Flaws in PBK Philosophy

An open forum for all ex-BKs, BKs, PBKs, ex-PBKs, Vishnu Party and ALL other Splinter Groups to post their queries to, and debate with, any member of any group congenially.
Post Reply
mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 17 Oct 2020

# Flaw No. 615)PBKs inadvertently imply- PBK Yagya is creator of False Gita:-

665)Murli Point:- "Jhoothee Gita se Bharath dharm_bhrasth, karm_bhrasht ban gaya hai = False Gita (Putting name of Krishna in the seat of God of Gita) has made Bharath/India irreligious, and karm_bhrasth/goofy(may not be accurate translation)" .

PBKs interpret this as - "Gita(Sakar Murli) became wrong/false by putting name of B Baba ("PITAASHREEE") in Sakar Murlis. This has led downfall of Bharath, means Mr. Dixit did not get any value in BK Yagya. [PBKs interpret "Bharath" for "Mr. Dixit" here]".
But, their claim fails, since Sakar Murlis have been spoken through mouth of B Baba himself, not through Mr. Dixit. This is already discussed in the same topic, but adding few more points.

666)Now, their such allegations fails by default itself due to the following reasons too.

666a)PBKs believe "false HUMAN Gita" is ex PBK Kamala Devi. She is obviously a product of PBK Yagya. So- in this view, "false SCRIPTURE Gita" too should be a product of PBK Yagya, is it not?
arjun wrote:666b)I have written several times and I repeat that whatever mistakes are committed by BKs in physical form are also committed by some PBKs in subtle form because BKs are the roots, but PBKs are the seeds.
666b)So- even in this view- PBKs imply - PBKs are the first cause for the mistake.

667)Practically, if we see- PBKs definitely are cause for false scripture Gita in Confluence Age . That is FALSE INTERPRETATION of Gita/Murlis.

668)We can see- Mr. Dixit playing role of Hiranyakashyap. He tries to take seat of Chariot of the Sakar Murlis too, even when he clearly admits they are words spoken through mouth of B Baba.

PBKs may say- "B Baba was just title holder, hence word PITAASHREE should not have put in the Sakar Murlis".
But whatever they may argue, it loses value because - in Sakar Murlis are words through mouth of Brahma B baba, and there are few words of B baba too, - which PBKs clearly admit it.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 20 Nov 2020

Flaw No. 616)Word "Atma_Linga" disproves PBK interpretation of "LING":-

670)An addition to the discussion said here below (regarding meaning of LING):-

viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42137&hilit ... cb5#p42108

671)Now, word ATMA_LING is famous in Hinduism. Atma means soul. So atma_ling logically means symbol of soul or Supreme Soul. If the soul is Supreme Soul, it means Symbol of Supreme Soul.
[Usually/Literally, JIV_ATMA= JEEV_AATMA means "living soul".
But, Baba says- I also become "jeev_atma" in Confluence Age.
Baba does not say - I become "jeev-paramatma" in Confluence Age.

So, soul can sometimes refer/mean to Supreme Soul as well in Murlis.

Like meaning of OM can be soul (when a human soul utters it), or Supreme Soul(when God utters).
So, basically, OM means = SELF.

Similarly, Atma_Ling means "symbol of soul, Supreme Soul or incorporeal".

672)Let if we take PBK interpretation of LING which is PHALLUS, then meaning of "atma_linga" leads to "soul's phallus" or "phallus's soul". Both become ambigous. Neither soul has a phallus? nor phallus is seat of soul.
So- PBK theory goes wrong.

Flaw No. 617)PBK interpretation of "BASE of LING" too fail:-

673)PBK explanation for claiming phallus becoming worship worthy is- "Mr. Dixit's stage is/becomes highly elevated, hence his phallus is also worshipped".

674)PBKs also claim - Base of Shivling represents yoni/uterus of parvati (ex PBK Kamala Devi = PBK Jagadamba).

675)But/now, PBKs claim their Jagadamba is false Gita, and purity of mothers is cowardice, attachment, etc.
In PBK view, stage of mothers can never become equal to level of Mr. Dixit. They believe neither Kamala Devi or sister Vedanti would get seat in top most 8 jewels.

So- how can yoni of such lower status souls too become worship worthy?

676)So, just by saying/boasting- Mr. Dixit's organ reaches to an extra-ordinary stage (that no one else can attain that), PBKs fall into their pit, because they now have to give reason- how can lower stage organ too become worship worthy?


677) Further, if we see from the memorials, many Shivlings have their base as SQUARE SHAPED too. If the base represents yoni/uterus, bases of Shivlings should have been only circular or oval type (smooth borders). But, square shape does not have smooth border. So, this also implies the base is only a device kept to support the symbol of incorporeal.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 04 Dec 2020

# Flaw No. 618) PBKs inadvertently imply- Mr. Dixit can be only a BACHCHAA/CHILD, never Father!

678))Murli points-
a)Sarvashaastramayi shiromani hai sreemad_bhagavadgita = Gita is the highest and mother of all the scriptures.
b)Gita hai Maa Baap. Baaki sab hain baal-bachche. = (Scripture) Gita is the Father and mother, and all the rest (of the scriptures) are children.

679)In some Murlis, Baba says MOTHER to Gita scripture, in some both MOTHER and Father.
[When ShivBaba is included, Gita becomes/is only mother, Father is Shiv/God HIMSELF who narrates/speaks it.
But, when comparision is made just among the scriptures, Gita is both mother and Father, means the highest]

680)Mr. Dixit misinterpreted word Gita_Mata(Mother Gita) in the Murli point into a "human mother" to create his false history and propaganda.
So, as per PBK theory, Gita is a human and only a mother (no Father). PBKs claim two human Gitas, and both are mothers only.[ex PBK Kamala Devi and BK Vedanti sister]
PBKs do not say Gita is also a Father.
But, Baba says- Gita is both mother and Father as well. So, PBKs clearly fail here.

681)Also- when Baba says- "baaki sab baal-bachche hain = All the rest are children".
Since Mr. Dixit does not fall into the category of human Gita, now, as per his own theory, he fits only for the seat - "BAAL BACHCHE (child/children)".

[682)For BKs, there is no problem to say- all the BKs (including B Baba) are children of both God and Gita ( scripture = knowledge). But, B Baba cannot be a child of any human being.
But, when Mr. Dixit tried to misinterpret scripture Gita into a human, he fell into his own pit, hence Mr. Dixit became child of human now, failed permanently for the seat of Father, and hence got out of the track ].

682)Again, the Murli point says - Gita is SHIRO_MANI (highest jewel). But, ss per PBK philisophy, both of their human Gitas are not highest. One does not et seat in Rudramala at all(TG) and the other does not get seat in top eight.
So- even here, PBKs fail.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 22 Dec 2020

# Flaw No. 619) PBKs fail to address the Murli point - "Prajapita Brahma shown in Golden Age (too)":-

683)In lowkik, there are many beliefs and confusions about residence place of Brahma, Vishnu, and other deities. One belief says - Three Worlds another one says 14 worlds, etc, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmaloka
https://www.quora.com/Where-exactly-is- ... ha-located
https://www.quora.com/Where-does-Lord-Brahma-reside

One can do more google search or get from Hindu scriptures.
Most beloved, Ocean of knowledge, Supreme Soul, Almighty, Purifier ShivBaba addresses this issue.

684) SM 21-01-89(1):- Aur sab Yoga hote hain manushyon ke manushyon ke saath. Aisaa hotaa naheen jo manushyon kaa niraakaar ke saath ho. VAH BHEE PARICHAY SE. Aajkal bhal Shiv se Yoga lagaathay hain, poojaa karthay hain, parantu jaanthay unko koyi naheen. Yah bhee naheen samajhthay hain ki PPB zaroor Sakar duniyaa par hoga. Moonjhey huye hain. Samajhthay hain PPB pahley2 Satyug may honaa chaahiye. Agar Satyug may Prajapita ho toh phir sookshmvatan may kyon dikhaayaa? Arth naheen samajhthay. Vah Sakar hai karm bandhan may, vah sookshm hai karmaateet. Yah gyaan koyi may naheen.

= ...People do not understand that PPB would be definitely (first) in corporeal world. They are confused. They think/believe Prajapita Brahma should be first in Golden Age. If PPB would be first in Golden Age, then why is he shown in Subtle Region? They do not know the meaning. The former is the corporeal, in the bondage of actions, the latter is subtle free from the bondage of actions. No one has this knowledge.

685)As we know- ShivBaba addresses the confusion in the lowkik world, and explains in Murlis- that Prajapita Brahma would be first in corporeal Iron Aged world, and then go to Subtle Region, etc, etc.

686)Due to this confusion in lowkik scriptures and beliefs, initially, ShivBaba had to say- I do not enter in subtle Brahma (till 1969, there was no subtle Brahma at all), Creation is not done in Subtle Region, I need corporeal Brahma, etc, etc. [But, in other Murli points, Baba has clearly said- both corporeal Brahma and subtle Brahma are one and the same. - which PBKs cleverly ignore them as already said in the forum].

687)Here, also we can see PBKs ignoring such Murli points- and like to take only some Murli points just like describing an elephant by taking only its tail.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 22 Dec 2020

# Flaw No. 620)God says- "I FIRST need Prajapita".
But, PBK theory says- God needs Prajapita as only a FOURTH or SECOND personality:-


688)SM 26-10-83(1):- ... In whose body should I come? First I need Prajapita. ...

[ viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51766&hilit ... 868#p51766 ]

689)According to PBKs, God first gave vision to B Baba, then B Baba met the two (imaginary) PBK sisters. Turn of the PBK Chariot Mr. Sevakram was only next to(after) these three.
So- PBKs inadvertently imply- PBK Prajapita was contacted by God only as fourth personality.

690)PBKs also believe God first entered one of the two sisters (False Gita alias GitaMata), then only entered PBK Prajapita (Sevakram).
So- even in the case of entrance of God, PBKs believe Mr. Dixit (= Mr. Sevakram) is not first, but second.

691)So- in the attempt to hijack seat of Prajapita, Mr. Dixit failed everywhere.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 29 Dec 2020

# Flaw No. 621)FIVE different BRAHMAS, but only two types of Brahmins?:-

692)PBK theory says- In Confluence Age itself, there are five Brahmas in total in the BK/PBK yagyas. Mr. Dixit, ex PBK Kamala Devi, BK sister Vedanti, B Baba and BK Mama.
[In BK theory, there is only one Brahma, B Baba, who later becomes/became subtle Brahma and only one type of Confluence Aged braahmins. That is, BK= PBK (In BK view, BK is short form of PBK) ].

693)Now, the point is- if there are five DIFFERENT Brahmas, (logically speaking) obviously, there should be five different types of braahmins too, is it not?. But, PBKs teach/believe there are only TWO types of braahmins - BKs, and the so-called PBKs.

694)So, we can see here, PBKs falling into their own pit again and again. PBKs throw stones to BKs, but fail to realize that they are sitting in the house made from FULL/JUST of GLASS, a theory made from almost 100% lies created by bodily Guru Virendra Dev Dixit.

695)I think- It may not be wrong to say- Mr. Dixit as DOUBLE/TRIPPLE Hiranyakashyap.

First reason is- His attempts are to hijack the seat of many others - Prajapita, Sri Krishna, Sri Narayana, Sri Ram, etc.

Second reason- Mr. Dixit also tried to hijack seat of God also. For example -

---Mr. Dixit claims he is RUDRA as well as Confluence Aged Ram (even when in Murlis, sometimes Ram is meant for incorporeal Ram, Mr. Dixit misinterprets it for himself in his teachings).
---Mr. Dixit claims in his teachings - he is main part of Shivling. Sometimes, PBKs claim Shivling is memorial of his corporeal body/organ itself.
---Mr. Dixit claims God rides Chariot whole day and hence claims as if God is trapped in corporeal body all the time.
---PBKs believe Mr. Dixit is Father of Brahma, hence indirectly claim- he is ShivBaba.
---PBKs believe title ShivBaba includes corporeal body of Mr. Dixit too.
---Mr. Dixit (spiritually) murdered God by saying - just remembering point form of God is of no use.
---Mr. Dixit says- he should be mentally worshipped always. in PBK theory of Yaad, remembering Iron Aged impure corporeal body of Mr. Dixit is compulsory.

Third reason- For all these, Mr. Dixit mis-interpreted purest Godly versions, GYAAN or SPIRITUAL Murlis. So- he tried to murder the highest scripture.

Also- most importantly- Till recent, PBKs used to call words of Mr. Dixit as "clarification of Murlis". Now, they call words of Mr. Dixit as "ShivBaba's Murli" itself.
So- they have hijacked the title/word Murli also.

Also- PBKs consider body of Mr. Dixit itself is Paramdham. So- he has hijacked even the highest world too.

---------------- ---------
Flaw No. 622)PBKs inadvertently claim- All the PBK Brahmas are secondary, dummy or almost useless:-

697)PBKs claim ex PBK Kamala Devi(the so-called "PBK human mother Gita") is the Adi/First Brahma.
PBKs also believe she gave(became instrument to) birth only to Mr. Dixit/Sevakram and child Krishna(Krishna bachchaa). So, in PBK view- the first Brahma is capable of creating only one or two braahmins.
[Sometimes PBKs believe child Radha created child Krishna (since PBKs later shifted to theory of false human Gita and true human Gita, mostly in 1998 when PBK Kamala Devi became ex PBK when she left PBK Yagya].
So- practically, PBKs believe she(PBK first Brahma) successfully became instrument to create only one - PBK Sevakram.

698)The others(BK sister Vedanti, BK Mama) whom all "PBKs give title Brahma" , PBK do not call any BK or PBK in "their" names/surnames. They do not even mention how many percentage of braahmins have got created from these two respective Brahmas and whether they are mouth born(mukh vamshavali) or kukhvamshavali.

699)Let us take case of Mr. Dixit's position of Brahma. He himself hesistates to take position of Brahma, and wishes to take title of only Prajapita. He also/usually bifurcates the title Prajapita Brahma into separate as Prajapita and Brahma.
Also- practically, Mr. Dixit believes he cannot create braahmins (as per his bifurcation theory). Hence PBKs believe they are children of both Mr. Dixit and B Baba (not of any other Brahmas!- so inadvertently PBKs admit their Brahmas are inferior to B Baba).
[On the other hand, BKs believe B baba can create braahmins just with help of God= God can create braahmins just through one human personality B Baba].

700)So- in PBK inadvertent view- B baba becomes most wanted among all these, is it not? In the two words used by Mr. Dixit - PBK and BK, alphabet B(Brahma) is present in both, but P(Prajapita) is present in one category only.
[So, unknowingly, PBKs admit their Prajapita became inferior than Brahma here, is it not?]

701)If PBKs practically believe - Mr. Dixit is also a Brahma, then PBKs should say either of the following-
---They do not need B baba for the creation, since Mr. Dixit is both P and B. OR
---Change/Make the title PBK as fully CLEAR. That is PBBK (Prajapita Brahma and Brahma kumars/kumaris= Children of both Mr. Dixit and B Baba), instead of just PBK is it not?
[here, alse we can say- in PBK view- no other Brahmas are included in the title BK or PBK].

702)PBK foolishness/ignorance is visble by default itself. All- whether BKs or PBKs know/believe- Creation of braahmins is impossible without Shiva.
But, in the name BRAAHMIN, BK or PBK, - there is no mention of word/alphabet of Shiv. Why PBKs forget Shiv here or do not address this?
[BK view is simple and clear- Brahma cannot exist with Shiva. Because Brahma is the Chariot of Shiv and can be one and only one. Hence in the title Brahma or Brahmin, Shiv is automatically present - for the gyaani tu atmas.

Hence most beloved Ocean of knowledge ShivBaba also says in Murlis - children, your full name is "shivavamshi Prajapita Brahma Kumar and Kumaris", and also give different names like "swadarshan chakradhaari braahman kulbhooshan", etc. ]. But, the short form is "Brahmins" or "BKs".

703)But, PBKs criticize BKs, by asking- where is the name P/Prajapita (physically) is your title BK? (They do not ask in the same way- where is name Shiva in your title BK)
But, by doing so, PBKs fall into their own pit, because by claiming there is need of physically alphabet P in the title BK (for the Gyani tu atmas), they inadvertently commit two blunders.

First, they have admitted that - their Prapaita is not a Brahma at all.
Second- they have forgotten Shiva. They inadvertently claim creation is possible without Shiva. So- act superior to ShivBaba. Because they are more interested in title Prajapita than Shiva. - the highest blunder.
[For BKs, this is not a great blunder, because for BKs, Chariot is only one B baba, without Shiv, Brahma has no value.]
But, in PBK view, there can be many Brahmas, and as already said above, and in PBK view- all the Brahmas are not very next to Shiv. In PBK view- some Brahmas are like- false Gita, cowardly purity, etc, etc.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3329
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 30 Dec 2020

# Flaw No. 623)Mr. Dixit loses position of Chariot once again by DEFAULT view itself:-

705)Mr. Dixit loses position of Chariot or at least MAIN Chariot by DEFAULT view itself.

706)PBKs believe Mr. Dixit is neither FIRST Brahma, nor MAIN Brahma.

707)Murli points clearly say- name of the Chariot is Brahma.

708)So, when in PBK view- Mr. Dixit is neither main Brahma, nor first Brahma, in their own view- Mr. Dixit fails to get the title MAIN Chariot. Hence automatically, he loses that title.

709)Also- in the Avyakt Murli point- "Sthaapanaa kaa kaary ab bhee Brahma ke dwaaraa hee ho rahaa hai = The part of establishment is still being carried through Brahma only " -which actually refers to B Baba, even after misinterpreting the Murli point- PBKs claim it for ex PBK Kamala Devi.
[Because as said earlier, Mr,. Dixit hesitates to take the title Brahma. He likes to take only half the title Prajapita only due to his bifurcation theory].
Due to this, PBKs belice SENIOR BRAHMA for ex PBK Kamala Devi and/or B Baba.
But, PBKs due to their allergy towards the title BRAHMA, usually give that seat to B Baba at many places. For example- they say- temple Brahma represents B Baba. They also do mockery about Brahma as saying Brahmas part is only half/incomplete.

So, practically and inadvertently, PBKs imply- PBK souls are not eligible for the position of Chariot/BRAHMA.

710)So, when Mr. Dixit's connection to title/name BRAHMA is secondary, automatically, his eligibility for the seat Chariot becomes secondary only- in their own inadvertent view.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests