Shankar's Part ?

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: 3265
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: Shankars Part?

Post by mbbhat » 18 Dec 2012

thank you.

But, there is no point that proves Dixit is Shankar and he plays role of Prajapita, Vishnu, etc, etc.

harikrishna
Posts: 24
Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To churn Shiva baba knowledge

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by harikrishna » 19 Dec 2012

But, there is no point that proves Dixit is Shankar and he plays role of Prajapita, Vishnu, etc, etc.
Dear Bhai

It is the greatest test to recognize the unlimited Father.If it was said directly in the Murli what is the use of test?This is the race of 108.The one who churn and read deeply the Murli points alone recognize the role of Father.Remaining fail to recognise Him.Thats why it was told kotom me bhi koyi(BK), unme bhi koyi(PBK).very very few know it.In them also very few recognize His real part.This Murli point said by shiv baba to recognize Him.

Kaise pata pade inme bap bhagavan hai?jab gnan dena...

I read this Murli point but did nt remember the date of Murli.I will provide when i get.If any one have date of above Murli point please post here.

In the above Murli point ShivBaba clearly said how to recognize the part of Him.Churn the above Murli point well you can get the answer for your query.
With the knowledge given by Him you can recognize.No one can hear knowledge like bhagvan.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11572
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

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by arjun » 19 Dec 2012

harikrishna wrote:Kaise pata pade inme bap bhagavan hai?jab gnan dena...

I read this Murli point but did nt remember the date of Murli.I will provide when i get.If any one have date of above Murli point please post here.
"Brahmanon may jab kiski soul aati hai toh unkay bhi bolney say pehchaantey hain na. Bigar bolney pehchaan kaisey ho saktee? Baat karney say maaloom padega – Barobar falaani aatmaa hai. ShivBaba bhi jab knowledge dein tab samjhein ki ShivBaba boltey hain. Gyaan yah toh dey na sakein. Yah sivaay Baap ke koi samajha na sakein." (BKs dwara prakaashit revised Sakar Murli taareekh 14.06.08, page 3)

“When someone’s soul enters Brahmins, people recognize (that soul) by the style of his speech, don’t they? How can we recognize someone without (listening to his) speech? The manner in which he speaks indicates that this is definitely such and such soul. Even in case of ShivBaba, we can understand that ShivBaba is speaking only when He gives knowledge. This one cannot give knowledge. Nobody except the Father can explain this.” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 14.06.08, page 3 published by BKs)

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
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: Shankars Part?

Post by mbbhat » 19 Dec 2012

That satisfies just one of the conditions. It does not fit all other conditions. But Baba also says- i do not read any book. but, Mr. dixit reads and explains. so- it violates other Murli points. So- then PBKs say- It is brahma Baba reads there. but it has no proof!

--------
And- PBKs have not been able to prove the following:-

The Murli point says- Brahma and Shankar are the righteous children. but, when according to pbk philosophy, brahma Baba has no place in rosary of 8, then how can be righteous?

To make it fit, they may say- he is number one in dharna. How can a person/soul who has been called as Ravan, childish, attachment with children be perfect in dharna? And how can a person who is good just in one subject and not in others be called as righteous?

All these are total contradictions and ambiguities.


As some members here have rightly pointed- when AIVV gives clarifications to some things, more doubts are created.

But, OK- you may have your views, fine.

I have got what i needed. If you feel you have got what you needed, fine. If our FB soul also feels that it has got what its needs, then why worry? fine.

good, let us keep on dancing.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11572
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

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by arjun » 20 Dec 2012

And- PBKs have not been able to prove the following:-

The Murli point says- Brahma and Shankar are the righteous children. but, when according to PBK philosophy, Brahma Baba has no place in rosary of 8, then how can be righteous?
First of all Dada Lekhraj Brahma Baba is not part of actual Trimurti at all. His picture has been superimposed on all the three personalities. But when the actual Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar are revealed, Dada Lekhraj's picture will be removed completely. It is about the actual Brahma and Shankar that Baba has said that they are righteous. Even Dada Lekhraj is righteous, but to a lesser extent.

harikrishna
Posts: 24
Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To churn Shiva baba knowledge

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by harikrishna » 20 Dec 2012

PBKs say- It is Brahma Baba reads there. but it has no proof!
crescent moon shown on Shankar's fore head.This shows that in Shankar jnan chandra ma is doing his part.
The Murli point says- Brahma and Shankar are the righteous children. but, when according to PBK philosophy, Brahma Baba has no place in rosary of 8, then how can be righteous?
Baba also said brahma stul and Shankar sukshm(sukshm buddhi).Brahma baba did nt understand the date of distruction given by ShivBaba in muralis.He think that the stul world would get distroyed.But he is good in the work that had given to him by shiv baba.In that sense he is righteous.But that does not mean he is sukshm buddhi to get the inner knowledge of every gem.It was also told in Murli in every sentence of Murli there is a secrete.Thats why crescent moon given on Shankar's forehead.That mean gnan chandrama has not get complete kala till.He took all in limited sense where as knowledge is taken in sukshm(unlimited) by Shankar.

All these are total contradictions and ambiguities.


There is no contradictions and ambiguities in knowledge when you correctly understand the meaning.Thats why baba has said in Murli
which soul who did nt take full 84 births that soul could nt understand any matter completely.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
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: Shankars Part?

Post by mbbhat » 20 Dec 2012

Good. You may continue.

User avatar
shivsena
ex-PBK
Posts: 4335
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To find out the absolute Truth.
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by shivsena » 20 Dec 2012

harikrishna wrote: 1)Shankar na hota tho hamko(Shiva Baba ko) Shankar ke saath milte bhi nahi.chitr banaya hai tho mujhe bhi Shankar saath mila diya hai.Shiv Shankar mahadev kahadete tho mahadev bada ho jata (SM 26.6.70)
Dear harikrishna Bhai.
According to you, the above point means that shivshankar are same.
Sharing a Murli point which clearly says that Shiv and Shankar are not the same....so which Murli point is to be believed.

Murli 2-4-01 says: "भारतवासी तो यह भी नहीं जानते की शिव निराकार अलग और शंकर आकरी अलग . शंकर देवता और शिव परमात्मा कहा जाता है . शिव शंकर इक्कटा हो ना सके . इतनी भी बुधि नहीं है ."

"Bharatwasi toh yeh bhi nahin jaante ki Shiv nirakar alag aur Shankar aakari alag. Shankar devta aur Shiv paramatma kahaa jaata hai. Shiv Shankar ikkataa ho na sake. Itni bhi budhi nahin hai."

[" Bharatwasi(PBKs) do not know that nirakar Shiv is different and subtle Shankar is different. Shankar is subtle devta and Shiv is paramatma. Shiv Shankar cannot be together. Their (PBK) intellect cannot understand this."]

Who are these Bharatwasis in Sangamyugi drama who believe that shivshankar are combined...it is PBKs who believe that they are bharatwasis and they believe that shivshankar are combined...so the outside world bharatwasis have made this mistake.

The above Murli point is self-explanatory....Shiv and Shankar can never be together either during the shooting period nor they can be revealed together as single entity.

shivsena.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
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: Shankars Part?

Post by mbbhat » 21 Dec 2012

Good point:- So- can it be pbk souls in Dwapur yug who may start saying Shiv and Shankar are same (and cause for downfall of Bharat by diluting the name of shiv) [as exactly what they are doing now in the shooting period?].

That may be their yaadgaars. [One of the possibilities. ]

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11572
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

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by arjun » 21 Dec 2012

Most PBKs do know that Shiv and Shankar are different and that Shiv is giving knowledge through Prajapita Brahma. But it is those PBK, BK and non-BK souls who are unable to realize the incorporeal Shiv through Shankar (incorporeal through corporeal) in the end and recognize just the corporeal due to body consciousness who mix up Shiv and Shankar to be one.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
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: Shankars Part?

Post by mbbhat » 21 Dec 2012

arjun wrote:Most PBKs do know that Shiv and Shankar are different and that Shiv is giving knowledge through Prajapita Brahma. But it is those PBK, BK and non-BK souls who are unable to realize the incorporeal Shiv through Shankar (incorporeal through corporeal) in the end and recognize just the corporeal due to body consciousness who mix up Shiv and Shankar to be one.
The Murli point says-
"Bharatwasi toh yeh bhi nahin jaante ki Shiv nirakar alag aur Shankar aakari alag. Shankar devta aur Shiv paramatma kahaa jaata hai. Shiv Shankar ikkataa ho na sake. Itni bhi budhi nahin hai."

[" Bharatwasi do not know that nirakar Shiv is different and subtle Shankar is different. Shankar is subtle devta and Shiv is paramatma. Shiv and Shankar cannot be together. Their intellect cannot understand even this."]
So- you mean to say this Murli point applies just to end time and not for the whole of the Confluence Age?

Also- the Bharatvasi in the Murli point refers only to such weak souls?

And- do you believe it is they who become cause for mixing of shiv and Shankar in Bhaktimarg?

Do such PBKs get seat in the first 2.25 lakh souls category?
-------
Further more- if we think deeply the sentence- "Shiv and Shankar cannot be together." Does it mean shiv can never enter Shankar?

User avatar
shivsena
ex-PBK
Posts: 4335
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To find out the absolute Truth.
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by shivsena » 21 Dec 2012

mbbhat wrote:

So- you mean to say this Murli point applies just to end time and not for the whole of the Confluence Age?

Also- the Bharatvasi in the Murli point refers only to such weak souls?

And- do you believe it is they who become cause for mixing of Shiv and Shankar in Bhaktimarg?

Do such PBKs get seat in the first 2.25 lakh souls category?
Good questioning.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11572
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

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by arjun » 22 Dec 2012

So- you mean to say this Murli point applies just to end time and not for the whole of the Confluence Age?

Also- the Bharatvasi in the Murli point refers only to such weak souls?

And- do you believe it is they who become cause for mixing of Shiv and Shankar in Bhaktimarg?

Do such PBKs get seat in the first 2.25 lakh souls category?
-------
Further more- if we think deeply the sentence- "Shiv and Shankar cannot be together." Does it mean Shiv can never enter Shankar?
Please don't keep on arguing like a child. I have already explained why Shiv and Shankar are mixed up. The Murli point that you have quoted does not mean that Shiv cannot enter Shankar. It means that Shiv and Shankar cannot be considered to be one, which most body conscious people do. That is why ShivBaba keeps repeating in the Murlis that very few among millions recognize Me as I am and what I am (i.e. incorporeal through corporeal). Most people either believe in incorporeal separately or in corporeal separately. But recognizing the incorporeal through the corporeal is not the cup of tea for everyone.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
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: Shankars Part?

Post by mbbhat » 22 Dec 2012

Arjun Soul wrote:- The Murli point that you have quoted does not mean that Shiv cannot enter Shankar. It means that Shiv and Shankar cannot be considered to be one
But, the Murli point says- they cannot be together. So- here- i feel and it is almost clear that pbk interpretation is a little bit different than the word meaning of Murli point.

Thank you for not answering for other questions.

Salutes to a complete soul.

harikrishna
Posts: 24
Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To churn Shiva baba knowledge

Re: Shankars Part?

Post by harikrishna » 22 Dec 2012

Further more- if we think deeply the sentence- "Shiv and Shankar cannot be together." Does it mean Shiv can never enter Shankar?
Dear Bhai

It does not mean shiv never enter Shankar as you think.It means that shiv nirakar separate and Shankar akari devta separate.So shiv and Shankar cannot be mixed.
In Murli baba clearly said that
shiv ne Shankar me pravesh kiya toh shiv Shankar ko mila dete hai. (SM 16-2-73)

Amarnath me toh shiv ka chitr dikhate hai.kahate hai Shankar ne parvathi ko amar kadha sunai...accha shiv kisme bitha?shiv aur Shankar dikhate hain.shiv ne Shankar me baith kadha sunai esa hisab ho jata hai(Mu 6-10-73)


In the above Murli points shiv baba clearly said that he should enter into Shankar.So the meaning of shiv and Shankar cannot be mixed is shiv nirakar separate and Shankar akari separate.But few people who has love with their body(body consciousness) so mixup them.They do not understand that they are two different souls(Nirakari and akari) who are working in the same body for the transformation of world.Thats why they mix shiv and Shankar but in reality they are separate souls(God and His child).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests