Krishna's name was inserted in the Gita

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

Krishna's name was inserted in the Gita

Post by tinydot » 13 Oct 2007

According to the BK Teachings, Bharat fell down to its current state due to many errors in people's belief, two of which are the following:
  • 1. That God is omnipresent
    2. That people mistakenly inserted the name of Krishna in the Gita
I told this to a vedic scholar and pure devotee of Krishna (the guy is not a monist), and he ask me if the basis of saying this claim of "erroneously inserting the name of Krishna in the Gita", stands the test of reason, is logical, or factual. I just told him, that it is the belief of the Brahma Kumaris, and I ended up thinking why Lekhraj Kirpalani became a Shaivite (worshiper of Shiva) from being a Vaishnavite (worshiper of Vishnu).

Can any vedic professionals throw some light with regards to this claim of the Brahma Kumaris? I had no good background in the Hindu philosophy and when I entered the BKWSU, I just accepted these two claims without question.

bkdimok
Reforming BK
Posts: 292
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: Russia, ICQ 261034552
Contact:

Post by bkdimok » 13 Oct 2007

Om Shanti. I am not a Vedic professional, but a BK and devotee of Krishna as well. In my humble opinion, Brahma Baba was a devotee of Narayan, but when he saw all visions he realised, that he was the first Narayan in the Golden Age. Also he realised that God is not Krishna as it is said in the Gita, but Shiva. When I say to vaishnavas of my temple that I was shivait they don't think that my practic was meditation on Paramatma they think that I was meditating on Shiva (Shankar in BK tradition). There is a huge difference in Vedic knowledge and Knowledge (as it is used to say). But also there are some common things.

Shankar

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 » 13 Oct 2007

The same question I asked
  • ... how, when and why did Vallabhacharya devotee Lekhraj Kirpalani, a member of a sect of Vaishnavas, introduce Shiva into the BK theodicy?
The BKWSU says it was 1936 and Shiva introduced himself going "Shivoham, Shivohum ... etc". The problem is that none of the early literature up until 1949 at least mentions ANYTHING about Shiva ... only Prajapati God Brahma and the Brahm element.

All the early material has Lekhraj Kirpalani named as the "Gita Sermonizer/Inventor" etc ... strengthening the reasoning behind the Krishna connection. There is no mention of Shiva.

The working hypothesis is that Shiva was introduced at some point soon after the failure (or misinterpretation) of the 1950 Destruction prediction. The good questions are how, when and why.

My feeling is that they just tossed another Hindu God in there for good luck and to expand their market! Hell, they had used the names of all the major ones! :roll: Lekhraj Kirpalani is; Brahma, Vishnu, Krishna, Narayan, Shankar, Hanuman AND then Shiva too ... and a whole load of minor ones. Boy, were they in love with that guy. Did they miss anyone out? No bit part as Jesus or Buddha!?! (Joke).

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11584
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 » 13 Oct 2007

tinydot wrote:Can any vedic professionals throw some light with regards to this claim of the Brahma Kumaris? I had no good background in the Hindu philosophy and when I entered the BKWSU, I just accepted these two claims without question.
Dear brother,

Om Shanti. You can get information about the worldly, BK and PBK point of view on the above mentioned subject in the following article (along with its Hindi translation) which has been approved by ShivBaba (through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) and was even posted on the discussion forum of ISKCON followed by a lengthy discussion on it long ago.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incorporeal God of Gita - Shiv Shankar Bholenath or the soul of corporeal Sri Krishna alias Dada Lekhraj?

There is no doubt that Gita, which has been guiding the Indians since the last two and a half thousand years is a gem among all the scriptures. But there would not be as many commentaries by scholars and learned persons on any other scripture as on Gita, which proves that this scripture is so unique that the different kinds of clarifications on Gita given by human beings have never satisfied all the human beings. Someone has rightly said, " Kai jaaney kavi, ya kai jaaney ravi". The poet only or the Sun of Knowledge can give the correct clarification of a poem. Rest of the clarifications given by the human beings will be incomplete from one point of view or the other.

It has been fed in the minds of the general public that the Sermonizer of Gita was Shri Krishna, who gave the discourse of Gita to Arjuna sitting on a Chariot in the war field of Kurukshetra. But if we look from a spiritual and historical angle then all the questions such as who, when, whom and where was Gita narrated are disputable. The story of Gita and Satyanarayana prove that God reveals himself in the form of an ordinary, old and experienced human being. It has been written in Gita:
  • Avjaanaanti maam moodha manurshee tanumashritam I
    Param bhaavamjaananto mam bhootmaheshwaram I
    I (Gita 9/11)
Further it has been written in Gita that God is ajanma (eternal), abhokta (one who does not enjyoy any pleasures) and Avyakt (imperceptible).
  • Ajo S pi sannvyayatma bhootanamishraro S pi san I
    Prakriti swamdhishthaay sambhavamyatmamaayayaa II
    (Gita 4/6)

    Yo maamjamanaadim cha veti lokmaheshwaram I
    Asam-moodhah Silver Age martyeshu sarvapapaih pramuchyatey II
In the Shrimad Bhagwatgita that aadi-anadi purush (eternal being) has been praised – (tamev chadhyam purusham prapdhye yatah pravrittih prasoota puraani I Gita 15/4), i.e., I bow to that aadi-anaadi purush, who has first of all created this world-like tree. That eternal being (aadi purush) is telling himself-(Ahamadirhi devanam maharshinaam cha sarvashah-Gita 10/2), i.e. I am only the beginning of all the deities and sages. He only had propagated that famous principle of karmayoga (remembering God while performing actions) in the ancient times, due to which India got the name of karmabhoomi (land of the actions of God) as per the Jaina tradition also (nishtha pura prokta mayanagh ... karmayogen yoginaam-Gita 3/3 )

Here it may be recalled that the knowledge of Gita was not given by Shri Krishna, but by that aadi-anaadi purush (eternal being) to the householder Arjuna in order to teach the religion of household (grihastha-dharma) and to teach him easy RajYoga. In this connection, some of the quotes of famous historians are given below, without going into the details:

Hopkins said, “The present Krishna-dominated form (of Gita) was earlier a Vishnu-dominated poem and prior to that it was a non-communal writing.” Religions of India (1608 ) Page 386 (Radhakrishnan Gita, Page 17). Farkuhar has written in Religious literature of India (1620) page 12-14, “This (Gita) is an ancient prose Upnishad, which was probably written after shwetashwataropanishad and which has been moulded into the present form after the death of Christ to support the Krishnaism by some poet.” As per Garvey, “Bhagwatgita was earlier a scripture related to Sankhya-Yoga, in which the methods of worship of Krishna Vasudev got included and it was adjusted as per the Vedic traditions by considering Krishna to be a form of Vishnu in the 3rd Century B.C. Holtzman considers Gita to be a later Vishnu-dominated form of a sarveshwarwadi poem. Keith also believes that originally Gita was a Shwetashwatar form of Upanishad, but later it was moulded in the form of Krishna worship. (An extract from the introduction to Radhakrishnan ‘Gita’, page 17)

Shri Krishna was born from the womb of a mother. He enjyoyed all the pleasures of life and had obtained knowledge from Guru Sandipani. He has mostly been depicted in childhood form. That is why the entire world cannot accept him as a Father. Secondly, it is famous in mythological stories that Shri Krishna narrated Gita only to one Arjuna while sitting on a Chariot in the Copper Age (Dwapar Yug), but it is also famous that Sage Vyaas had written the scripture Mahabharata, which reached the general public in Sanskrit. From the historical point of view these points are disputable.

Actually, Gita is the highest among all the scriptures (sarva shastra shiromani), but it was narrated in the Confluence Age of the 5000 years old world drama wheel consisting of four ages, i.e. at the confluence of the Iron Age and the Golden Age, which is being repeated now. Had Gita been narrated only in the Copper Age then how did the sinful Iron Age arrive? After the incarnation of God, it should have resulted in the commencement of Golden Age and not the most sinful Iron Age. And Gita is narrated in the Confluence Age, when all the religions, the religious followers and the religious fathers of those religions are present in their last birth. It is because of this only it has been said in Gita, “Renounce all the religions and come into my asylum, the asylum of one Supreme Soul.”
  • Sarvadharmanparityajya Mamekam Sharanam Vraj.
    Aham twa sarvapapebhyo mokshayami Maa shuchah
    . (Gita 18/66 )
From the point of view of Hindus, when Gita was narrated in the Copper Age, then the religions like Islam, Sikhism etc. were not present. Then how did the above hymn (shloka) come in Gita? And the Gita was not narrated in a complex language like Sanskrit, but is being narrated in language like Hindi, which can be understood by the common public. Even from a historical point of view, Sanskrit was never the language of the general public. Then how can God, who has entered in a very ordinary human being, use such a complex language? Apart from this, Gita was not narrated by a corporeal prince Shri Krishna, who had an attractive name and form and who comes in the cycle of life and death, but by incorporeal God Shiva, who is ajanma (beyond worldly births), abhokta (beyond pleasures) at the end of the Iron Age through an ordinary human body (Prajapita Brahma) not just to one Arjuna, but it is being narrated to many other householders like Arjuna. It is written in Gita, “O Arjuna, you do not know your births (i.e. past lives). I narrate to you the story of your past lives.”
  • Bahooni mein vyateetani janmaani tav charjun.
    Taanyaham ved sarvaani na twa vettha parantap
    . (Gita 4/5)
But how can Krishna, who passes through the cycle of life and death himself, give the inheritance of true mukti (liberation) and jeevanmukti (living a liberated life), and narrate the story of many births to other human souls? This proves that the story of many births, which is famous as Gita or Amarkatha (the story of becoming imperishable) is not narrated through corporeal Shri Krishna, but through the Supreme Soul Shiva, who is beyond life and death.

The above view about Gita, which is completely different from the common view, is a view of not just the Brahmakumari Organization but also of Adhyatmik Ishwariya Vishwavidyalaya based in Kampila, Uttar Pradesh that the Godly knowledge called Murli, which was narrated through a very ordinary corporeal human Chariot, is the true Gita, on the basis of which the Sanskrit Gita will be written in the Copper Age, which is going to commence 2500 years henceforth. Although the Brahmakumari Organization believes that the incorporeal Shiva is the God mentioned in Gita, but they are spreading the name and form of Dada Lekhraj alias the soul of Krishna in the world as the corporeal medium of God, whereas it is known to everyone that Dada Lekhraj had expired in 1969 itself. Then how can he be called the Father of the entire world, i.e. Prajapita Brahma? In the flute of knowledge (Murlis) narrated by incorporeal Supreme Soul Shiva regarding Gita and its narrator, He has said the following points:


"This is a new knowledge for the new world. The giver is only one. Krishna does not give this knowledge. Krishna is not called the purifier of the sinful. The purifier of the sinful is only one Supreme Father Supreme Soul, who is beyond the cycle of rebirths, whereas the name of Krishna, who takes 84 births, has been added in Gita." (Murli dated 28.10.87 )

"Now, who has given birth to Gita. This is the topic. When they say Jayanti (Birthday of Gita) then certainly Gita was also born, isn’t it? When it is named Shrimat Bhagwat Gita Jayanti, then there must also be someone who gave birth to Gita, isn’t it? Everyone says Shri Krishna Bhagwaanuvach (God Shri Krishna speaks), then Shri Krishna comes first and then Gita. Now the creator of Gita is certainly required. But Shri Krishna was a small child. He cannot narrate Gita. It will have to be proved who gives birth to Gita. This is a deep matter. Whatever dispute is there in India is only on this point. Krishna takes birth through mother’s womb. He is a prince of Golden Age." (Murli dated 24.11.88 )

"Shri Krishna cannot be called Vrikshapati (master of the world tree). The Supreme Father Supreme Soul is the seed-like creator of the human world. Krishna cannot be called the creator. He is always a human being with deity-like virtues." (Murli dated 22.2.98 )

"Krishna is not the Father of everyone." (Murli dated 30.9.98 )

"Krishna cannot be called the Father of all the souls. The Father of souls, i.e. Supreme Father Supreme Soul says, “Remember none but me.” "

"In the picture of Trinity Shiva published by the Brahmakumaris organization Dada Lekhraj has been picturised as Brahma, but they are unaware of the human souls, who will play the roles of Shankar and Vishnu after the death of Dada Lekhraj in 1969. That is why, in place of Shankar and Vishnu, the pictures from the path of worship (Bhaktimarg) have been shown. On the basis of the Murlis and Avyakt Vanis narrated from Mt. Abu, AIVV believes that after 1969 the incorporeal Supreme Soul Shiva is giving the true knowledge of Gita and teaching easy RajYoga to all the human souls through another corporeal human Chariot called Shiv Shankar Bholenath, through which all the Arjuna-like souls can get transformed from human beings to deities. The proofs for this fact are present in the various flutes of knowledge (i.e. gyaan Murlis) narrated through Dada Lekhraj, which the administrators of Brahmakumari Organization are unwilling to accept in fear of losing the throne.

The Brahmakumari Organization and AIVV believe that the soul of Dada Lekhraj will take birth in the coming Golden Age as Shri Krishna. But the publicity of Dada Lekhraj as the medium of Gita Sermonizer Shiva by the Brahmakumari Organization is like denying the knowledge given in the Murlis that were narrated through Dada Lekhraj himself. Dada Lekhraj became the temporary medium of God Shiva from 1951 to 1969, during which he gave motherly love to the Brahmakumar-kumaris and the versions of God Shiva uttered through his body became famous as the true Gita amongst the Brahmakumar-kumaris. But prior to 1951 and after his death in 1969, the responsibility of this huge Godly task was carried by the soul of his business partner, who is playing the role of the corporeal medium of incorporeal Shiva, i.e. Mahadev Shiv Shankar, and will play the role of Satya Narayan in the Golden Age in the near future and the role of Shri Ram in the Silver Age, which will begin after 1250 years.

God Shiva certainly narrated the knowledge of Gita, i.e the Murlis through Dada Lekhraj, but he is revealing the deep secrets of those Murlis through his present human Chariot. Just as the Hindus in general have accepted attractive looking Shri Krishna as the Gita Sermonizer instead of Bholenath Shiv-Shankar out of ignorance, similarly the Brahmakumari Organization has accepted attractive looking Dada Lekhraj, i.e. the soul of Krishna as the Gita Sermonizer instead of the soul of Shankar or Ram. Even in the Murlis of knowledge published by the Brahmakumaris organization, the name of Dada Lekhraj (Pitashri) has been added before ShivBaba. This is the only mistake because of which the name of Shri Krishna has been added in the Sanskrit Gita as its creator instead of Shiv-Shankar in the path of worship in the world drama cycle from Copper Age onwards. The qualities of God given in Gita, like Avyakt, Ajanma, Abhokta etc. actually apply on Shiv Shankar both in limited and unlimited sense and not on Shri Krishna.


"Father says that I am the God of Gita. It was ShivBaba who created Mother Gita. Krishna took birth. Along with him Radha and others are also included. First there are Brahmins. Father says, “Who is the foolish person, who has removed my name completely? Then, I only have to come and reveal that I, the Supreme Soul Shiva am the God mentioned in Gita. I have created Gita. The child Krishna took birth from Gita. You have then added the name of child instead of Father. This is the biggest mistake."(Murli dated 13.12.88 )

• "Child Krishna was born from Rudra (another name of Shiv-Shankar). So the name of child has been added instead of Father in it (i.e. in Gita)." (Murli dated 29.3.88 )

"Gita is the mother and Father. Gita is called mother. No other book is called mother. Its name is mother Gita. OK, who created it? First of all a man adopts a woman, isn’t it?" –(Murli dated 28.9.88 ) (So in the beginning of the Godly family, i.e. Yagya also Shiv Shankar must have certainly adopted Dada Lekhraj Brahma as the 18 chaptered mother Gita after the demise of Mother Gita)

• "Everything is based on correcting Gita. Because of amending Gita the personality of God has vanished." (Murli dated 9.3.88 )

• "Bharat (India) gets the cream through the God of Shrimat Bhagwat Gita. Shrimat Bhagwat Gita has also been amended to the extent that Gita has been reduced to the level of buttermilk by adding the name of Shri Krishna instead of the ocean of knowledge, purifier of the sinful incorporeal Supreme Father Supreme Soul." (Murli dated 31.10.78 )

• "Gita is the mother and Father of all the scriptures. It is not true that it is only the mother and Father of only the scriptures of India. No. It is the mother and Father of all the biggest scriptures that are present in the world." (Murli dated 5.2.83 )

• "He is the creator of heaven – he is helpful to everyone. Krishna is a creation himself. He is the first class flower of the garden." (Murli dated 5.2.83 )

This is the only mistake, which has caused the degradation of India, and has condemned Gita, and in spite of being the mother of all the scriptures, Gita is not accepted by the followers of other religions. This is the reason why scholars have clarified Gita in different ways. Shankaracharya has proved the soul and the Supreme Soul to be one and the same (advaita) on the basis of the same Gita, whereas Madhvacharya proved the soul and Supreme Soul to be different entities (dwaita). Sex-lust has been termed as the biggest enemy in Gita. The people of the world do not accept this fact only because it is famous in the scriptures that the so-called creator of Gita, i.e., Shri Krishna had 8 wives and 16,108 Gopikas. If Mahadev Shiv Shankar’s name had appeared in Gita as the Gita Sermonizer then the world would have readily accepted the point of Sex-lust being the greatest enemy, because Shankar is famous in the scriptures as the one who had only one wife and the one who destroyed sex-lust. If we take the example of the scriptures only then just as God was not recognized when he appeared in an ordinary, old human being in the story of Satyanarayana, similarly seeing the graveyard dweller-like ordinary form of Shankar, his Father-in-law Daksh Prajapati did not recognize him and insulted him. So “As the King, so are the subjects.”

In India Gita is also considered to be a mother. But in the Godly knowledge being given by God Shiva presently, it is also being clarified that Gita is not just a symbol of knowledge, i.e. a book, but it is also a symbol of a living human soul, who is playing the role of world mother (Jagdamba) along with Prajapita to sustain the Godly family in the present Confluence Age. Both of them are only known as Aadi Dev- Aadi Devi by the Hindus, as Aadam-Havva by the Muslims, as Adam-Eve by the Christians and as Aadinath-Aadinathini by the Jains.

Hence, keeping in view the above points, if Father Shiv-Shankar is presented as the God mentioned in Gita instead of the child Shri Krishna, then Gita will be accepted by the souls of the entire world as a Godly version.


• "When did God narrate Gita? Certainly all the religions must be present. Actually, Gita is the main scripture for all the religions. People of all the religions must accept it….Father has come to cause the true salvation of people belonging to all the religions through Gita. Gita has been narrated by Father. This matter has been made complicated by putting the name of child instead of Father." (Murli dated 21.2.93 ) Om Shanti

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gita ka niraakaar Bhagwaan Shiv Shankar Bholenath ya saakaar Shri Krishna kee aatma urf Dada Lekhraj?

Bhaarteeyon ke liye dhai hazaar saal say jeevan ke har kshetra may maargadarshak kaa kaarya karney vaali Gita sarva shastra shiromani hai, is baat may koi sandeh nahi hai. Kintu Bharat ke itihaas may isee Gita par jitney vidwaanon aur aacharyon nay teekaaen likhi hain, utni shaayad kisi aur shastra par nahi likhi gayi hongi, jo yah siddh karta hai ki yah shaastra aisa anootha hai ki manushyon dwara vibhinn prakaar say kee gayi iski vyakhya nay saarey manushyon ko kabhi santusht nahi kiya hai. Kisi nay sach hee kaha hai, “Kai jaaney kavi ya kai jaaney ravi.” Kisi kavita kee sahi vyakhya uska rachanakaar arthaat kavi hee kar sakta hai athava gyaan surya ravi kar sakta hai. Baaki jitney bhi manushya us kavita kee jitni bhi vyakhyaaen karein, voh kisi na kisi drishtikon say adhoori hi hogi.

Jan saamanya ke man may toh yahee baat baitha dee gayi hai ki Gita ke gyaandaata Shri Krishna thay, jinhonay Dwaparyug may Kurukshetra kee ranbhoomi may rath par viraajmaan hokar Arjun ko Gita ka updesh diya tha. Kintu adhyatmik aur aitihaasik drishtikon say dekhein toh Gita kisnay, kisko, kab, kahaan aur kaisey sunaai thi, ye saarey hi prashn vivaadaspad hain. Sarvapratham prashna toh yahee uthta hai ki Gita kisnay aur kisko sunaai thi? Gita aur Satyanarayan kee katha yah siddh kartey hain ki Bhagwaan toh saadhaaran, boodhey aur anubhavi manushya ke roop may prakat hotay hain. Gita may hi likha hua hai:
  • Avjaanaanti maam moodha manurshee tanumashritam I
    Param bhaavamjaananto mam bhootmaheshwaram II (Gita 9/11)
Saath hee Gita may likha hua hai ki Ishwar toh ajanma, abhokta aur Avyakt hai.
  • Ajo S pi sannvyayatma bhootanamishraro S pi san I
    Prakriti swamdhishthaay sambhavamyatmamaayayaa II (Gita 4/6)

    Yo maamjamanaadim cha veti lokmaheshwaram I
    Asam-moodhah Silver Age martyeshu sarvapapaih pramuchyatey II
Shrimadbhagwadgeeta may usee aadi-anaadi purush kee stuti kee gayi hai- (tamev chadhyam purusham prapdhye yatah pravrittih prasoota puraani I Gita 15/4) arthaat mai us aadi-anaadi purush ko pranaam karta hoon, jis say is sansaar vriksh kee aadi pravritti hui hai. Gita kaa vah aadi purush swayam bataa rahaa hai -(Ahamadirhi devanam maharshinaam cha sarvashah-Gita 10/2) arthaat mai hee devon aur maharshiyon sabka aadi hoon. Usee nay praacheenkaal may karmayog kee vah prasiddh nishtha prachalit kee thi jiskay kaaran Bharat ko Jain paramparanusaar bhi karmabhoomi kee sangya mili hai. (nishtha pura prokta mayanagh ... karmayogen yoginaam-Gita 3/3)

Yahaan dhyaan rahey ki Gita kaa gyaan Shri Krishna nay nahi diya tha, apitu usee aadi-anaadi purush nay grihasthadharma kee shiksha ke liye grihastha Arjun ko sahaj Rajyog sikhaaney ke hetu diya tha. Is baarey may adhik vistaar may na jaakar prakaranvash kuch prasiddh itihaaskaaron ke uddharan prastut kartey hain:-

Hopkins ka vichaar hai- “(Gita ka) ab jo Krishnapradhaan roop milta hai, vah pehley koi Vishnupradhaan kavita thi aur is say bhi pehley vah koi ek nissampradaay rachana thi.” Religions of India (1608 ) page 386 (Radhakrishnan Gita, page 17), Religious Literature of India (1620) page 12-18 par Farkuhaar nay likha hai, “Yah (Gita) ek puraani padhya Upnishad hai jo ki sambhavatah shwetashwaropanishad ke baad likhi gayi hai aur jisay kisi kavi nay Krishnavaad ke samarthan ke liye Eesvi San (A.D.) ke baad vartamaan roop may dhaal diya hai.” Garvey ke anusaar, “Bhagwadgeeta pehley ek saankhyayog sambandhi granth tha, jismay baad may Krishnavasudev pooja paddhati aa mili aur Eesvi Poorva (B.C.) teesri shatabdi may iska melmilaap Krishna ko Vishnu kaa roop maankar vaidik parampara ke saath bitha diya gaya. Mool rachna Eesvi Poorv 200 may likhi gayi thi aur iska vartamaan roop Eesa ki doosri shatabdi may kisi Vedaant ke anuyaayi dwara taiyyaar kiya gaya hai.” Holtzman Gita ko sarveshwarvaadi kavita ka baad may Vishnupradhaan banaaya gaya roop maanata hai. Keith ka bhi vishwaas hai ki moolatah Gita shwetashwar ked hang kee Upanishad thi, parantu baad may usay Krishnapooja ke anukool dhaal diya gaya. (Radhakrishnan ‘Gita’ kee bhoomika, page 17 say uddhrit)

Jabki Shri Krishna ka toh Maa ke garbh say janma hua tha, unhonay jeevan ke sabhi sukhon ka Bhog kiya, guru Sandipani say shiksha prapta kee. Unhay adhiktar baalyavastha may hi dikhaya gaya hai. Isliye saara sansaar unhay apney pita ke roop may sweekar nahi kar sakta. Doosri baat, pauraanik kathaaon may prasiddh hai ki dwaparyug may Gita Shri Krishna nay keval Arjun ko ek rath par viraajmaan hokar sunaai, kintu yah bhi prasiddh hai ki Maharshi Vyaas nay Mahabharat shastra kee rachana kee, jo ki jan-jan tak Sanskrit may pahunchi. Aitihaasik drishti say ye tathya vivaadaspad hain.

Vaastav may Gita hai toh sarva shaastra shiromani, kintu vah dwaparyug may nahi apitu 5000 varsh ke chaturyugi manushya srishti roopi charka may Kaliyug ke ant aur Satyug kee aadi, arthaat purushottam Sangamyug may sunaai thi, jiski abhi punaraavritti ho rahi hai. Yadi Gita dwaparyug may hi sunaai gayi thi toh fir paapi Kaliyug kaisey aa gaya? Bhagwaan ke avataran ke pashchaat toh Satyug aana chaahiye tha, na ki mahapaapi Kaliyug. Aur Gita sunaai jaati hai Sangamyug may jabki srishti par saarey dharma, dharmaavalambi aur apney-apney antim janmon may un dharmon ke dharmapita bhi vidhyamaan hotay hain. Tabhi toh Gita may kaha gaya hai-sarva dharmon ka tyaag kar mujh ek parmatma ki sharan may aa ja.
  • Sarvadharmanparityajya Mamekam Sharanam Vraj.
    Aham twa sarvapapebhyo mokshayami Maa shuchah. (Gita 18/66)
Hinduon ke paaramparik drishtikon say toh jab dwaparyug may Gita sunaai gayi thi tab Muslim, Sikh aadi dharma toh nahi thay. Fir Gita may ukta shlok kaisey aa gaya? Aur Bhagwaan dwara Gita koi Sanskrit jaisi kathin bhasha may nahi sunaai gayi thi, vah toh sarva saadhaaran ko samajh may aaney waali bhasha, jaisey Hindi may hi sunaai ja rahi hai. Aitihaasik drishti say bhi dekhein toh Sanskrit kabhi jan saadhaaran kee bhasha nahi rahi hai. Fir sarva saadhaaran maanushi tan may aaya hua bhagwaan bhalaa aisi klisht bhasha ka prayog kaisey kar sakta hai? Saath hi Gita Shri Krishna jaisey aakarshak roop rang waaley tatha punarjanma ke chakra may aney vaaley kisi saakari rajkumar ke dwara nahi apitu ajanma, abhokta, niraakaar bhagwaan Shiv dwara Kaliyug ke ant may kisi saadhaaran manushya tan (Prajapita Brahma) ke dwara keval ek Arjun ko nahi apitu Arjun jaisey kayi anya grihasthiyon ko diya ja raha hai. Gita may likha hai, "Hey Arjun! too apney janmon ko nahi jaanata. Mai tujhey terey anek janmon ki kahaani sunaata hoon.
  • Bahooni mein vyateetani janmaani tav charjun.
    Taanyaham ved sarvaani na twa vettha parantap. (Gita 4/5)
Kintu jo Krishna swayam janma aur maran ke chakra may aaney waala ho toh vah anya manushyaatmaon ko sachhi mukti aur jeevanmukti ka varsa kaisey dey sakta hai, aur unkay anek janmon ki kahaani kaisey sunaa sakta hai? Is say siddh hota hai ki anek janmon ki kahaani saakaari Shri Krishna dwara nahi apitu ajanma Parmatma Shiv dwara sunaai jaati hai, jo ki Gita ya Amarkatha ke roop may prasiddh hai.

Gita ke sambandh may uparyukta mat, jo ki aam dhaarana say poornatayaa bhinn hai, Brahmakumari sanstha ke saath-saath Kampila, Uttar Pradesh sthit Adhyatmik Ishwariya Vishwa Vidyalay ka bhi yahi mat hai ki 1936-37 say praarambh huay Purushottam Sangamyug par niraakaar Bhagwaan Shiv dwara apney ati saadhaaran saakaar manushya rath ke dwara sunaaya gaya Ishwariya gyaan, jisay Murli kaha jaata hai, vahi sachhi Gita hai, jiskay aadhaar par dhai hazaar saal baad prarambh honay vaaley dwaparyug may Sanskrit ki Gita likhi jaayegi. Haalanki Brahmakumari sanstha yah toh maanti hai ki niraakaar Shiv hi Gita ke Bhagwaan hain, kintu vay Dada Lekhraj Brahma urf Krishna ki aatma ko hi sansaar bhar may Bhagwaan ke saakaar maadhyam ke roop may prachaar aur prasaar kar rahey hain, jabki yah sarvavidit hai ki Dada Lekhraj ka toh 1969 may hi dehaavasaan ho chuka hai. Fir bhala voh saarey vishwa ke pita arthaat Prajapita Brahma kaisey kahla saktey hain? Dada Lekhraj ke mukh dwara sunaai gayi gyaan murliyon may niraakaar parmaatma Shiv nay Gita evam Gita Gyaandaata ke sambandh may nimnalikhit mahaavakya uchhaarey hain:-


• "Yah hai nayi duniya ke liye naya gyaan. Deney waala ek hi hai. Krishna yah gyaan nahi deta. Krishna ko patit-paavan nahi kahaa jaata hai. Patit paavan toh ek hi Parampita Parmatma hai jo punarjanma rahit hai aur Gita may naam daal diya hai Krishna ka, jo poorey 84 janma letey hain." (Mu.28.10.87)

• "Ab Gita ko janma kisney diya hai, yah hai topic. (Gita) Jayanti kahtey hain toh jaroor janma bhi hua na. Unko jab kahtey hain Shrimat Bhagwat Gita Jayanti, toh jaroor unko janma deney waala bhi chaahiye na. Sab kahtey hain Shri Krishna Bhagwaanuvaach, toh fir Shri Krishna pehley aata, Gita peechey ho jaati. Ab Gita ka rachayita jaroor chaahiye. Parantu Shri Krishna toh chota bachha tha. Vah Gita sunaa na sakey. Yah siddh karna hoga ki Gita ko janma deney vala kaun? Yah hai guhya baat. Bharat may jo kuch rola hai so isi baat par hai. Krishna toh janma leta hai mata ke garbh say. Vah to Satyug ka prince hai." (Murli dated 24.11.88 )

• "Shri Krishna ko Vrikshapati nahi kahenge. Parampita Parmatma hi manushya srishti ka beejroop creator hai. Krishna ko creator nahi kahenge. Vah toh sadaiv daivi gunwaala manushya hai." (Murli dated 22.2.98 )

• "Krishna toh sabka Father nahi hai." (Murli dated 30.9.98 )

• "Krishna ko sabhi aatmaon ka baap nahi kahenge. Aatmaon ka baap Parampita Parmatma kahtey hain ki maamekam Yaad karo." (Murli dated 24.9.98 )

Brahmakumari sanstha dwara prakaashit Trimurti ke chitra may Dada Lekhraj ko Brahma ke roop may chitrit kiya gaya hai, kintu 1969 may Dada Lekhraj ke nidhan ke pashchaat kaunsi manushyatmaen Shankar tatha Vishnu ki bhoomika adaa kareng, iski unhay jaankaari nahi hai, isliye Shankar tatha Vishnu ke sthaan par vahi bhaktimaargeey chitra dikhaaye gaye hain. Mount Abu say chalaayi gayi murliyon aur Avyakt vaaniyon ke aadhaar par Adhyatmik Vidhyalay ka maanana hai ki 1969 ke baad say niraakaar Parmatma Shiv ek aur saakaar manushya rath Shiv-Shankar Bholeynaath ke dwara sabhi manushyaatmaon ko Gita ka sachha gyaan dey rahey hain tatha sahaj Rajyog sikha rahey hain, jis say har Arjun roopi aatma manushya say devata ban sakey. Is baat ke pramaan Dada Lekhraj ke dwara sunaai gayi anekshah gyaan murliyon may hi maujood hain, jinhay Brahmakumari sanstha ke sarparast apni gaddi kho jaaney ke dar say sweekaar karney ko taiyyaar nahi hain.

Brahmakumari sanstha tatha Adhyatmik Vidyalay ka maanana hai ki Dada Lekhraj ki aatma hi aaney waaley Satyug may Shri Krishna ke roop may janma legi. Kintu Brahmakumari Sanstha dwara Dada Lekhraj ka Gita gyaandaata Shiv ke maadhyam ke roop may prachaar prasaar kiya jaana swayam unkay mukh dwara sunaai gayi gyaan murliyon ko nakaarney ka kaarya hai. Dada Lekhraj toh keval 1951 say 1969 tak Bhagwaan Shiv ke temporary manushya rath baney, jis dauraan unhonay Brahmakumar-kumariyon ko ek Maa ka pyaar diya aur unkay dwara uchhaarey gaye Bhagwaan Shiv ke mahavaakya sachhi Gita mata ke roop may Brahmakumar-kumaariyon ke beech prasiddh huay. Kintu 1951 say pehley tatha 1969 may unkay nidhan ke pashchaat is brihat Ishwariya kaarya ka beeda unkay poorva janma ki bhaageedaar vaali aatma nay uthaaya hai, jo ki vartamaan samay niraakaar Shiv ke saakaar maadhyam arthaat Mahadev Shiv-Shankar ki bhoomika adaa kar rahey hain, aur bhavishya Satyug may Satya Narayan ke roop may agley 1250 varsh baad praarambh honay waaley Tretayug may Shri Ram ki bhoomika adaa karenge.

Bhagwaan Shiv nay Dada Lekhraj ke dwara Gita ka gyaan arthaat Murli sunaai jaroor thi, kintu usmay chipey goodh rahasyon ka udhgaatan apney vartamaan manushya rath ke dwara kar rahey hain. Jaisey aam Hinduon dwara agyaanvash Bholeynath Shiv-Shankar ke sthaan par aakarshak Shri Krishna ko Gita gyaandaata maan liya gaya hai, usi prakaar Brahmakumari Sanstha dwara agyaanvash saadhaaran Shankar ya Ram waali aatma ke sthaan par aakarshak shareer vaaley dhanaadhya Dada Lekhraj arthaat Krishna vaali aatma ko Gita gyaandaata maan liya gaya hai. Brahmakumari sanstha dwara prakaashit gyaan murliyon may bhi ShivBaba say pehley Dada Lekhraj (Pitashri) ka naam daal diya gaya hai. Yahi vah ekaj bhool hai jiskay kaaran chaturyugi srishti chakra may dwaparyug say Bhaktimarg may Sanskrit ki Gita ke rachayita ke roop may Shiv-Shankar ke sthaan par Shri Krishna ka naam daal diya gaya hai. Gita may Bhagwaan ke liye dee gayi Avyakt, ajanma, abhokta aadi ki sangyaen vaastav may Shiv Shankar par had aur behad may laagoo hoti hain, na ki Shri Krishna par.


• "Baap kahtey hain ki Gita ka Bhagwaan mai hoon. Gita mata rachi ShivBaba nay. Janma liya Krishna nay. Unkay saath Radhey aur sab aa jaatey hain. Pehley hai hi Brahman. Baap kahtey hain kaun moodhmati hai jisnay hamaara naam nishaan hi gum kar diya. Fir mujhey hi aakar bataana padta hai ki Gita ka Bhagwaan mai Shiv Parmatma hoon. Mainey Gita rachi. Gita say Krishna bachha paida hua. Tum nay fir baap ke badley bachhey kaa naam daal diya. Yah hai badi bhool." (Murli dated 13.12.88 )

• "Rudra say Krishna bachha paida hua. Toh usmay baap ke badley bachhey ka naam daal diya." (Murli dated 29.3.88 )

• "Gita hai maai-baap. Gita ko mata kaha jaata hai. Aur koi pustak ko Mata nahi kahtey. Inka naam hi hai Gita Mata. Achha, unko kisnay racha? Pehley-pehley purush stri ko adopt kartey hain na." (Murli dated 28.9.88 ) (Toh jaroor Shiv Bholeynaath nay Yagya ki aadi may bhi Gita Mata ke upraant titledhaari Dada Lekhraj Brahma ko hi 18 adhyaayi Gita Mata ke roop may adopt kiya).

• "Saara madaar Gita ko correct karney par hai. Gita khandan honay ke kaaran Bhagwaan ki hasti gum ho gayi." (Murli 9.3.88 )

• "Ek hi Shrimat Bhagwat Gita ke Bhagwaan say hi Bhaarat ko maakhan milta hai. Shrimat Bhagwat Gita ko bhi khandan kiya hua hai. Jo gyaansaagar patit paavan niraakaar Parampita Parmatma ke badley Shri Krishna ka naam daal khandan kar chaanch banaa diya." (Murli dated 31.10.78 )

• "Gita toh hai sabhi shaastron ki maat-pita. Aisey nahi ki sirf Bhaarat ke shastron ki maat-pita hai. Nahi. Jo bhi badey tey badey shaastra duniya may hain, sabhi ki maat-pita hai." (Murli dated 5.2.83)

• "Vah hai swarg ka rachayita - sabka sahaayak. Krishna toh swayam rachana hai. Bageechey ka firstclass fool hai." (Murli dated 5.2.83)

Yahi vah ekaj bhool hai, jiskay kaaran Bhaarat desh ki durgati hui hai, Gita khandit ho gayi hai, aur sabhi dharmashaastron ki maata honay ke baavjood Gita ko anya dharmaavalambiyon dwara sweekaar nahi kiya jaata hai. Isi kaaran alag-alag vidwaanon dwara Gita ki alag-alag vyakhya kee gayi hai. Shankaracharya nay usi Gita ke aadhaar par aatma aur parmatma ko ek (adwait) siddh kiya, jabki Madhvacharya nay aatma aur parmatma ko bhinn (dwait) siddh kiya. Gita may kaam vikaar ko mahashatru ki sangya dee gayi hai. Duniya vaaley is baat ko isliye sweekaar nahi kartey kyunki Geet ke tathakathit rachayita Shri Krishna ki aath patniyan aur 16,108 gopiyan shaastron may prasiddh hain. Yadi Gita gyaan daata ke roop may Mahadev Shiv-Shankar ka naam aaya hota toh sansaar kaam mahashatru vaali baat ko sahaj sweekaar kar leta kyunki Shankar toh ek patnivrata ya kaamdev ko bhasma karney vaaley ke roop may prasiddh hain. Shastron kaa hi udaaharan lein toh jis prakaar Satyanaarayan ki katha may saadhaaran, boodhey maanav ke roop may aaye bhagwaan ko pehchaana nahi jaata, usi prakaar Shankar ke shmashaanvaasi saadhaaran roop ko dekh kar unkay sasur Daksh Prajapati nay unhay nahi pehchaana aur unka apmaan kiya. Toh yatha raja tatha praja.
Bhaarat may Gita ki maanyata Mata ke roop may bhi hai. Kintu Bhagwaan Shiv dwara vartamaan samay diye ja rahey Ishwariya gyaan may is baat kaa bhi spashtikaran diya gaya hai ki Gita keval gyaan ka prateek pustak hi nahi apitu ek chaitanya manushyatma ka bhi prateek hai, jo ki vartamaan Sangamyug may Ishwariya parivar ki paalana karney ke liye Prajapita ke saath Jagdamba ki bhoomika adaa kar rahi hai. Inhay hi Hindu dharma may Aadidev-Aadidevi, Musalmaanon may Aadam-Havva, Isaaiyon may Adam-Eve tatha Jainiyon may Aadinath-Aadinaathini ke roop may jaana jaata hai.

Atah uparyukta baaton ko dhyaan may rakhtey huay yadi baalak Shri Krishna (Dada Lekhraj) ke sthaan par pita Shiv Shankar ko Gita Gyaandaat ke roop may prastut kiya jaaye toh Gita ko saarey vishwa ki aatmaon ke dwara Bhagwaan ki Vani ke roop may sahaj sweekar kar liya jaayega.


• "Bhagwaan nay Gita kab sunaai? Jaroor sabhi dharma honay chaahiye. Sabhi dharmon ke liye vaastav may ek Gita hai mukhya. Sab dharma vaalon ko maanana chaahiye ... Sabhi dharmon ki Gita dwara sadgati karney baap aaya hua hai. Gita baap ki uchhaari hui hai. Usmay baap ke badley bachhey ka naam daal mushkil kar di hai." (Murli dated 21.2.93) Om Shanti

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

Post by tinydot » 13 Oct 2007

ex-l wrote:My feeling is that they just tossed another Hindu God in there for good luck and to expand their market! Hell, they had used the names of all the major ones! :roll: Lekhraj Kirpalani is; Brahma, Vishnu, Krishna, Narayan, Shankar, Hanuman AND then Shiva too ... and a whole load of minor ones. Boy, were they in love with that guy. Did they miss anyone out? No bit part as Jesus or Buddha!?! (Joke).
They kind of deviated when it dealt with "Shiva thing" by telling us Shiva is a separate soul. I guess it would have been to much to say that Krishna is Shiva. That will confuse the heck out of the Vaihnavites and Shaivites followers.

I have the same feeling about this continuous re-invention of the wheel by the BK Seniors. They call it "understanding the deeper secrets of the Knowledge".

Thanks for the reply Arjun. I will have to digest what you have posted. The thing that bothers me is that the BK Murlis are like a mutated version of Bhagavat Gita. I am sure the vedic scholars have some explanation about Krishna being the narrator of the Gita.

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

Post by john » 13 Oct 2007

arjun wrote:Dada Lekhraj became the temporary medium of God Shiva from 1951 to 1969, during which he gave motherly love to the Brahmakumar-Kumaris and the versions of God Shiva uttered through his body became famous as the true Gita amongst the Brahmakumar-Kumaris. But prior to 1951 and after his death in 1969, the responsibility of this huge Godly task was carried by the soul of his business partner, who is playing the role of the corporeal medium of incorporeal Shiva, i.e. Mahadev Shiv Shankar, and will play the role of Satya Narayan in the Golden Age in the near future and the role of Shri Ram in the Silver Age, which will begin after 1250 years.
Two things.
  • One) You say this piece has been approved by ShivBaba( through Virendra Dev Dixit), yet in it, it claims the person playing the role of corporeal medium of incorporeal Shiva, will play the role of Shri Ram in the Silver Age?
    Two) It has been said that initially, those in the Yagya e.g. Lekhraj Kirpalani used to give interpretation of the 'Gita', the Hindu scripture from the Copper Age, does anyone know for sure this is true and for how long it went on?
Did Lekhraj Kirpalani and his business partner live in the same vicinity, same city even, was the business partner part of the small community of the Yagya or was he working/teaching away from the others at the time?

john morgan
ex-BK
Posts: 306
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by john morgan » 13 Oct 2007

Listening to the Murli can be a marvellous experience. Imagine that you are a Hindu and that everyone told you that Krishna spoke the Gita. You are aware that everyone who spoke about this scripture said that Krishna was the author. Then one day you are in soul-consciousness, someone is reading a Murli. Your mind travels to the time it was originally spoken and you have the faith that the voice of the Murli is God speaking through the mouth of Brahma. You are thrilled to the core.

The voice says "Krishna is is the first prince of the Golden Age, I am not omnipresent, I am here in the forehead of Brahma. By thinking that Krishna was me Bharat has fallen, now I come to give my own introduction. By remembering me you will once more become residents of the land of heaven."

You are aware that no one (other than Brahmins) has heard God speaking in the first person. You have faith in your intellect and because it is clean and refined through listening to the Murli and practise of the things therein you catch the inspiration in the words. Listening to the Murli can be one of the most marvellous experiences. This my understanding of why Murli's are so valuable.

Then we descend into another consciousness, oh the Brahma Kumaris said that did they? Has anyone else verified it? Mmm ... I'll consider it, put it somewhere in my list of 1,000's of things to do before I die.

To use this knowledge well is an art. It is not like worldly knowledge where you accumulate and sort facts. There are other ways to use the Murli.

Kindest regards,

John Morgan

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11584
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 » 13 Oct 2007

John wrote:One) You say this piece has been approved by ShivBaba( through Veerendra Dev Dixit), yet in it, it claims the person playing the role of corporeal medium of incorporeal Shiva, will play the role of Shri Ram in the Silver Age?

Two) It has been said that initially, those in the Yagya e.g. Lekhraj Kirpalani used to give interpretation of the 'Gita', the Hindu scripture from the Copper Age, does anyone know for sure this is true and for how long it went on?

Did Lekhraj Kirpalani and his business partner live in the same vicinity, same city even, was the business partner part of the small community of the Yagya or was he working/teaching away from the others at the time?
Om Shanti. The first questions seems to be valid because PBKs have been told that the soul of Confluence-Aged Lakshmi would become the Silver-Aged Ram in the Silver Age, while the Confluence-Aged Ram would become Silver-Aged Sita. Anyways, I will check up and intimate you and incorporate correction if required.

As regards the second and third questions, these are matters of research. If I find any proofs I would certainly intimate through this forum. It is known to us that Dada Lekhraj and Sevakram lived in the same building in Calcutta. But as regards their association in Sindh, Pakistan, I do not know if they lived in the same premises or different premises.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

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

Post by john » 13 Oct 2007

john morgan wrote:Then we descend into another consciousness, oh the Brahma Kumaris said that did they? has anyone else verified it? Mmm ... I'll consider it put it somewhere in my list of 1000's of things to do before I die. To use this knowledge well is an art. It is not like worldly knowledge where you accumulate and sort facts. There are other ways to use the Murli.
What also has to be taken into consideration is how much a person wants to know the truth about God, Shiva and the Knowledge as opposed to someone who is just comfortable with feeling good and having an incomplete understanding.

If you are happy to just accept what is told to you by BKSWU, then that is fine.

Here, I differentiate between what God Father Shiva says and what the BKSWU say. What I mean is that BKSWU is not reporting the Knowledge accurately and is distorting it. From the moment anyone takes the 7 Day Course, their mind is getting a mixture of manmat and Shrimat. It is up to the wise individual to then study Murli closely, with full attention, to come to a better understanding.

Horses for courses really (or everyone plays their own part in drama), but why does it upset you that others want to go the extra mile and really understand what is happening?

It is interesting to read this from
BapDada wrote:Madhuban Avyakt BapDada’s divine message via Mohiniben for the special Bhog 11/10/07 - offering for departed souls who have gone into the Advance Party

Baba then said: Look, they are also My children, but these are the children who have hidden something or another from Baba so they are not able to look Me in the eye. They are not able to take drishti. Firstly, they have told a lie and secondly, they have hidden it. So, now they are experiencing that they have made a very big mistake. However, even then, it was as though Baba was giving them drishti filled with mercy. The atmosphere on that side was heavy.
I think members from this forum can look BapDada in the eye and say we did our best to find and promote the truth. How many BKs can?

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 » 13 Oct 2007

You know. Giving the whole thought of how and when did they introduce Shiva into Knowledge Post-1950, it makes me want to ask ... how and when did they introduce Lekhraj Kirpalani as Krishna. I know the BK version but I am afraid their "versions" are all out to question now. It does appear to be early on. All the same when exactly after his retirement in 1932 did he start using this powerful concept and technique of becoming all the mata's beloved Krishna?
  • Especially if, indeed, Shewakram and The Golden Circle were involved in the channeling and mediumship in the early days.
john morgan wrote:To use this knowledge well is an art. It is not like worldly knowledge where you accumulate and sort facts. There are other ways to use the Murli.
Yes, essentially it can also be used to delude the self, delude others and sustain one's altered state of consciousness and one's position of power within the organization if one has one. The sort of "go to sleep, baby ... don't think" tack of encouraging individuals to switch off one's rational and critical powers is a technique prevalent amongst the BKWSU teachers. Indeed, instituted within the BKWSU.

Of course, one ought "accumulate and sort facts" if one has the capacity. Not all have the stomach (intellect) to do so. But everyone has the right to full access to the full facts.

I agree, and respect, the position that john, Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs take, of not stopping off at the intoxicated stage but continuing on to investigate and address the anomalies within the Gyan. And I contrast this with the BKWSU approach of chopping out, erasing and exercising control over the "official versions" of the Knowledge, Murlis and history.
  • Is this what you would call an "art"? Or is it even acceptable?
The infant cries and does not want to leave the mother's breast ... but one day he or she must or always remain a dwarf.

john morgan
ex-BK
Posts: 306
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by john morgan » 13 Oct 2007

Dear John,

When you get to know me you will find that I speak from my own experience, my truth is the only thing I have to work with. As regards getting upset when others try to really understand what is happening - do I? We are creators and it is the creative process that interests me.

At present I am looking at how I create thought. this to me is important as thoughts are the seedlings of future realities. Please see the poem I posted in Who is to Blame?

In the meantime take care,

Kind regards,

John

User avatar
alladin
Friends and family of
Posts: 718
Joined: 27 Feb 2007

boutiques

Post by alladin » 13 Oct 2007

ex-l wrote: My feeling is that they just tossed another Hindu God in there for good luck and to expand their market!
Jokingly? Sounds very possible, may be. Lots of weird, inexplicable aspects of the BKWSU start to make some sense when you observe the organization as a corporation and their activities as a business.

I know it may sound offensive, and it may take years before a committed BK dares to even consider this as a possibility. Being deluded hurts and waking up is not easy. Turning a blind eye creates a comfort zone, up to a certain point, or for some souls.

So, as ex-l suggested, one strategy could be offering variety of styles, sizes and colours, alternatively "one size fits all". "What about this one, madam? It suits you perfectly. You look like a deity in it! You can pay later!"

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.

Re: boutiques

Post by fluffy bunny » 13 Oct 2007

alladin wrote:Jokingly? Sounds very possible, may be.
I am not sure myself.

I think the problem is the fixedness of the minds of the early BKs. They say the name Krishna means "The All Attractive One". They say Shiva means "The Beneficial One". (Anyone that can comment on the closest and most accurate definitions and not the endless Bhakti ones, please comment). I we were to think in the Islamic mode, I have problem with a god being called "The All Attractive One" or "The Beneficial One" ... the problem is when those titles become mixed up with all the iconic luggage attached to them like the picture of the little blue babies. May be Lekhraj Kirpalani just got it so wrong and had little clue about what was going on?

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11584
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 » 26 Nov 2007

Quoted from the BK Section for record:

40.
"Baap dwara sachchi Gita sun-ney say sadgati hoti hai. Toh koi ko bhi pehley-pehley Baap ka parichay dena hai. Yah hai mool baat. Parantu koi kee buddhi may nahee baithtaa hai tab toh Baba nay yah poster chapwaya hai ki Gita ka bhagwaan Krishna bachcha hai ya Parampita Parmatma? ... Toh yah poster laakhon kee andaaz may chapaao, sab bhashaon may. Angreji may toh jaroor chapwana chaahiye. Jahaan-jahaan Gitapathshala ho vahaan baant-tey jaao. Poster par address bhi likhi hui ho. Baba direction detey hain, karnaa toh bachchon ka hee kaam hai." (Brahmakumariyon dwara prakaashit revised Sakar Murli, dinaank 10.10.07, pg 1&3)

"By listening to true Gita from the Father one attains true salvation. So, first of all one should give the introduction of the Father to anyone. This is the main issue. But it does not fit into anyone’s intellect. That is why Baba has got this poster printed that – is the God of Gita the child Krishna or the Supreme Father Supreme Soul?....So, get this poster printed in lakhs in all the languages. It must certainly be printed in English. Wherever there is a Gitapathshala, you go on distributing it there. The address should also be written on the poster. Baba gives the direction, but it is for the children to act/do." (Revised Sakar Murli dated 10.10.07, pg 1&3 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

Om Shanti. I don't know if any such poster was actually got printed by the BKs in lakhs during Brahma Baba's time. It may be possible that a few hundred posters were got prepared and distributed. If anyone can trace out the original posters, it would be good.

After Brahma Baba's demise, BKs have almost forgotten this main issue, but when we PBKs tried to remind them of this issue through emails (and not posters), some BK centers responded with bad words. And when PBKs once tried to print and display posters on knowledge (like the picture of Trimurti), many of them were torn off by the BKs.

I hope they realize the importance of the issue as mentioned in their own publication quoted above and do the needful.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests