Official Contact with Sister Jayanti BKWSU (UK) - legal

DEDICATED to BKs.
For those involved with the Brahma Kumaris, to discuss issues about the BKWSU in a free and open manner.
Post Reply
User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 03 Aug 2007

tinydot wrote:You guys are expecting for nothing with regards to the release of all Murlis by the BKs.
I know that bit but I just meant the earliest version of the "acceptable" 5 years rotation in the first place. We can always document the "official" response to the historical stuff and see how it measures up.

Fine, they can tell us where the rest were buried and we will go see what is left ... but I can imagine that someone has already been despatched from Abu on a "seek and destroy" mission to cover their trail. I do not believe the buried story is entirely innocent. It must have been something to dow ith the re-invention of the BKWSU and the introduction of Shiva.

Perhaps it was even insired by Lekhraj Kirpalani and co's vanity at how daft they were before not to notice. The introduction of the Shiva element post-1948/50 still bewilders me. I would like answers to that. I was certainly never told ... no one was. I reckon Liz Hodgkinson must have stumbled on it, so there must have been discussions when the book "Purity" was written and it kept quiet.

One issue this is raising for me is, who actually is "the BKWSU"? Who actually calls the shots? Folks give their lives in the idea that they are eternal "family" and "members" but really when it comes down to it, you are not. They hold the power, you are "in or out" and "stuff happens" on whose whim?

User avatar
john
Reforming BK
Posts: 1606
Joined: 03 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: UK

Post by john » 03 Aug 2007

tinydot wrote: They won't release them in my opinion, only the last 5 to 6 years of Lekhraj Kirpalani's life. Why? They apparently got buried when they move to Abu.
They moved to Abu around 1951?

That gives 18 years worth, plus it has been mentioned there was morning and night class.
You guys are expecting for nothing with regards to the release of all Murlis by the BKs. But go ahead, demand anyways as a matter of documentation.
Probably not, but we have to start somewhere.
So, why would the disadvantaged player take a weak move (i.e. answering all your questions), if he/she can quit and call it a draw?
But they contacted the forum/website, if they want to quit for a draw then it was all pointless for them.

There has to be a very good reason for the contact, otherwise why not just ignore the site? I think they understand the power of the internet, therefore would a chess game stalemate be in their interests?

User avatar
pilatus
non-BK
Posts: 112
Joined: 26 May 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by pilatus » 03 Aug 2007

Dear admin, I am more than happy with your considered response to Sr. Jayanti. Let's just wait and see the next step. In the meantime, let's continue the lively debate and mutual support we provide across the various groups and topics of the forum.

Best regards,

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 03 Aug 2007

john wrote:They moved to Abu around 1951?
Say 1 May 1950 ... so add another year. May be the Shiva stuff came even later?

I feel very strongly that we should ask them to
  • a) correct and complete their history - universally - and make clear that their published versions are not genuine but "devotional literature". In short, grow up and kick out the Bhakti.

    b) offer new students some sort of clear disclosure about what they are, what their lifestyle is, the problems that might arise, e.g. family. Let's face it, either they do or we do ...
Someone ought to contact that person that wanted some kind of "Duty of Care" programme ... who was that?

I think they need to afford some kind of external review and "Alternative Disputes Resolution" service like the Hare Krishnas brought in (ISKCON Resolve) after their internal problems which should also be open to families. No more leaving it to the SS to palm off in secret. The SS ought to be accountable for their actions.

User avatar
mr green
ex-BK
Posts: 1100
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by mr green » 03 Aug 2007

I agree ex-l ... I have personally challenged Jayanti on this very issue myself and would be happy to do it again; that someone has to police the policies of the BKWSU ... someone has to be accountable/responsible.

It clearly does not work to say it is Gods task as plainly it is not!!!!!!

One problem I think exists for them, in the process of change, is that there is no democracy within the organisation ... it is literally an old girls club ... you DO achieve status and position through creeping ... they will say it's karma but the truth is the humblest sincere types stay in the background whereas the bolshy types push their way to the front ... The problem with this is that none of them are prepared to take responsibility for anything that happens to people whilst under the umbrella of the Yagya family. They would prefer (at the moment) to bury bad news along with the Murlis.

Whereas if someone was democratically elected to a position of responsibility, it would be far easy to have accountability etc.

Not holding my breath :!:.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 03 Aug 2007

I think "vote for" type democracy within the BKWSU would fail, who is going to vote against the SS? They do not even really allow centers to question their choice of center-in-charges ... and look at the issues of "ownership" that came up when they tried swopping center-in-charges around centers.

But the Trustees ... that is another matter. As far as I can see, the Trustees should be looking after all this. What the Trustees are going to question, oppose and hold to accountability the SS? Has anyone even ever seen the "By-Laws"?

Who elects and reviews the Trustees? The SS ... The system appears to operate like a nepotistic medieval fiefdom ... but, probably also out of necessity because no one would come forward to do stuff and stick around. They do not really believe in the Kaliyugi formalities, IMHO it is just do not to keep the taxman and governments happy. I do not believe that the choices of individuals and policy are really done on "spiritual principles". The Maryadas appear to be chucked out of the window when required, like with all the Brian Bacon stuff and licensing the SML course.

Frankly, if the BKWSU was a proper NGO or charity the size that it is, and things had happened as are happening in the BKWSU; heads would have had to roll, people would have been required to step down from their positions. So what is the reality of the BKWSU?
  • mr green, you also had negative experiences with a Jaguar-driving trustee, did not you? How was he elected? I suppose we could ask Jayanti about all this too.
I'd say it was time to lay bear all this stuff before someone else digs it all up. I'd like to see a copy of the by-laws if anyone has one. All part of their evolution.

User avatar
mr green
ex-BK
Posts: 1100
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by mr green » 03 Aug 2007

Yes, I have had severe run ins with one 'trustee' who likes expensive cars ...

As far as I can see, it is like you say. The Dadis and the next rank Jayanti/Mohini/Nirmala etc actually appoint the trustees, who then control the true mechanics of the organisation on a legal (lokik?) level whereas the SS carry on with the public 'spiritual' role.

The trustees actually have the last say over the Dadis. I wonder how many BKs are aware of this!!!!!!!! It was a surprise to me and I was staff.

I think for some of the trustees, it is almost an honourable role for services rendered, either time or money or property ... For instance, one long time server who set up a trust that resulted in the creation of the present day Shakti Bhavan, she was a trustee for a while but I don't think she was involved other than a meeting attender ... but she was removed from the trustees and my Jag driving friend appears to have taken her place. But his story is very different. He is the main accountant for the London operation and recieved his position on account of this role. It seems to me all the trustees are wealthy and big hitters as such ... like Ratan, for instance, who owns a string of properties in Mumbai.

Yes, well, I really think they had hoped Destruction would have happened by now and everything was just thrown together adhoc. I seriously doubt they ever believed that one day they would have to be accountable to such things as the law, let alone the tax man!

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11631
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups.
Location: India

Post by arjun » 03 Aug 2007

admin wrote:A reply has been received from BK Jayanti copied in full. Can members please consider it and suggest what response we should make.
Om Shanti.

I congratulate both admin and Sister Jayanti for taking forward the line of communication. If she does not want to communicate directly through this forum, it would not be a bad idea if some of the members of this forum could meet her in a group. When the letters/mails to and from Sister Jayanti could be made public, the discussions that would be held between Sister Jayanti and some of the members could also be made public.

May be that meeting would increase the mutual faith.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

User avatar
abrahma kumar
Friends and family of
Posts: 1133
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Contact:

Meet & Increase Mutual faith in what? The God Men?

Post by abrahma kumar » 03 Aug 2007

Arjun Bhai, I do not want to go off at a tangent here but as i read it Sister Jayanti is not interested in meeting groups. She wants to meet with the senior adminsitrator of this site. On the one hand your suggestion seems commendable but i wonder about your motives in voting this a good idea? Are you volunteering to meet with her as one of the 'members' of this site or on behalf of the PBKs in the place of a/the Senior Administrators? And this talk about increasing mutual faith. Faith in what? That the purpose of the site is NOT to defame God's name? Or that the site is not aimed at destroying the BKWSU?

Arjun Bhai, i do not write this post as a personal attack against you but so that I can remind myself of the difference between sitting invisibly in the sidelines and asking for this that and the other thing; and on the other hand choosing to stand up and be counted for what one believes (your nick is pertinent in this regard) or no longer believes in.

Maybe there are 3 things i do not yet understand:
  • 1. The extent of the PBK organisation experience with exiters.

    2. Whether the PBKs are at heart desirous of having some sort of rapprochement with the BKWSU.

    3. Whether the combined force of the BKs/PBKs will be more potent in requesting "contact and meeting with one of the members of this forum for their mutual benefit".

User avatar
john
Reforming BK
Posts: 1606
Joined: 03 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: UK

Post by john » 03 Aug 2007

My gut feeling is that they see this site and forum as an anti-BK site, with which they want to close down or limit.

It is our job to enlighten them as to what the forum is about. Yet, what with a loose agenda encompassing many varieties of ex-BK, it may be tricky to pin point and put in a nutshell. They are an organisation with leaders etc, and we a collective of various voices. By getting to the admin of the site, they think they can close it down and bypass any official communication with the forum users. Silencing/dismissing any (as they see it) dissenting voices.

It is in our interests to seize this opportunity and turn the tables as much as possible in our favour.

If we use like for like thinking, i.e. they, the leaders of BKSWU, call the shots and the other BKs just follow, therefore the thinking could be 'control the admin' and all the other users (us) will just follow. Or be silenced.

User avatar
bansy
Posts: 1643
Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by bansy » 03 Aug 2007

This and that meeting that and this is just a waste of time.

The necessary step is to for the Chariot of BapDada to meet the Chariot of ShivBaba (Virendra Dev Dixit) and maybe throw in an invite to the Vishnu Party and all the other chariots, all sitting on a stage.

Then have a mixed audience and have the event broadcasted live (telecast/webcast/radio) so that as many of the worldwide audience can witness this event.

This forum is obviously not important enough for any senior BKs to care about since they don't participate and thus cannot make any stance as to what this forum is. It doesn't matter if the senior BKs care or not does it, if they did they would have particpated by now.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 03 Aug 2007

john wrote:My gut feeling is that they see this site and forum as an anti-BK site, with which they want to close down or limit.
... which for me underpins the lack of enlightenment with BK leadership circles.

For me, I would say that there is nothing on this forum that has not been said between card carrying BKs or in the bhavans. If we define "the BK family" to the PBKs and others, this site is the only honest representation of the whole BK thing; the light and the shadow, the organization and the human fallout. To caste it as "anti-" is pathetic.

Its basic psychology that any individual and organization has a difficult time accepting its "shadow" and will generally attempt to destroy or deny it, or anything or anyone that represents it. It is very typical behavior. We all do it. In fact, I know of a whole lot more that is said and done within BK circles by card carrying BKs that no one on this forum would dream of, outright verbal racism towards Indians, funnily enough, is one.

To suppress a voice is to suppress another's personality, the expression of their relationship with the creative force, other souls, their right to and method of learning. Who would have thought that they would have come face to face with a bunch of no bodies suggesting transparency and accountability? They may be polishing their diamonds, we are knocking lumps off rough hewn rock faces.

We will have to wait and see what she does. If she was smart, she would grasp the nettle and come onboard. Its a good service opportunity to present her darna in front of the world, and family. I do not see there being any easy quick option for them though. No "bit of toli and run". The issues are too deep and too intrinsic.

May be this is the "good policeman" approach. The sweet talk to "give us a chance" nicely, and they have a "bad policeman" waiting to strike hard ... legal action. That note they sent around about the emails was at attempt to gather evidence that could be used to present a case via an accusation of spamming. Why else would they ask centers to keep copies of unsubscription notices?

User avatar
mr green
ex-BK
Posts: 1100
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by mr green » 03 Aug 2007

They actually believe this is a pbk site.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 03 Aug 2007

Is that so? How small minded can you get.

It only underlines again how unenlightened, unintuitive and "un-unlimited" they actually are in real life.

User avatar
tinydot
ex-BK
Posts: 304
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by tinydot » 04 Aug 2007

I suggest that we create an open letter addressed to BKWSO that can be viewed by anyone with the internet. We can put the link on the front page of www.brahmakumaris.info website. In the letter, we as good citizens of the world, brothers and sisters of the human race, are requesting BKWSO to answer some of the questions regarding their history and philosophy.

If they have the million minutes of peace project, we, too, can have the million sincere petitioners.

We can send the link of the open letter to friends, family members, relatives, and officemates as campaign for religious freedom not to discredit the BKs. Never mind sending the letter to BKWSO lest we are accused of spamming. Then, we can send the list of petitioners to the UN.

I will be one among the first to sign as a petitioner. My lokik family members will also sign-up.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests