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: 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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 04 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 415) In PBK view- KD/AB was Guru of Yagya from 1936 till 1947!-

1)- PBKs have made the destruction as more personal one than between two groups. They claim there had been fight between two groups BK-PBK in the beginning of Yagya, but what they show is none accompanied Sevakram in 1942 (including the two main PBKs sisters).

----If the fight had been between (so called) PBK pandava and BK kourava groups, there should have been at least few PBK pandava souls too, accompanying Mr Sevakram in 1942, is it not?
---But, in PBK view- the PBK pandava had been as if alone in Yagya having no value- even when God used to enter in him all the five years??? Still they claim lot of things about Piyu ki Vani for which Sevakram was the instruement!
Can there be any bigger joke than this?
Roy wrote:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2180&p=44494&hilit=flame#p44494

- Most of the Yagya preferred the soft motherly nature of Dada Lekhraj; they were not so happy with the strict nature of Prajapita(Sevak Ram), and so he was always outnumbered. He would have opposed the wrong doings he understood as wrong, such as that of letting the foreigner souls into the Yagya... but whether he opposed Brahma Baba's Prajapati God Brahma phase, i do not know for sure... But even if he did, it would have made no difference; as no-one recognised the part of Father he was playing; and Brahma Baba Krishna chose Jagadamba Gita Mata as his guru over him... i.e. the Adi Brahma who clarified his visions directly... i.e. gave birth to him spiritually in the form of child Krishna, through her womb-like intellect.
2) So- in PBK view- Sevakram himself was cowardice only, and the PBK mothers(mainly KD) had been controlling or ruling him since 1936 itself?!

3) PBKs say- DLR received clarification of visions from KD/AB directly, (NOT through THEIR Radha bachchi!), and claim- this is the reason even DLR had made her/KD as his Guru.
---See- how weak this argument is. PBKs on one hand, say- intention of DLR was to approach Sevakram. And, they also claim, KD after listening to DLR's query, went inside the house, (then only managed to get reply) and then only spoke to DLR.
---So- how does the question of - Lekhraj Kirpalani removing Sevakram from seat of Guru, and giving the same to KD arise?

4) But, NOW/LATER, PBKs say- "PBK Radha bachchi (sister Vedanti- whom they claim) " was mediator between DLR and KD/AB - and it was NOT DIRECTbetween DLR and KD!
----Mostly- after 1998- when KD left AIVV, Mr Dixit might have CHANGED the story and placed Radha bachchi between DLR and KD (in the 1936 incident).
----Initially, PBKs used to place Radha bachchi(RB) in side (they used to say- she/RB too had witnessed and was listening), so she was the second mother.
----But, now they say- Radha bachchi is the first mother - but again in twisting manner. But- if they place Radha bachchi as the first mother and the mediator between DLR and KD, then the Guru of Yagya would be PBK Radha BACHCHI- NOT KD!

[So- finally- again just a bundle of mutual contradictions, and Spiritual HOG-WASH]

5) If in PBK view- DLR had placed KD as his Guru, then how come in the recovered pictures from British library- Lekhraj Kirpalani had been shown as "Divine Father Prajapati Brahma" appears? - (this point had already said- just adding to keep the post complete).

6) Now- if Lekhraj Kirpalani had made KD as his Guru, when she left Yagya in 1947 (- this is what PBKs claim), why DLR (and at least some of the others) did not leave Yagya and accompany her? - fed up by his Guru just in 5 years?

7) ---Or do the PBKs believe the two PBk sisters did not leave Yagya, but left their bodies in 1947? [But, that will not fit, since the Murli point which they quote clearly says- such children went into stomach of python].
---In that case, the DOB of their next birth should also be 1947. Do they tally with the present DOB of KD and sister Vedanti?
----Or did KD and sister Vedanti took a purely lowkik birth before their re-entry of Yagya in 1965/1983?
----In any of these cases, how do PBKs explain their role in Trimurti?

8) PBKs claim even BK Mama and B baba followed PBK souls. But, leave the BK souls, "not even a single PBK soul followed their leader Sevakram".
The most ridiculous things they say is- No one in Yagya had been aware of the PBK Father SEvakram- but, they do not hesitate to claim (as usual in the twisting manner) -
Roy wrote: - search.php?keywords=husband&t=2180&sf=msgonly

"Is the Father first or the husband first? The Father, the one who gives birth is first. The one who controls, the one who safeguards is called husband (pati). He becomes the husband of the world (Vishwapati) later on." [Varta 902]

Yes, after Father Shiv started speaking through Brahma Baba in 1947, he would come to accept that the part he was playing was (ostensibly) that of Prajapita. He is infact the true mother, and Prajapita-Ram is the "true" spiritual Father... but the role had to be continued to be played in his absence... There has to be a Father Brahma.
9) Mr Dixit has used everyone as scapegoat. Sometimes he says- -"Lekhraj Kirpalani is true mother of Yagya!" Sometimes he says - "No, KD is true Mother", sometimes says- "Radha bachchi is the true mother", sometimes- "No- the real Brahma is only one Mr Dixit"- the rest all are just title holder Brahmas" -
A MERRY-GO-ROUND of Spiritual MORONS & BUFFOONS, INDEED! -

10) BUT, BY DEFAULT ITSELF- If PBKs believe Yagya heads had been PBKs, then their claim of saying fight between DLR and Sevakram loses value.
----They will have to say- fight was between Yagya Guru (either PBK Radha bachchi or KD) and PBK Sevakram!
So, the CONCLUSION of ALL this BUMBLING TOMFOOLERY is NOTHING BUT -
CARRY ON CLEO
!!!


# Flaw No. 416) If from 1936/37 till 1942 is "Piyu ki Vani", what is from 1942 till 1947?-

11) PBKs believe period of Piyu ki Vani is between 1936 till 1942 and claim God used Sevakram as the Chariot.
----If so, then what had been the Godly versions from 1942 till 1947? [They believe God used to enter into PBK sisters during that time].

12) Moreover, to PBKs, "Murli" is the first class word, but "Vani" is a second class word. [They criticize avyakty Vanis in this way]. But, then the Piyu ki Vani is called Vani?

By hijacking the seats and titles of others, Mr Dixit defamed himself! - :laugh:

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 05 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 417) In PBK view - a "HELPER" (that too in Godly Version) can mean to be an "enemy/invader"!
arjun wrote: viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2519&p=44413&hilit=helper#p44413

Similarly, Didi Manmohiniji was made the head of BKWSU after the demise of Brahma Baba as per the first Avyakt Vani, but she could not assert herself and Dadi Prakashmani who was supposed to be her assistant usurped the power. So, one can assume the religions of these souls from Copper Age. Buddhist and Islamic respectively.

“बाकी आज से सभी के लिए कौन निमित्त है वह तो आप जानते ही हैं – दीदी तो है, साथ में कुमारका मददगार है। जैसे और सभी लिखापढ़ी चलती थी वैसे ही हेड क्वार्टर से चलती रहेगी। यह दोनों आप सभी की देख रेख करती रहेंगी।“ (अव्यक्त वाणी दिनांक 21.1.69, पृ.21, 22)
“As regards who is instrumental for you all, you already know – Didi is there; along with her Kumarka is helper. Just as all other correspondence used to be done, similarly correspondence will continue from the headquarters. These two will continue to look after you all.” (Avyakt Vani dated 21.1.69, pg.21, 22)
1) PBKs believe Dadi Prakashmani took power from Didi - as if, by force. PBKs have used the word INVADER there- even when there had been a very good level of harmony among the Dadis.
----details of the discussion is available there.

2) Now- let us apply the same argument of PBKs on the PBK souls, what they claim about during the beginning period of Yagya.
-----Since in PBK view- the right leader of Yagya is/was Sevakram; but, that position was given (or taken by or let them say all different possibilities) wrongly to KD.
----Now what is the PBK clarification on this incident- which is more crucial and important than the Dadi/Didi case. In this case, it is even more relevant, because "in PBK view"- the real leader Sevakram had been kept, almost like in DARKNESS/ISOLATED and FULLY OUTNUMBERED (not just like Dadi-Didi case in BKWSU- where each one had almost equal respect, and everyone in Yagya knew both of them).

3) So- now- "in PBK view" does PBK Guru say/accept - "He himself belongs to a weak/soft religion, and KD (or DLR) is like a strong religion? "- as he had already undergone this shooting in drama?
----If PBKs believe the cause for this is DLR or others, then he will have to place DLR in place of a strong religion. But, even there, they lose. Because they believe DLR is a sweet soft mother.

4) PBKs also believe DLR rides on both Mr Dixit and KD and misuses both of them. Then do PBKs apply these in the same way and say- DLR belongs to strong religion, and the so-called strict father of PBKs and Mahakali PBK KD belong to weak religion? [In the PBK case, they believe the invading (controlling and ruling) is severe. (They believe Bull rides on Shankar, and child Krishna creates/commits eclipse/atrocity on mother KD)!

5) PBKs also believe- Om Radhe rides on sister Vedanti. Now- as the rider should be superior to the Chariot, they will also have to say- one cow riding on another cow- one belonging to strong religion, and the other to weak religion.
----Mostly PBKs believe - all the BK souls who leave the body, enter into the PBK personalities. So- they will have to believe- all of their Rudrmala beads are soft and weak- is is not? - :sad:

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 05 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 418) The PBK concept of "SEED- ROOT souls" directly goes against the Murli points:-
arjun wrote: viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2519&hilit=helper&start=15

Om Shanti. PBKs believe that there are three souls responsible for establishing every religion. One is the soul of the religious Father (for example, Buddha) that comes to this corporeal world from the Soul World in the Copper Age. It enters in the body of someone (Siddharth) who had been a BK in the Confluence Age and was the root of that religion (Buddhism) among the BKs. Obviously Siddharth would be the soul of Manmohini Didi in whom the soul of Buddha enters. So, she happens to be the root soul of that religion among the BKs. Well, if there is a root, there should be a seed as well. So, the soul that gives birth to Didi Manmohini's body (Siddharth) in the Copper Age is the seed of that religion among the PBKs in the Confluence Age.

The root soul and the seed soul of every religion enters the path of knowledge in the Confluence Age in the form of a BK and a PBK respectively for a long time and hence becomes a deity in the Golden Age and Silver Age. But the soul of the religious Father of every religion obtains knowledge only in the end of the Confluence Age and hence descends from the Soul World only in the Copper Age or Iron Age when it is scheduled to come.
1) Most beloved ShivBaba has said- the respective religious fathers themselves are the seed. It even says/implies- Prajapita cannot be called as seed. But, PBKs say totally against the Murli points.

Post No. 204 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... eej#p15659

SM 17-10-2000(2):- Samjho koyi Christian hai, to unhon ka beejroop CHRIST thahraa. Tumhaaraa BEEJROOP KOUN hai? BAP, kyonki Bap hee AAKAR swarg kaa STHAAPAN karte hain Brahma dwaaraa. BRAHMA KO HEE PRAJAPITA KAHAA JAATAA HAI. RACHTAA NAHEEN kahenge. In dwaaraa bacchje adopt kiye jaate hain. Brahma ko bhee create karte hain na. Bap aakar pravesh kar yah rachte hain. ShivBaba kahte hain tum mere bacche ho. Brahma ko bhee kahte hain tum mere sakari bacche ho.

= For example, there are Christians. Their SEED form is Christ. Who is your SEED Form? Father (obviously refers to POINT, Supreme Soul Shiv). Because Father only comes and establishes Heaven through Brahma. Brahma HIMSELF is called as PrajaPita, NOT CREATOR. Through him, children are adopted. Brahma is also created, is it not? Father comes and enters and creates. ShivBaba says- you are My children. Even to Brahma, He says- you are my CORPOREAL CHILD.

2) Now- to establish deity religion, who are the three souls? - (in PBK view)
----- Mostly PBKs may say- the seed soul is Mr Dixit, the root soul is DLR, and the religious Father - point Shiv?? So- they are placing ShivBaba even lower to the PBK/seed and BK/root souls*** (in PBK view).

3) But- it does not fit. Because in Conf Age- Mr Dixit had not been Father to DLR. And- even after 1976, PBKs claim- DLR soul enters him just like SS Shiv.

4) Further contradictions are - since PBKs show three different human beings in their Trimurti picture, then obviously they will have to show it as 3 + 1 (SS Shiv) = FOUR!
But- then how can they ignore the other two helping hands whom they claim to be (DLR and Om Radhe)? So- it will become 3 + 2 + 1 = SIX?

5) But, again as they believe- DLR and Om Radhe would be in kourava group, do not fall into the first 4.5 lakh category- they are inadvertently implying- the deity religion gets established by three pandava souls, and two from kourava group!

*** - ----To what extent PBKs have defamed ShivBaba can be visible here. PBKs claim Prajapita is the corporeal seed, and ShivBaba is the incorporeal seed. In fact, there is no word corporeal seed and incorporeal seed in Murlis. The one who enters the Chariot is termed as SEED in Murlis.

In this way- PBKs once again prove they have absolutely no hesitation to go against the Murli points and act superior to ShivBaba, and keep on MOCKING & INSULTING God!

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 06 Nov 2016

# Post No. 419) A thought on establishment of different religions. - (Sorry for a slight off topic, but it is relevant as well)

The following is My personal view/belief at present:-

1) There is a Murli point which says- the body/Chariot (Jesus), in which soul of Christ enters would be of sanaatan religion (which is sometimes meant for deity religion, sometimes even for Hinduism - in Murlis).
Obviously, base for all others is deity religion. Islam emerges very close/next to deitism- as soon as Copper Age begins. Buddhism after around 250 yrs past Copper Age. Christianity comes after 500 yrs past Copper Age.

2)I believe the religious Father souls would enter into souls of ordinary citizens, not great or famous personalities..
----That is- they are likely not to enter into any of the 16,108 souls. [Even it would be difficult for them to enter into the first 9 lakh souls] - as they would have some individuality, quality, uniqueness in them. They have put at least some effort in their life.
They would be like special in quality and uniqueness in them. Their power will not get reduced to such a low level even in Copper Age so that- religious Father souls can enter them.
----So, those who have not put any effort in Conf Age, listened to knowledge for just few minutes or days, - in them the religious Father souls may enter.
-----They may enter into third class BK souls, or in some ex BKs, or in splinter groups who have opposed or misinterpreted the Murli points and defamed ShivBaba.

Or even the failures in BKWSU- some ex BKs, or for example- the splinter groups. Whereas, souls who have just listened to little knowledge, will come as citizens in Silver Age, would not have any such uniqueness in them. So, other souls can enter in them.

3) Further- another point is- some of the religious Father souls may enter into those bodies/persons who had been deities, BUT, some other religious Father souls NEED NOT enter in those bodies who had been deities.
-----They may enter into a person who begins his part from Copper Age only, as they come ONLY later.


4) For example- the Chariot in which soul of Christ enters gets crucified. So, I do not think first class deity souls will undergo through such incidents.

5) And- in the establishment of other religions, Chariot is not significant, as there is no question of Chariot putting anything like effort, unlike in case of deity religion. In case of deity religion, the Chariot/Prajapita puts effort and God gives Srimath to "see Father/Chariot, follow Father/Chariot"

6) Moreover, there is a lot of difference between God and HIS Chariot, when compared to that between the religious Father and their respective chariots.

7) And- in case of other religious Father souls, they are likely to ride on their Chariot whole day, so the Chariot need not be special, and even the rider slowly begins to develop karmic account too. But, in case of establishment of deity religion, God does not ride the Chariot whole day, and the Chariot progresses day by day.

9) Some have a different belief as given below, which I do not believe. But, there is some critical thinking.
----Yet to know fully, as Baba has not clarified these things in detail, as for now.
----------------


= CLARIFICATION =

The entire Play of Bhaktimarg or Ravan Rajya is governed by TWO PROMINENT embodied souls within this EWD.
ONE - the soul of LAST Rama of Silver Age (Last Prince & Sovereign of S A) = Rama, regarded as the HERO - within the Unlimited World of Ravan Rajya (predominant MASCULINE 'Sanskars'); &
TWO - the soul of FIRST Narayan of Golden Age (First Prince & Sovereign of G A) = Krishna, regarded as the HEROINE - within the Unlimited World of Ravan Rajya (predominant FEMININE 'Sanskars').
The corporeal father of EVERY corporeal religious founder soul in Ravan Rajya, is ALWAYS the soul of Krishna, and the corporeal grand-Father is ALWAYS the soul of Rama.
Thus, the soul of Krishna, would ALWAYS be the corporeal child of the soul of Rama, in Ravan Rajya, ONLY WHEN concerned religion has to be established, and would ALWAYS be the corporeal father to EACH of the corporeal religious founder souls of major religions, in Ravan Rajya, into whose corporeal bodies the Pure Souls from the Soul World descend, in order to establish their respective religions.

The Pure Soul descending from the Soul World, at respective times, would obviously be the Seed Soul, who retains the blue-print of THAT PARTICULAR religion within the 'sanskars', JUST AS, Supreme Soul Shiva retains the blue-print of the ENTIRE CYCLE within His 'Sanskars'. The SEED of the ENTIRE TREE is Supreme Soul Shiva, while the relevant Seeds of the respective BRANCHES of the TREE, are the Seed Souls descending from the Soul World, at respective time periods, during Ravan Rajya. The ROOTS of the TREE represent the corporeal bodies into whom Supreme Soul Shiva, and the other Seed Souls enter, at respective time periods.

Taking Christianity, as an example -
Christ is the Pure Soul, descending from the Soul World, at that specific time, being the Seed Soul of Christianity, who ENTERS into the impure corporeal body of Jesus of Nazareth, who is one of the Narayans in G A, and who is considered to be the Father or Founder of Christianity - also regarded as the Son of God by many Christians, and also regarded as God, in 'Sakar', by many Christians, depending on their spiritual awareness and consciousness. The corporeal father of Jesus of Nazareth would be the soul of Krishna, and his corporeal grand-Father would be the soul of Rama.

Similar pattern is followed in the establishment of ALL other major religions, in Ravan Rajya.
The soul of Krishna is Brahma Baba or DLR, and the soul of Rama is Shankar 'Baba' or -Virendra Dev Dixit.
These aspects are STILL NOT CLEAR to the CONCERNED souls AS YET, since they are STILL in the process of carrying out the 'shooting' of their INTERMEDIATE roles, but they will eventually become clear to them with the passage of time, after the resolution of all these 'tussles'.

sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 06 Nov 2016

10) BUT, BY DEFAULT ITSELF- If PBKs believe Yagya heads had been PBKs, then their claim of saying fight between DLR and Sevakram loses value.
In the Murli it is said that the flames of destruction got ignited from the Yagya itself, still from the beginning and the ones who became instrumental was Brahma, The Father and the brahmin children. It is a spiritual family and when in a family there is a quarrel between the mother and Father, some children take side of the mother and some of the Father. We believe that Brahma Baba took the side of the mother. He did play important role of the Yagya, he is the first and best child. But we believe that he moved to Karachi due to public pressure.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 06 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 420) To what extent PBKs cut, edit and manipulate the Murli points:-

PBKs accuse BKs for cutting or editing of Murli points even when it did not misguide them. But, we have already seen quite number of such blunders and spiritual crimes from PBK Guru himself in this topic as well as- here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593. Now, another one.
sita wrote:In the Murli it is said that the flames of destruction got ignited from the Yagya itself, still from the beginning and the ones who became instrumental was Brahma, The Father and the Brahmin children.
1) True. Father (say ShivBaba as well as Brahma) and braahmin children means whole of the brahmin family. Baba says- flame of destruction has emerged from "Avinaashi Rudr Gita gyaan yagy- which points to 1936, not 1942"
----Baba has clearly said- when your study gets completed, even destruction would begin in outside world. Does it mean completing study means one group fighting with the other group?

2) BUT PLEASE WAIT- the underlined word is added by PBKs which is a pure lie.
The erroneous Murli point provided by PBKs is
Roy wrote: search.php?keywords=flame&t=2180&sf=msgonly

When was the flame of destruction ignited? From the beginning of Yagya itself the flame of destruction was ignited from the Yagya Khund along with the flame of establishment. Who were instrumental for this? Father Brahma and Brahmin children also became instrumental in igniting this flame of destruction.” [Av 03.02.74]
3) Dear Sita soul,
You have added a comma- between Father and Brahma- which actually does/need not exist in your quote which points there are THREE things(person or group) for the CAUSE, , but, Roy soul has showed it as only TWO.
----You might be saying all of them had been the cause, (Sevakram, Lekhraj Kirpalani and the children), but Roy soul has put the whole accusation on just Brahma Baba(Lekhraj Kirpalani) the children, so as to depict SEvakram as innocent! - ;-) May be you have changed it now. Because PBKs usually put allegation on others only for even the failure of Sevakram- as already put.
---Whatever both of the PBKs say- the Murli point says- totally something else.
Av 03.02.74 wrote:The Murli point actually says- http://www.bkdrluhar.com/00-Avyakt%20Mu ... 2.1974.htm

http://www.bkdrluhar.com/00-Avyakt%20Mu ... 2.1974.pdf

Now, in order to accomplish such a huge task, you need to make a lot of preparations. Do you know what preparations you need to make? Does Shankar have to carry out this task? You are not waiting for Shankar, wondering when he will inspire destruction, are you? How and when did the flames of destruction emerge? Who was instrumental for that? Was it Shankar or the Father and the Brahmin children who created the sacrificial fire?[/b] Since the sacrifical fire was created for the task of establishment, the flames of destruction also emerged at the same time as the sacrificial fire was created. So who is the one who will make the flames of destruction powerful? You are together with the Father in this, are you not? So, those who start the fire who also have to finish it, is it not or is it task of Shankar? Become the form of fire the same as Shankar and finish the flames of destruction that you started. After the fire is started, when a pyre is burning, the fire is made intense every now and then, and so how big would these flames of destruction be? In order to accomplish this task, the instrument souls have to be stoked in order to make them fast. How should they be stoked? With your hands or with a stick? You have to make the flames of destruction intense with your thoughts. Does the thought emerge to become such a form of fire and intensify the flames of destruction, or do you think it is not your task?

....Vinaash jwaalaa prajwalith kab aur kaise huyi? Koun nimitt banaa? Kyaa Shankar nimitt banaa yaa yagy rachnevaalee Baap aur braahman bachche nimitt baney? Jabse sthaapnaa ke kaary arth yagy rachaa, tabsey sthaapnaa ke saath2 yagy kund se vinaash kee jwaalaa bhee prakat huyi. Toh vinaash ko prajwalith karneyvaaley koun huye? Baap aur aap saath2 hai na. Toh jo prajwalith karnevaale hain, TOH UNHON KO SAMPANN BHEE karnaa hai na, ki Shankar ko? Shankar samaan jwaalaa roop ban_kar prajwalith kee huyi jwaalaa ko sampann karnaa hai. ...

4) We can see to what extent PBKs cut, edit, add, misinterpret and manipulate the Murli points.
---The Murli point clearly says- the flame of destruction emerged at the same time of establishment- meaning 1936 itself, NOT 1942 or close to it what PBKs claim. Or do they believe fight started at the same time when Lekhraj Kirpalani went to house of Sevakram to seek clarification?
----Moreover, the Murli point says- the instruments were Father and (all the children) - together!- not two groups! It does not mention Brahma. It just says - Father and children. It DOES NOT SAY- "Father, mother and children- what PBKs say/imply".
BapDada is also saying those who became instruments, have to finish the goal- NOT Shankar!

5) Brahma Baba had got vision of not only establishment (heaven, Vishnu) but also of destruction in 1936 itself. So- Baba is saying the flame had begun from 1936 itself, since establishment and destruction go hand in hand. More the establishment, more the firewood becomes dry/ready.

---------
It is a spiritual family and when in a family there is a quarrel between the mother and Father, some children take side of the mother and some of the Father.

6) This is only in PBK view. For BKs, Brahma is both Father and mother. Mama is junior/next mother. And- there had been never fight between/among ShivBaba, Brahma Baba and Om Radhe.
----The master mind Mr Dixit misused such Murli points and have brainwashed loose intellect like PBKs who without studying the other Murli points, fell prey to him.
We believe that Brahma Baba took the side of the mother.

7) So- do you believe fight was between Sevakram and Mother KD, and Lekhraj Kirpalani took side of this mother? So- the fight was not directly between SEvakram and Lekhraj Kirpalani?
-----And- all the children took side of the mother? NO ONE TOOK SIDE OF SEVAKRAM- EVEN GOD HIMSELF???

sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 06 Nov 2016

Who says it is about 42. In 42 Brahma Baba is already in Karachi.
.Vinaash jwaalaa prajwalith kab aur kaise huyi? Koun nimitt banaa? Kyaa Shankar nimitt banaa yaa yagy rachnevaalee Baap aur braahman bachche nimitt baney? Jabse sthaapnaa ke kaary arth yagy rachaa, tabsey sthaapnaa ke saath2 yagy kund se vinaash kee jwaalaa bhee prakat huyi. Toh vinaash ko prajwalith karneyvaaley koun huye? Baap aur aap saath2 hai na. Toh jo prajwalith karnevaale hain, TOH UNHON KO SAMPANN BHEE karnaa hai na, ki Shankar ko? Shankar samaan jwaalaa roop ban_kar prajwalith kee huyi jwaalaa ko sampann karnaa hai.
Creator of the Yagya is the supreme Father Shiv, but when he comes he comes with three - Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar. It has been said that destruction will definitely take place through Shankar, but it is not Shaknar who does the destruction practically, but Shaktis. Baba inspires destruction through Shankar, but the Shaktis do it practically. So if we have destruction ignited in the beginning of the Yagya, there will be Shankar through whom the inspiration for destruction takes place and also the shaktis who do it practically. When there is destruction mentioned, we need to have the name of the mothers mentioned.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 07 Nov 2016

sita wrote:Who has claimed it is about 42. In 42 Brahma Baba is already in Karachi.
1)It is PBKs who claim Sevakram left Yagya in 1942 , so, I meant (inadvertently) PBKs are pointing the time of emerging of the fight/flame close to 1942, is it not?.
-Or do PBKs imply- the fight had begun in 1936 itself? Even this was clearly asked. You may read the post once again.

Flaw No. 421) Was PBK Sevakram famous or not:-

2) When necessary- PBKs say- the entire Yagya was in control of Sevakram till 1942, and from 1942 till 1947 within the hands of PBK sisters.
----But, they also say- Sevakram was NOT FAMOUS in Yagya- in twisting manner.
But, the Murli point which they quote - Post No. 14 - Murli point Nos. 21 and 22 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 7&start=10

clearly says- the children who had been in Yagya for 5 to 10 years, through whom even Mama and Baba used to learn had been famous. [Even PBKs use these words when they need to argue in twisting manner]

3) Now- the Murli point says- such children used to go to trance, get directions even to Mama, Baba.
-----Do PBKs believe (of the three of their personalities - SR, AB/KD, and RB), b]even Sevakram used to go to trance?


4) If PBKs believe SEvakram did not go to trance- and God just used to enter in him, the Murli point clearly says- God used to teach drill even to Mama-Baba (it also says- Maa- Baap for Mama- baba).
----If PBKs belive BK Mama and B baba had been just title holders, their role of Maa- baap should begin only after 1942/1947 . Why does ShivBaba designate Mama and B baba as Maa- Baap (mother and Father) to the earlier period itself?
----Why ShivBaba never used the words - Maa - Baap for the children used to give directions to Mama and B baba? [whom PBKs believe are the real Father and mother-][/b]]

5)Further- PBKs believe fight had been between these three or four personalities. Now, is it possible that- one group used to sit and listen to the directions given by the other(enemy) group?
-----If PBKs believe - the flame emerged from 1936 itself, then it becomes even more difficult, as it would look bad that one group listened to the other group for 5 long years.

-----But, the PBK theory of two groups is still confusing even in their own view. Was Sevakram head of Yagya in PBK view- even this is ambiguous - in PBK view.
-----Even not clear (in PBK view) - whether the fight had been between SR and KD or SR and Lekhraj Kirpalani.
----------------------

# An addition to flaw No. 420):- PBKs quote the Murli point which of the Avyakt Murli of year 1974 said above. The Murli point clearly says- you have to accomplish such a hughe task in two years- pointing to year 1976. It also says- you need to end the task by that time.

PBKs believe the Murli point is said for just two souls- Dixit and sister Vedanti. Now, if it applies only to two souls- is it a huge task?
----Also- then is it work of children? It is work of just those two souls, right?
----And- in PBK view- it just begin only, where as the Murli point has give the target to end(complete) by that time.

sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 07 Nov 2016

Certainly the people from the beginning of the Yagya were famous. We believe the older Dadis also know them and have their pictures. The point is that at that time the role of the Father was not revealed. The knowledge was in its initial stage, many things that are clear to us today at that time were not clear, like the knowledge about Lakshmi and Narayan, Prajapita etc.

Regarding the role of Brahma Baba he did play a very important role of complete faith and surrender. He invested all of his wealth. This cannot remain hidden. But this is a Yagya of knowledge, not a material Yagya and Brahmins are mouth born and not lap born. If someone is impressed by the body or personality of someone or his wealth it is like a lap born brahmin.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 07 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 422) PBKs inadvertently once again spit towards sky or on themselves:-
sita wrote:Certainly the people from the beginning of the Yagya were famous.
We believe the older Dadis also know them and have their pictures.
1) Thank you for at least the courage to reply even in the midst of total contradictions.
----But, it is futile*** as already said. [Nowhere their names are mentioned in the pictures recovered from British library. Even to court cases, names of Om radhe and Lekhraj Kirpalani are mentioned Even in Murlis- they have not been given title Maa baap].
----Mostly in the trust formed by Brahma Baba- there too no names of the PBk sisters- am I right?

2) But- there is no need of any Dadi/Didi or PBKs to certify this. Because Murli ITSELF SPEAKS they are famous. By claiming Dadi/Didis have their picture, PBKs do not gain anything.
---But, Murli never says- they were maatpitas, and the pupularity of them is much less when compared to that of Mama and B Baba as already proved above.

3) One reason- Why Dadis or Didis may not want to reveal the older history to full extent- as it looks somewhat awkward too. Baba says- you all had been babies initially. Suppose say you had followed some weak part in your life, would you like to highlight it or keep it gupt? - And- in this case, they have become bhaagantis - of the 400, nearly 70 ro 80 only survived. Do you expect Dadis to show pictures of all of them or many of them at least? What is the use of highlighting pictures of those whom Maya python had gobbled?
----But, Murli never certifies them as Chariot. In fact, Murli clearly says- fixed Chariot is B Baba (Lekhraj Kirpalani) - even when Baba used to enter in the other children too to teach drill, etc to Mama, B baba(as a side scene to give extra training)!

**** - So, those children were really famous. No doubt. But, not in the way PBKs claim. Definitely not famous to the extent of controlling the entire Yagya.
The point is that at that time the role of the Father was not revealed.

4) In the older picture and the documents itself , it is clearly written DIVINE Father GOD PARAPATI BRAHMA and picture of B baba has been shown there. Do you need anything more?
----BTW- where does Murli say- initially the role was of mother? Or any document highlighting something like DIVINE MOTHER more than DIVINE Father?"
- :laugh:
This clearly shows PBKs do not know what they speak, as well as have absolutely no hesitation to speak lies.
The Knowledge was in its initial stage, many things that are clear to us today at that time were not clear, like The Knowledge about Lakshmi and Narayan, Prajapita etc.
5) Another useless comment like above. No one denies that knowledge was in initial stage. Has any BK denied?
---But, the PBk theory on Prajapita or L, N or anyone is just of blunders, manipulations, errors and mutual contradiction- as already evident here.
Regarding the role of Brahma Baba he did play a very important role of complete faith and surrender. He invested all of his wealth. This cannot remain hidden. But this is a Yagya of knowledge, not a material Yagya and Brahmins are mouth born and not lap born. If someone is impressed by the body or personality of someone or his wealth it is like a lap born Brahmin.
6) Many had got visions of Krishna in B baba, and Lakshmi in Mama. They were not attracted to body of this birth. They were seeing the future birth of B Baba
----And- visions, trance, etc- were in ShivBaba's hand, not Brahma Baba. So, your comment is again weak.

7) Even if PBKs claim children had been attracted to physical wealth and body of Lekhraj Kirpalani, PBKs are committing another spiritual suicide as they are inadvertently defaming Supreme Soul Shiv, as well as his spiritual miracles. In PBK view- it is as good as people give more importance to physical wealth rather than visions, trance, etc. [Even in lowkik, people give very high importance to vision, etc. And- in the beginning period of Yagya, there was no much knowledge, so obviously the next value would be of vision, etc, is it not?

8) Also- some of those who had come to Yagya had been very rich in lowkik life(Eg- Didi Manmohini) , had very good personalities and relations. So- why should they get attracted to an old man?
----So- are PBKs claiming that- people came to God's Yagya by seeing physical wealth and form of an old man?


9) Also PBKs are defaming all the children of Yagya- including themselves. They believe in the beginning there had been many souls who belong to the PBk group. So, if PBKs defame the earlier period, they are defaming themselves too in the same way. Actually they are defaming only themselves, as their story is believed by only them!

10) Moreover, PBKs believe SEvakram was partner of Lekhraj Kirpalani, so he too would be wealthy, right? [As already said earlier- By claiming SEvakram as Chariot, PBKs are implying- SEvakram was rich, but Mr Dixit is beggar!- so the Chariot Sevakram was not ordinary, but only Mr Dixit is ordinary!! - flaw No. 146 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51066&hilit=beggar#p51066]

So- as said there, by pointing to the wealth of Lekhraj Kirpalani, and claiming Mr Dixit as poor, PBKs committed a terrible spiritual suicide.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 07 Nov 2016

sita wrote:Creator of the Yagya is the supreme Father Shiv, but when he comes he comes with three - Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar. It has been said that destruction will definitely take place through Shankar, but it is not Shaknar who does the destruction practically, but Shaktis. Baba inspires destruction through Shankar, but the Shaktis do it practically. So if we have destruction ignited in the beginning of the Yagya, there will be Shankar through whom the inspiration for destruction takes place and also the shaktis who do it practically. When there is destruction mentioned, we need to have the name of the mothers mentioned.
Murli wrote:Vinaash jwaalaa prajwalith kab aur kaise huyi? Koun nimitt banaa? Kyaa Shankar nimitt banaa yaa yagy rachnevaalee Baap aur braahman bachche nimitt baney?
1) Read the Murli point FULLY. It says- Shankar did not become even nimitt. You still like to argue- Shankar became nimit. It says- Father and children became nimitt. It has kept Shankar out of the role.
2)Who is Father here? Even if you take Shiv, it fails in PBK view- as they believe just Shiv is not Father, and Shiv played role of only mother through others. It has again kept Shankar out of the role Father here.
So- if Shankar is not even an instrument in the beginning of Yagya, where do PBKs have any room to argue?

2) Further interesting point is- the Murli says - the Father who created Yagya and the children became nimitt. It implies ShivBaba and all the members/children including B Baba and Mama or everyone.
----But, in PBK view- Father means just Mr Dixit. B baba, KD are mother/s, not (mainly or just) children. [If they are children, then even Mr Dixit is also a child!]
----So- in PBK view- KD and Lekhraj Kirpalani are not nimit (as they do not fall either in Father or the children). So- how can PBKs accuse them as a cause for the fight. Then in PBK view- cause for fight are Mr Dixit, and the children only (excluding the mothers).
But- Mr. Dixit puts the whole allegations on just one Mother (that too title holder one)! He never put any allegation on Father or any child. Another white lie, is it not?

3) Anyhow, you touched only tail of the elephant (query). Rest of the points are more than enough to prove failures of PBKs.

sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 09 Nov 2016

1) Read the Murli point FULLY. It says- Shankar did not become even nimitt.
Shankar does not do destruction, shakties do. The fire of destruction is of burning of sex lust. Baba says that we should not wait for time or others and consider ourselves responsible. Many are needed, nothing can be achieved by a singe personality. The issue from the beginning has been and still is the issue over purity.
4) In the older picture and the documents itself , it is clearly written DIVINE Father GOD PARAPATI Brahma and picture of B Baba has been shown there. Do you need anything more? 
These are from later period.

Regarding the matter of the souls who left in the beginning and the mothers who did not follow them, we believe these mother are not from the sun Dynasty.
defaming Supreme Soul Shiv, as well as his spiritual miracles. In PBK view- it is as good as people give more importance to physical wealth rather than visions, trance, etc. [Even in lowkik, people give very high importance to vision, etc. And- in the beginning period of Yagya, there was no much knowledge, so obviously the next value would be of vision, etc, is it not? 
Baba does not do any miracles. There is no benefit in visions.
----So- are PBKs claiming that- people came to God's Yagya by seeing physical wealth and form of an old man? [/b]
We claim in the Brahmin family there is variety and people who are sincere effort makers, who are there for the sake of knowledge and Yoga are less. People attracted to external matters are more.
He will be cautious as he is in front of many people
You have created easy method to become pure. Just sit in front of people and because of the public pressure we will have to become pure. But you also realize that if we are impure and we are, and there is no need to check, Baba has said all are impure and no one is pure and there is no need to pretend we are pure and check our purity....but you also realize that we are effort makers and we make effort for purity. If we are still impure it is not because we wish so. If we are impure, it is out of our control. Even if we like to be pure and control ourselves and make effort for that, accounts from the past still do come, where we fall even if we don't like to fall. Just because we indulge in a wrong practice in front of public, it does not make it more right.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 09 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 423) "In PBK view" - God's some work are a total waste- even when it gives some fruit, but their work is fully useful and relevant- even when its result is zero!
sita wrote:Baba does not do any miracles. There is no benefit in visions.
1) PBKs argue- spiritual knowledge can be extracted even from a lowkik newspaper, but, in their view- even Godly visions have no value.
sita (just before Flaw No. 190) wrote: from - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51189&hilit ... per#p51189

It is said that when our intellect becomes unlimited we will see unlimited meaning even in the news. We can read knowledge in the newspaper. Baba can clarify the news of the newspaper too. There is no extraordinary knowledge there, but the clarification makes it extraordinary. The Avyakt Vanis are something we hold dear and narration of a very elevated soul. We are used to reading it when we were in the BK and it is something popular in the BK. And we also consider Brahma Baba to possess the qualities of a world mother and we respect both mother and father.
----PBKs on one hand say- there is no benefit from visions, but believe Mr. Dixit's first clarification was on vision.
----They even say- sister Vedanti got some realization in 1976 through visions- even if she had not yet taken advanced knowledge. So, when they need, they will use the vision.
So- whom are they fooling?

2) BTW- if we compare the benefit in the so called clarification story of PBKs, the PBK Sevakram himself had left in 1942, and the other two sisters left in 1947. So- the one who became instrument to give clarification, he himself made the Yagya as orphan! Any use or benefit?

3) Use of miracles, visions, etc are said in Murlis. It also says- when your stage reaches high, others will get vision automatically. So, it is an indication of the HIGHEST STAGE AS WELL.

a) SM 25-1-83(1):- Bachchon ne saakshaatkaar bhi kiyaa hai jo achchi reeti Yaad karte hain Baap unhon_ki rakshaa bhi karte hain. DUSHMAN KO BHAYANKAR ROOP DIKHAAYE BHAGAA DETE HAIN. Tumko jab tak sharir hai tab tak Yoga may rahnaa hai. Nahin toh sajaayein khaani padengi. -35 [Yaad, vision]

b) SM 19-9-82(1):- Apney ko sajani samajhney se bachchaa samajhenge to jaasti taakath milegi kyonki sajani ho to half partner hai saajan ke saath. BACHCHE TO BAAP KE FULL VAARIS HO JAATE HAIN. ISLIYE BABA KAHTAA HAI HUMKO GYAANI TU ATMA PYAARAA HAI. Dhyaani ko saakshaatkaar ki ichchaa rahti hai. JO SAARAA DIN BABA2 KARTE RAHENGE UNKO TO GYAANI KAHENGE. Baba ko gyaan ka bahut shounk hai. Gyaan ke goley,.. nayi baath hai na. Dhyaan may bahut saakshaatkaar aadi karte hain. Parantu unko gyaan kuch nahin miltaa. Khush ho jaate hain. BABA AISE BHI NAHIN KAHTE DHYAAN KHARAAB HAI. Bhaktimarg may saakshaatkaar hota hai to khush ho jaate hain. –[WOT, vison, dual, PBKs, gyaan]

So- Baba does not say trance, etc is bad. which PBKs usually say/imply


c) Trance Message No. 5 (soon after 1969 Jan 18) (Pg 5, 6 of the Hindi Book):- Aaj jab vatan may gayee, toh jaate hee anubhav ho rahaa thaa jaise ki light ke baadalon ko cross karke vatan may jaa rahee hun. Baadalon ke light aisey lag rahee thi jaise sooryaasth hote samay laalee dekhney may aatee hai. Jaise hee vatan may pahunchee toh vahaan bhee aise hee dekhaa ki light ke baadalon ke beech BapDada ka mukhdaa soory chandrama samaan chamaktaa huvaa dekhney may aa rahaa thaa. Scene toh badaa sundar dikhaayi rahee thi, lekin aaj kaa vaayumandal bilkul shaanth thaa. Bapadada ke mulaakaath may bhee shaanthi aur shakti kee bhaasnaa aa rahee thi. Fir toh muskuraate huye Baba boley- BHAL TUM SAKAAREE SRUSHTI MAY SAAKAAREE SHAREER MAY HO, FIR BHEE SAAKAAR MAT RAHTE AISEY HEE LIGHT MIGHT ROOP HOKAR RAHNAA HAI. JO KOYI BHEE DEKEHY TOH MAHSAAOS KAREY KI YAH KOYI FARISTAA GHOOM RAHE HAIN. LEKIN VAH AVASTHAA TAB HOGEE JAB EKAANTH MAY BAITH ANTHARMUKH AVASTHAA MAY RAH APNEE CHECKING KARENGE. AISEE AVASTHAA SE HEE AATMAAVON KO AAP BACHCHON SE SAAKSHAATKAAR HOGA. Aaj vatan may ek taraf toh bilkul shaanthi thee. Doosrey taraf fir pyaar kaa roop thaa. Kyaa dehaa? BABA KI BAAHON MAY SABHEE BACHCHE SAMAAYE HUYE THAY. SAATH2 PREM KE SAAGAR TOH THAA HEE. BABA NE KAHAA TUM SHAKTIYON KO BHEE SARVA AATMAAVON KO AISEY HEE AB APNEY SAMEEP LAANAA HAI. AAPKI DRUSHTI MAY BAAP SAMAAN JAB PREM AUR SHAKTI DONON HEE POWER HOGEE, TAB AATMAAYEIN NAZDEEK AAYENGEE. Iske baad Baba ne teesraa drushy di. Kyaa dekhaa- baba ke saamney dher cards padey thay. Baba ne kahaa in cards ko aisey sajaavo jo koyi scenery ban jaaye. Kyoni har card par seecenery koi design thi. Kismey chitr, kismay shareer. Hum milaaney kagee, toh kab ultaa, kab sultaa ho jaataa tha aur BapDada bahut has rahe thay. Usmay bahut hee sundar Satyug ke sceneriyaan theen. Ek krishn Baal roop may jhooley may jhool rahaa thaa, saath may kaathaa (daasi, servant) jhulaa rahee thi. Doosrey may sakhe, sakhiyon kaa khel thaa. Matlab toh Satyug ki dinacharyaa thi. Phir baba ne vidaayee dete samay kahaa bachchee, sabko sandesh do ki shakti bhav aur prem swaroop bhav. – [Yaad, pratyakshata]

d) SM 4-6-82(2):- BABA SE POOCH SAKTEY HAIN MAIN IS HAAALATH MAY KIS PADD KO PAAVOONGAA. Balki apni avasthaa se samajh saktey ho. ABHI MARGIN BAHUT HAI BABA KO Yaad KARNE KI. Tum sab purushaarthi ho. Paripoorn anth may banenge. Imthihaan pooraa hoga, phir praalabhd shuru ho jaati hai. Us samay tum nazdeek honge. BAHUTON KO SAAKSHAATKAAR HOGA. APNEY GHAR KA BHI SAAKSHAATKAAR HOTA RAHEGAA. EK DO KO SAMAJH JAAYENGE YAH KIS PADD MAY JAAYENGE. Samajh ki baath hai na. Atma besamajh ban gayi hai na. Abhi phir Baap koudi se heerey jaisaa banaane liye samajhdaar banaate hain. Baap kahte hain bachche yah yuddh ka maidaan hai. TOOFAAN TOH BAHUT AAYENGE. SABHI BEEMAARIYAAN BAAHAR NIKLENGI. APNEY PURUSHAARTH MAY TATPAR RAHENGE TOH VIJAYI HONGE. USTAAD KOYI MADAD NAHIN KARENGE. HAAR ATHVA JEETH PAANAA TUMHAARAA KAAM HAI. USTAAD KAHTE HAIN YAH Maya KI YUDDH HAI. Maya BAHUT PACHAADEGI. NA CHAAHTE HUYE BHI 5-6 VARSH THEEK CHALTEY2 PHIR AISEY ZHOR SE TOOFAAN AAYENGE JO NEEND BHI FITAA DENGE. BAHAADUR KO THAKNAA NAHIN HAI. Fail nahin hona hai. Is par chote2 naatak bhi dikhaate hain ki Bhagavaan apni taraf, Ravan apni taraf kheenchte hain. Tum Yaad may rahne chaahte ho, Maya toofaan may laa deti hai. So toh hoga. Yuddh karte rahnaa hai. Tum karmyogi ho. Savere uthkar practice karo. Baap ko Yaad karo. Tumhaaraa hai gupt. Koyi kyaa jaaney yah kyaa karte hain. Tum sab under ground ho. Tumhaari gupt senaa gaayi huyi hai. Unknown warriors, but very well known. TUMHAARAA YAADGAAR YAH DILWAADAA MANDIR UNKNOWN WAARIORS KA YAADGAAR MANDIR HAI. LN ka nahin. Yah phir LN bante hain. Tumhaaraa sab hai gupt. Sthool talwaar aadi kuch bhi nahin hai. Ismey sirf buddhi ka kaam hai. -45-, 46 [dharna, warning, srimath_raay, dilwaadaaa, prediction]


e) AM 23-3-70(With Janak Sister= Janaki Dadi):- Pg 223 of Hindi Book = Ab tak vaanimorrth baney ho. Phir banenge saakshaatkaar moorth. Abhee Vani se auron ko saakshaatkaar hota hai. Lekin phir hoga silence se. Saakshaatkaar Moorth jab banenge, toh sabhee ke muk se kyaa niklegaa? Yah jo gaayan hai na ki sabhee paramatma ke roop hai, yah gaayan sangam par hee practical may hota hai. Bhaktimarg may jo bhee baatein chalee hai, vah sangam kee baaton ko mixture kiyaa hai. Tumaaree anth may yah sthiti aatee hai, jo sabhee may Sakshaath BapDada ko moorth mahsoos hogi. Sabhee ke mukh se yahee aavaaz niklegaa yah toh saakshaath Bapadaadaa kee moorth hai. Saakshaath roop ban_nay se saakshaatkaar hoga. Toh yah jo anth kaa roop sabhee may saakshaath roop dekhthay hain, isko mix karke kah dete hain ki sabhee parmatma ke roop hain. Baap ke samaan ko parmatma ke roop kah dete. Yah sabhee baatein yahaan se chalee hain. Toh saakshaatkaar moorth banney ke liye saakshaath Bapadada samaan ban_naa hai. Ab checking kyaa karnee hai? vah checking naheen. Vah toh bachpan ke thay. Ab yah checking karnee hai. Jitnee samaanataa utnaa swamaan milegaa. Samaanataa se apney swamaan kaa lagaa saktey ho. Samaanataa kahaan tak laayee hai aur kahaan tak samaanataa laanee hai, yahee checking karnaa aur karaanaa hai. Yah bhee topic hai. Jitnee jismay samaanataa dekho utnaa sameep samjho. Sameep ratnon kee parakh samaanataa hai. – [Yaad, prediction, sarvavyaapi]
We claim in the Brahmin family there is variety and people who are sincere effort makers, who are there for the sake of knowledge and Yoga are less. People attracted to external matters are more.
4) In PBK view- there was only one Sevakram while he left. No one accompanied him either in 1942 not even God!
You have created easy method to become pure. ...
5) I never said by giving drushti one becomes pure. But, it gives some motivation and also extra clarification in subtle way, like vision. I have also quoted Murli points on it. Murli itself speaks great things on drushti. But, if you have understood so, it only shows the intellect of the so called gyaani tu atmaa.
Regarding the matter of the souls who left in the beginning and the mothers who did not follow them, we believe these mother are not from the sun Dynasty
6) As said earlier- when PBKs have no reply, they say- "we believe, we believe....". It does not prove anything.
BTW, it once again shows that- the PBK leader himself is not in pravruttimarg.
----No mother of PBKs, had accompanied Sevakram either in 1942 or in 1969 or in 1976. He was alone. He announced name of sister Vedanti in some 1980s as applicable to 1976, but she has never came to him.
He placed Premkanta, she too left. He then placed Kamala Devi in 1983. She left him in 1998. He then hesitatingly took (mostly sister yogini- like title holder- even if they do not use that word).
So- you may keep claiming- "we believe" and believe that is a proof as well in your or PBKs' perception! - ;-)

7) Just a note:- Here, PBKs inadvertently imply - their mothers are like cowardice and say- they believe their mothers do not come in sun dynasty! - which they do not like to accept when others say the same.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 09 Nov 2016

# Flaw No. 424) Why nothing regarding "Aham Brahm Asmi" or "Infinite Light" is mentioned in PBK literature and Blogs?
sita wrote:These are from later period.
8) The recovered old documents from British Library almost clearly imply - that they belong to the initial period (1936) in Yagya.* - the But, a PBk claims that they belong to later period- after 1947.

9) Now- to the PBKs:- In one of the old pictures- the old srushti-chakra (time cycle) - attached below- it says-

a)INFINITE DIVINE LIGHT.
b) Brahman deity dynasty established by Divine Father Prajapati Brahma through - "Aham Brahm asmi"

10) When the concept of "Infinite Light" and "Aham Bragma asmi" had been introduced in Yagya? - 1936? 1942 or after 1947 or ???

schakr1.jpg
schakr1.jpg (80.71 KiB) Viewed 769 times


11) If you believe- the concept of aham brahm asmi existed post 1947, (since you just said - pictures belong to later period), then what about the benefit of the so called PBK clarification story given by the PBK Guru SEvakram or the so-called PBK lady drill masters have impact on Yagya? [/color] Just zero benefit?


12)Or do you believe- the concept of Indivisible light and Aham brahm asmi came only after 1947, and were introduced by - Shiv? or Lekhraj Kirpalani??? or ???

14) So- in PBK view- Sevakram was the only gyaani tu atma soul in the whole of Yagya, and that is why he alone left Yagya, and no one accompanied him. Even their mothers are useless, do not come in Sun Dynasty.
----Still the effort made by PBK SEvakram got total futile- "even if we take PBK theory" . Because no one applied it.
----But, then the teaching given through less intellect souls(Lekhraj Kirpalani) had been useful, and the children developed to a considerable extent, is it not?
So- "in PBK view" - clarifications through title holder mothers really gave some fruit, but that of real Father and mothers were futile! - even the PBK real mothers rejected the teaching of the PBK real Father! - :sad:

sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 09 Nov 2016

4) In PBK view- there was only one Sevakram while he left. No one accompanied him either in 1942 not even God!
We believe he left along with his own group.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests