Absolute and Relative Truth according to mbbhat

[fluffy bunny]

From the BK forum, here: Absolute and Relative Truth

mbbhat suggest that there are only two levels of truth and then goes on to define them as follows ... thereby completely misunderstanding what "absolute truth" means. He follows the typical BK sanskar of stealing a valuable philosophical or religious terms and corrupting its meaning so that it means something different or entirely opposite from what it original meant, and how the rest of the world understands it, to promote their beliefs.

This allows the BKs to engage in public discussion, which non-adherents might consider to be reasonable or informed, but which actually has an entirely different or secret meaning to BKs. The BKWSU does not understand what "truth" means. It is allergic to truths and so much always try, and change and corrupt them.

An absolute or objective truth means that something or some statement which is absolutely true, that is to say; truth without anything else mixed in, beyond question or doubt. A relative or subjective truth is that which might be true to me, but not to others; my feeling or opinion. An a simple example I might suggest, "today is very warm" because I am from the North, whereas you might say, "today is very cold" because you are from a tropic country; those are both subjective truths. However, objectively it is 14 degrees Celsius. No argument, no interpretation.

Actually there are many different philosophical theories and schools of truth. The "two truth doctrine", relative or commonsense truth versus absolute or ultimate truth, arises in Buddhist religion and is said to have been first formalised by an important Buddhist teacher and philosopher Nāgārjuna 2000 years ago. Similar discussion has also arisen on many occasions in the West in various fields.

One might even suggest or believe that there are temporal (temporary), relative and pluralistic (many) truths; that is a matter of further discussion, but first let's look at what mbbhat, as a typical BK ideologue is doing here.

There are two levels of truths:- Absolute and Relative.

• 1) There is eternally role fixed in every soul which repeats every 5000 yrs as it is. This is the absolute truth. All other things are relative truths. Unless we are attached to the absolute, we are likely to get confused at one or other time and will not be able to become pass with honour.

mbbhat starts of fairly or correctly enough. Let's accept there are traditionally just two levels of truth (I would say three) ... however, immediately he demonstrates he does not understand the concept of Absolute Truth at all and turns it into a marketing statement to make the BKs philosophy appear better.

There is no way for us to prove the Cycle is 5,000 years, to define what 5,000 years means (whose years?), or to suggest that some individuals have a predestined role which repeats identically for eternity. Such a comment is a statement of faith alone and, hence, cannot be called a truth at all.

It may be true, it may not and by its own theory only those who live for 5,000 years or more would know. We don't know.

• 2)Discrimination between soul and matter
  3)Discrimination between any soul and god.
  4)discrimination between animal soul and human soul [but, let us not go into this- because Baba also says- and we do not have enough knowledge in these]
  5)Praise of God - this is absolute, since he is unique.

Let's understand what he is saying here; the soul and matter are different, human souls and the god soul are different, human souls and animal souls are different ... and the last one which says "praise of god is absolute" which underlines it all. It's straight out of Vedantic Bhakti again and is not a Gyani statement.

Praise is praise. It is only saying good things. Good things many be truth or not and there are certainly issues to question the god of the BKs on. He may as well say, "religion is good" ... it's a relative or subjective claim. The rest are, again, unprovable tenants of faith. Believing does not make something absolutely truth, even if it is true, only proving it does.

Devise way of proving your statements, mbbhat. No, Murli quotes are not "proof" they at best conjecture, opinion, theories. Sadly, in the BK University, the quality of truth is determined by the logic, it is true because Lekhraj Kirpalani says it is true. Why? Because he says so, and the Dadis tell us not to question. They use acceptance by repetition to indoctrinate, not educate, their followers.

6)Praise/feeling of heaven:- this is not absolute. Because heaven changes and becomes hell. But, feeling /remembrance of heaven is also becomes absolute truth, because, it is the same heaven we enjoy even today. We have just named the heaven as hell after 2500 yrs.

A confusion again here. Praise is just an activity like singing. It has no value. It can be true or false or meaningly. I can praise something as being absolutely good ... but that only makes it my own subjective truth. 10,000 BKs can praise something ... that is still only relative or subjective.

Heaven is not an objective state ... fair enough. Heaven is a only subjective state? Perhaps. It depends on ones relative point of view, e.g. for devils, hell is heaven.

7)Feeling of Paramdham is absolute truth.

Feelings are very difficult to call objective because they are, by nature, subjective ... the opposite. What I feel is not what you feel. What you like is not what I like. Not objective.

Is the existence of Paramdham an objective truth, or the experience of the soul in Paramdham an objective state? Perhaps ... but only according to the Brahma Kumaris, again it is unprovable tenant of faith. It is not even possible to suggest that the BKs' Paramdham is actually the same as the Buddhists' Nirvana. Only the BKs believe that ... hence it is merely a subjective truth again until proven otherwise.

All the mantras what Baba gives- Father and Property, manmanaabhav and madhyaajeebhav, mukti, jeevanmukti, etc-- these all fall in absolute truths. As soon as we get into discussion of relative truths without being in conscious of absolute truth, we are losing at least to some extent.

Now, here he makes the most obvious incorrect statement and reveals himself.

What he means is ... "you must accept these theories as objective truths". Manmanaabhav and madhyaajeebhav, mukti, jeevanmukti are just mantras ... advice ... leading or temporary truths which may or may not help guide individuals to a different state of mind or being hence not "objective".

What could make BK experiences "objective" would be if the BKWSU could produce a formula, "do this, this and this and you will get that" ... and if everyone doing this, this and this got that ... then it would be objectively true. Unfortunately, it just does not work like that in real life. Almost all experiences are subjective.

There will not be power and happiness inside.

Which means nothing ... it is a kind of control by fear or negative seed. What is "power" ... are there not sad and miserable BKs? Are there not powerful and happy non-BKs? Of course there are.

Why do some BKs kill themselves or have mental breakdowns if all BK are powerful and happy?

So, all in all, a very poor proposal which demonstrates how the BKs take and corrupt valuable ideas for their own purposes to which all mbbhat can answer ... "fine".

[mbbhat]

mbbhat suggest that there are only two levels of truth ...

What was the purpose to add ONLY? Is this not an adulteration from a so called great truth seeker?

What can such a soul understand from readings of another person? It can read only words and not feelings or facts.

[fluffy bunny]

I am definitely responding to your level and direction of intention (inner motivation), the facts of your argument and questioning your logic.

You're not a philosopher, you are a propagandist or marketing man.

I am trying to engage you in a discussion from the philosophical point of view because you are using philosophical terms and I do know want you to mislead people.

Terms like objective or "absolute truth" have specific means. You cannot just grab them and use them as advertising slogans because they are "the best".

You have to prove BKism is the absolute truth but the tools of logic and devices of philosophy, not just boast, brag and claim it ... nor corrupt the mean of the original terms like the BKs always do.

Please show respect for other older traditions not just rob the temples like some Mughal invader.

[mbbhat]

You may keep on claiming, criticizing and expecting.

[fluffy bunny]

It would be much safer and more humble, and less embarrassing, if you were to ask the question rather than make the statement. It would be more correct to do so.

Ask, "Is BKism the absolute truth ... Is praise of Baba the absolute truth ... is the existence of Paramdham the absolute truth?" You cannot state that something which you believe but do not know nor cannot prove is the absolute truth, is the absolute truth. That is a fundamental bottomline of logic and philosophy.

What concerned me the most was your statement the Praise of God is an absolute truth. Does Baba really say anywhere that we should praise him?

To be, that smacks of Bhakti.

In the Murlis it used to talk about "crippled" children. Baba used to use the examples of things like crippled people and black skinned people to mean some deeper and more metaphorical. I guess the BKWSU has taken the references out by now because they don't understand them, or don't like them. You should look in the mirror and ask yourself how straight I am ... how straight and correct my vision and logic is?

You appear to have no idea of the scale of crimes against truth and logic that you are carrying out. Please don't. By all means, promote your religion but please don't corrupt others or steal their concepts and terminology as you do so.

Thank you.

[fluffy bunny]

Personally, I find BK Shivani a bit weird. She seems to be seriously deluded to me. Look at her ...

But this is underline mbbhat's position and how the BKs either simply don't understand simple already existing terms ... or, more likely, corrupt already existing terms for their own ends. Literally turning them upside down.

Now, examine the soundbite. "No matter what others are doing, they are absolutely right in their perspective". What on earth is she saying?

The moment you say, "in one's perspective" it makes the matter a subjective matter ... that opinion of the subject. And yet, in the same breath, she says a subjective opinion is "absolutely" right.

Well, that is simply wrong. A subjective position is the opposite of an objective position. Objectively, or absolutely, either the position is right or wrong ... there is no question of opinion or perspective in it.

So, what is she saying? It's certainly not Gyan ... It's not logic ... It's not fact ... It's not accurate ... what is it? Some kind of superficial New Age nonsense which sounds "spiritual" that is designed to impress women who watch day time TV? Marketing.

BK Shivani

[mbbhat]

Now, examine the soundbite. "No matter what others are doing, they are absolutely right in their perspective". What on earth is she saying?

Baba says- every soul has predetermined role in drama.

Baba says- there is neither fault of humans, nor of Ravan.

so- all are right, everything is right, every soul is pure. We should think so.

Baba says- see aadi and anaadi stage of every soul.

Another Avyakt Murli point- to come into 8 manis/jewel, feel "Baba is pure, I am pure, everyone is pure"

Very very simple.

We should catch just to absolute truth what I had mentioned there. And not to relative/present truth.

Of course, when we deal physically, we need to see the present state, but emotionally we should never feel any difference. even intellectually, we should feel the difference just to the extent needed for transaction purpose.

FYKI, - all of these have been explained in that BK forum. You may read from there.

I have written 198 topics there. another 40 are yet to come.

I do not know to what extent you will be able to understand, because you cannot catch the whole thing at once.

See- we say- half knowledge is dangerous. so- if we see (are in conscious of) the present state of any soul, even self, it is wrong.

[fluffy bunny]

You should really study up on the most common logical fallacies and use the knowledge honestly and sincerely, not to trick or deceive further. Whether you are a BK or not, if you are active in the field of thought and philosophy, you should be aware of these simple errors.

We should catch just to absolute truth what I had mentioned there ...

Again ... what you are talking about is not "understanding" it is "acceptance".

What you say is not complex, it is very simple and easy to understand ... but it is faulted. Therefore no one should not accept it.

"Baba says ...", does not make something true, let alone "absolutely true". Neither is it just because something is written in the Murlis, as we are discussing elsewhere. That is a Bhakti level of understanding, just like the Christians and the Bible or Islamic fundamentalists and the Koran.

Why? How can we say this? It comes down to basic logic, so think it through.

Your or BK logic goes something like this ...

• 1) A statement is absolutely true because, a) it is in the Murli or b) Baba says so.
  2) Why is the statement true? Because the Murlis or Baba says so.
  3) How do we know this? Because the Murlis or Baba says so.
  4) But what happens when it is obvious false or fails at a later date? Baba must have been testing us!

At best, this is what is called an "argument from authority" (argumentum ad verecundiam); at worst it is just "circular reasoning" or worse. Both are "logical fallacies", false logic or errors in reasoning.

• Baba says that the statement is true.
  Baba says he is Ocean of Truth.
  Therefore the statement is true.

It's blind faith. No logic. No understand. No thought. No nothing.

Or even more simply ...

• Baba say that what he says is true,
  Therefore it is true.

The problem is, Baba has not always been true. In fact, Baba and the Murlis have been 'Absolutely Wrong' at times.

Neither Baba nor the Murlis can be said to be "absolutely true", therefore the degree of truth drops down a level to a question or interpretation (either subjective or metaphorical understanding) or probability ... what is the probability of Baba and the Murlis making a true statement?

No individual, not even the Baba, is likely to be absolutely true all of the time, but most individuals can be most of the time over simple matters; therefore we need to filter all information and never accept it on the basis of faith as you are promoting, and without proper understanding.

Can you follow that? Like the blind men and the elephant, it helps to work with others to examine statements to test them for their truthfulness.

• The term "praise of God is absolute" does not make any sense in English. It is also not true as many people curse, ignore or don't believe in God.
  
  The statement "God is praiseworthy" could be true, if it is proven to be so, but is far more likely to be a subjective opinion.

The real problem is, however, the god of the BKs is not God. It is more than likely just Lekhraj Kirpalani or some other spirit and we should not confuse the two.

We know this because God is said to be absolutely true, absolutely accurate, absolutely good etc ... and yet the god of the BKs had made numerous errors and mistakes, and is not.

[mbbhat]

We know this because ...

If you already know, fine then.

[fluffy bunny]

Now, now ... be polite and respectful please.

• Has the god of the BKs made any mistakes or errors or not?
  How does the BKWSU resolve them?

This is the key difference between the BKs and PBK, and at the root your involvement on this forum.

• There answer is, of course, yes.
  Not everything they say is absolutely true.
  Not even relatively true.
  If accepted literally, they are wrong.
  
  So how do you and the BKWSU resolve that?

How can someone be true and false as the same time?
They cannot ... or at least they cannot be absolutely true because they have been false.

Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs have recognised this and are trying their best to resolve these problems. What answers do the BKs have?

The PBKs say, logically, if God is Truth, then these cannot be mistakes or errors, the mistake or error must be with our level of understanding. We must be wrong ... so what do the statement really mean?

(In English, "we know this ..." refers to the logical discuss above it. Same as "therefore".

I must caution you about your dismissive or condescending attitude and ask you to stop. It's not very divine).

[mbbhat]

I did not read this and also the previous post of yours in this thread. Because- i have already explained them fully. If you cannot get things from them, then i cannot help you.

Anyhow, i respect your comments.

[fluffy bunny]

How can "ignorance" (refusing to read my posts) be "respect" ?

It's another typical BKism ... absolutely upside down and back to front. Everything means the opposite or something different.

You explained nothing.

You just did the typical BK thing of telling people what to accept without any understanding or logic.

(... and mbbhat answer, "fine" by way of a further insult to my efforts to explain to him where he is going wrong or failing to communicate.

It's just arrogance or conceit really. It's not divine behavior whatsoever).

[mbbhat]

Because Nothing is everything and everything is nothing.

I had already quoted even a sloka of Gita. One who finds action in inaction and inaction in action is intelligent.

Zero is hero and hero is zero.

[fluffy bunny]

You protect your faith by blocking your ears to new information that would challenge it, and practising non-thinking.

Short answer: Please stop taking and perverting the terminology of other religions or philosophy. Learn what it means and respect it as it is, don't steal for use for BKism. Invent your own new terms if you must.


In truth, the Brahma Kumaris have looked down upon and disrespected all other religions and religious leaders from their beginning and today, most of all, they look down upon and loath PBKism and Virendra Dev Dixit.

Whether one is a BK, PBK, non-BK, or Post-BK ... it does not matter. To learn how to listen, think, comprehend is essential; and learning basic logic and philosophy skills and tools is very useful.

Logic and philosophy are also religions in their own right with their own language and protocols. We should respect other religions and not steal or corrupt their wealth (terms and ideas).

All too often, I think, BKism boils down to Parrotism. Parroting (repeating and accepting without understanding) the right words but not applying them internally. BKs ... and I am not specifically targeting mbbhat here ... appear wise or divine by repeating the right words, but what they say in public is the opposite of what they say or believe in private, e.g. the BKs say, "we respect other religions" (because they learnt from the criticisms and negative responses of outsiders) ... and then they beat the **** out of PBKs and try to destroy them.

I know mbbhat does not listen. The reason I take him and BKs like him to task is to try and make them listen and make them start thinking again. Perhaps I am wasting my time too.

[mbbhat]

Perhaps I am wasting my time too.

finally, the truth seeker realized at least one truth.