BK Men and the BKWSU

[bansy]

Are you simply having problems with the fact that the majority of the running is by women ? Is it nothing to do with God after all ?
There are some who have many years of experience in the BKWSU but leave the "family", they have even remained loyal to the God in the BKWSU, is it they cannot stand having a younger female not giving them what they need at centres, such as Murlis, and "bossing" them around ?

Does this forum lend to the fact you may express your own opinions of how you can prove you are somewhat still loyal to the God of your own imagination, but yet find it hard to be within the family ? And now need to prove and justify that this break in loyalty is not because of the women whom you loved and grew up with when you were a little younger, but because God gave these women their roles instead rather than you ?

In the West, the parity between men and women have taken years to become more equal, but in Eastern cultures, it is much wider. It is quite clear and subtle. For example, a 35-40 year old male Indian often has a dilemma in this crucial time of his life (in both material and spiritual) when they may be in junior management roles in society, but in spiritual BK society, they are given manual tasks as beset by simple uneducated women in white saris whom they grew up but have superceded them ? Especially when that man is a virgin to be surrounded and beseeched by pure white virgins less intellectual then himself. :D

And now for the fun ...

[fluffy bunny]

Fun ... as in "light the blue touch paper and stand back"? I see one error in your opening statement, bansy. No women is simple. Remember the old saying, "There are only two ways to treat a women ... and no one knows what either of them are".

Is that not a body-conscious understand of the male and female, is the Baba not speaking about "male" and "female" souls as in passive versus aggressive, Yin versus Yang has the Yugya not been duped and taken allowed male souls in female bodies to take over the running of the show to its detriment?

Is "brother's Maya" (which is a common negative response to male BK followers way of thinking) not the ultimate in condescending, and a tricky method, practised by such cliques to put down valid concerns and belittle others?

I am wondering if your questions reflects general conversation within the BKWSU regarding this forum. I ask this because I have had similar responses or suppositions, e.g. the assumption that 'someone' who was the source for 'some information', "must be male" and so therefore the information or opinion was of no importance. "Being male" was a mental switch off for 'unimportant' or obviously 'Maya filled'. A volte face to the sanyasis saying that women are the source of all Maya ... suggesting to the accusation that such BK sisters are actually the sanyasis Baba is talking about NOT the historical ones.

What proportion of the "simple, uneducated women in white saris" are still 'stupid, prejudiced and defined by their cultural limitations'; what proportion are 'enlightened, God-guided beings at all times' ... and how do we tell the difference between the two?

Does the god of the BKs not give to those that can do the role that they have to play or does he always look around for someone in a skirt to do it first and then, only then if there are no takers, condescend to using someone in trousers. Is the problem that the leaders are women or how those leaders are leading it? Would this not be souls in female bodies using a body-conscious defence (a "poor woman" syndrome) to deflect from objective concerns and belittle them. Could the brothers' challenge not be the service these sisters most need and should one defer to another just because they wear a sari?

Your, or their, ball ... more brothers wearing saris I say.

[bansy]

PS : this is not a response to ex-l, whose contributions are always valid.

Here are just some additional thoughts to previous post. The theme is "acceptance" :

• 1. Can the BK man simply accept the rights and wrongs of a leadership run by women ?
  2. In the case of the leadership run by men, would it be predatory male instincts to challenge territory, position etc ?
  3. If the BK man cannot accept the women's position, can he then not join an organisation run by men instead so as to justify his prowess in 2.

Interestingly, is the cause of trouble for those leaving the BKWSU the access of this and that via the women in the organisation ? And then when they leave, they either go it alone or they end up in another place (such as the PBK) and they suffer the same fate. But they then challenge the leadership of the PBK (see 2 above) and still end up going alone? When does acceptance get instilled ?

I am not saying the same does the apply to women, the topic is about men in (was in) the BKWSU and their persepective.

Parvati and 5 pandav husbands. Now who has the power. Whatever happens in the BKWSU with the aging BKs, the next organisation leader is going to be a woman.

So the God in the BKWSU is "untouchable" in that God is in Subtle Region and/or Incorporeal world, and the BKs will protect this. Though this thread is more of BKWSU, what of the AIVV PBKs, as the current Chariot is aging, are we seeing the same predatory instincts to the challenge of the leadership to be the new Chariot of God especially from those who leave the AIVV ? (of course, the cycle ends in 2036 so can there be a new Chariot). Or easier to create a new Chariot elsewhere. Do we not see any women challenging the leadership ?

Is true acceptance meaning acceptance that women hold the key to your success ?

(Organisation leader = I am not mentioning about God/Chariot here as the leader which is plenty of other debating threads about what and which God).

Behind every successful man is a woman. Behind every successful women is her purity ? :D

[paulkershaw]

I'd like to suggest here that the BKWSU teachings are simply a non-complete theory based on mis-understanding and mis-interpretation wrapped around ego and inadequacy experiences based on past inequality.

The aspects of male and female (under topic here) are only being discussed relative the understanding of gender. IME, many females within the BKWSU are man-haters, many are not. Many feel the need to rise up and be stronger and more dominant in their self-created and self-sustained world. Some understand it deeper. What does it say about the male members (pun intended ...) who allow themselves to be present in such negative circumstance?

There were many instances where I fell into the well-laid trap of being invited onto a committee and asked for opinion, gave it and then experienced the quashing of that opinion as useless and inadequate by someone who themselves was inadequate and power-hungry. (Oh - to have known then what I know now ... but then I suppose there would have been no need for me to be part of the BKWSU structures then??? ...) - which in all reality simply gave one person's ego a boost and another experienced something else we could say is less than inspirational.

IOW, it made a 'sister' feel more masculine when she 'put down' a brother. Stealing someone's else's 'energy' and taking it on yourself (in these hidden ways) can certainly make you feel like well ... justified that what you are doing is correct. But I point out here that it cannot become it until you understand the reasons why you are doing it in the first place.

However, when we look deeper at the psyche and consciousness/awareness (of the world as we see it today), and look at the many other spiritual teachings available to the planet, much discussion centres around the masculine and feminine aspects of soul; the left and right brains, the Yin and Yang of life and ego, the give and take, the sharing on many hidden and 'subtle' levels. Even within the teachings offered by the BKWSU, God is depicted as both the Father and the Mother, but the majority within the BKWSU fold seem to have the relationship with "BapDada" as being one of the masculine, and very rarely would anyone call ShivBaba "she".

Are there many Murlis and classes that depict 'Baba' as 'SHE'? Not many in my memory and this in fact is a core flaw within the theories and practices of BKWSU styled Raj-Yoga as well as many religions and other followings apparent at this time. Its shows a lack of true relationship with one's own Father, as well as one's own Inner Parent, which is a mother and a Father by the way. What do many ex-BKs (and some BKs too) share on this forum of their experience of their time within the BK setup? Lack of nurturing, Lack of care etc, which all the processes we want from a parent figure (a mother in fact).

In my experience, the ones who carry the BKWSU teachings most strongly are the Mataji's, the married mothers with families and children, who have great expereince of mothering and caring and nurturing; not the old Seniors nor many of the the SS, the young virgin centres in charge, who have never truly had a relationship (never mind a child even) or, if they had such, then left them and came running to take up their place within the BKWSU and started fighting for their position of power. It is huge hidden psychological damage and dysfunction at its very best to my mind. Freud would be so in love with it all.

So to summarise, the reason why many of the female component of the BKWSU seem to present themselves in such a militant and domineering manner is that they do not truly understand that evolution of the soul means to bring one-self into balance in both non-sexual and non-gender specific masculine and feminine manner. Why not have a Goddess and a God working in unison? If we are the mirror, the image of God, one must then work on bringing all these aspects of self in total unison and harmony in order to evolve spiritually, And if the god that we meditate and pray only presents himself through physical form then we're in trouble and the damage is huge.

To only know "God" in a masculine form is to only know one aspect of self and that will be continuously expressed as succh in complete accordance with the structures we 'choose' to align with, (but in fact, have to align with in order to grow.) The ex-BKs on this forums have realised this. There's nothing like being stuck in one's own spiritual and emotional processes to learn is there. It's the getting stuck in the process that will eventually create the realisation that one needs to free oneself from the situation that matters.

Can anyone remember the Murli point that says something like, "be both male and female like Krishna"? I'd even hazard a guess here to say that (in terms of another thread's subject) that the Murli points are being changed, edited and polarised to be more in line with the understandings based on ego and inequality, rather than any other reason. Its an ingrained and deeply-fed awareness that lies beneath the surface. The BKWSU 'God' is not linking with and not allowing the "Goddess" side of himself and it shows in the experiences many people have at the hand of many of the female followers of the BKWSU teachings.

We can see the result and its more than imbalance. I'll let some other forum member say the words.

[arjun]

Can anyone remember the Murli point that says something like, "be both male and female like Krishna"?

I don't remember such a Murli point, but I think there is a mention of Ardhnaareeshwar (half male-half female) form.

[paulkershaw]

As a thought: - is it not the merging of Lakshmi (Lakshmi) and Narayan that creates the one-ness of the masculine and feminine?