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
vrkrao
Posts: 69
Joined: 04 Aug 2013
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To seek the answers and understand the true knowledge behind conflicting Murli points and baba's clarification

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by vrkrao » 08 Jan 2016

Please proceed. Appreciate the soul who made additional comments.

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 » 08 Jan 2016

# Flaw No. 73) PBK philosophy (unknowingly & INADVERTENTLY) declares- "SHIV ENTERS IN SUBTLE BRAHMA"!

This is another example of PBKs falling into their OWN TRAP. PBKs quote the Murli point that says-
"I do not enter in subtle Brahma", and say that ShivBaba cannot enter into the subtle body of DLR (WITHOUT understanding what ShivBaba is ACTUALLY speaking about or referring to). But, they themselves unknowingly & INADVERTENTLY STRONGLY CERTIFY that Shiv enters in subtle Brahma.
PBKs strongly believe that "whenever Shiv enters body of Mr. Dixit to speak and give clarifications,
B Baba would also be present in the body of Mr. Dixit
". [They believe soul of Lekhraj Kirpalani reads the Murli and Shiv/ShivBaba gives clarifications, while Mr Dixit is LOST in his so-called 'nirakari' stage (what a JOKE). So, it is as good as SUBTLE Brahma is combined with Shiv, and BOTH of them, i.e. BapDada are ACTIVELY operating through the body of Virendra Dev Dixit, while Virendra Dev Dixit is TOTALLY LOST in oblivion!]

This is how unknowingly a person falls into his own TRAP of the WEB of DECEPTIVE LIES. Mr Dixit started to give his own (mis)interpretations on Murli points. But, when others put questions, to cover his mistakes, he said- it is soul of Lekhraj Kirpalani that reads in his body and makes mistakes. But, that rebounded to hit his own back, like a batsman hitting his own wicket.

Now- who among Shiv and subtle Brahma first enters Mr. Dixit's body (IF AT ALL ANY ONE OF THEM DOES ENTER)? There are three possibilities -
a) Both Shiv and B baba enter together.
b) First B baba enters, and then Shiv enters.
c) First Shiv enters, and then B baba enters.

c) cannot be right option. Because Shiv is the highest personality. After Shiv's entrance, B Baba cannot have chance to enter. So, it should be either a) or b),

If they choose a), it again proves that B Baba is the soul that is even closer to or synchronous with ShivBaba than Mr. Dixit. If they choose b), then naturally, Shiv enters both subtle Brahma and corporeal Dixit together.

Even if they choose c), it cannot be said B baba enters into Shiv, as Shiv is just a point, and subtle body is larger. Even in that case, it would be like- Shiv within subtle Brahma Baba and corporeal Dixit.

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 Jan 2016

# Flaw No. 74) If not in fortune, they take opposite (meaning) even from literature:-

SM 24.7.13》Takdeer mein nahin to literature se bhi ulta (arth) utha lete hain. = If not in fortune, they take opposite (meaning) even from literature.

To whom ShivBaba might have predicted this? One may be for lowkik people, who read BK literature and still take opposite. BUT THIS FULLY APPLIES TO PBKs, who just take opposite of every word/sentence Baba had spoken in Murlis (CONSIDERING same to be the so-called 'UNLIMITED' meaning of the so-called advanced knowledge).

But, as per drama, there is no fault of anyone.

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 Jan 2016

# Flaw No. 75) Does Lekhraj Kirpalani enter Mr Dixit?

This is another example of PBKs falling into their own trap. Murli point -
"Krishn kee aane ki ghadi dikhaate hain = The INSTANT of coming of Krishna is shown".
Baba is comparing HIMSELF with Krishna that -
The time of entrance of Shiv cannot be understood precisely, but the time of (birth) of Golden Age prince Krishna can be precisely known or mentioned, because it is physical birth.

Mr Dixit first equated Brahma to Krishna, which itself is a BLATANT VIOLATION of Shrimat (see Murli point below*). OK, still let us agree with them.

As dates of Avyakt BapDada's milan are announced in advance (not sure whether these were announced in 1969-70 period itself, when number of children were few), PBKs say- "Oh, see, the dates are already announced, Krishna comes there, not Shiv". But, Murli point says- Krishn kee aane ki ghadi dikhaate hain = The INSTANT of coming of Krishna is shown, not just about date- which is a clear proof that what Baba had said was for number one prince Krishna of Golden Age.

But, ShivBaba says- "I never take a book and read". But, Dixit takes written Murli and reads. To cover up this, Mr. Dixit said- "It is soul of Lekhraj Kirpalani who enters in Dixit and reads". Now, PBKs should be able to give dates of entrance of B Baba in Mr Dixit too, since they call/refer him as Krishna. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO ANNOUNCE IT IN ADVANCE, IS IT NOT? Else, their claims are one sided, and double standards.

*- SM 8-11- 72(2):- ShivBaba ko toh apnaa sharir hai nahin. VAHAAN MANDIR MAY BHI LING RAKHAA HAI. Dilwaalaa mandir ka arth koyi samajh nahin sakte hain. Adhar kumaariyaan, kumaari kanyaa bhi hain. Sikhlaanevaale Baap ka bhi chitr hai. Swarg ka malik banaevaalaa zaroor ustaad chahiye. Vahaan Krishn ki baath nahin. JAHAAN BRAHMA BAITHAA HAI VAHAAN Krishna KAISE AA SAKTAA HAI? Krishn ki atma tapasya kar rahi hai sundar ban_ne liye. Brahma hai Shyaam. Oopar may Vaikunth ke sundar chitr khade hain. Braahman braahmanyiaan hee ...

= ... Where there is Brahma, how can Krishna be there? ...

Another thing is- Mr Dixit calls himself as Conf. Aged Krishna. They even call B Baba as Krishna. So, as per PBKs, are there two Krishnas in Conf. Age? If yes, then is B baba real Krishna in Conf. Age or just title holder Krishna? And, is ShivBaba comparing himself with TITLE HOLDER personalities? Do PBKs believe there could be even two (human) RAMs, and two SHANKARs as well, in Conf. Age?

Baba has given a warning.

SM 29-9-78(1):- BUDDHI KA TAALAA BAND HO JAANAA, YAH DHARMARAJ KI GUPT SAJAA HAI.
KADI BHOOL KARNE SE, PAHLEY YAHI SAJAA MILTI HAI. -91 [Dharmaraj, warning]

= Intellect/buddhi getting locked is incognito/gupt punishment/retribution from Dharmaraj. When great mistakes/blunders are committed, this would be the first punishment (or instalment- may be).

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 » 10 Jan 2016

# Flaw No. 76)False concept of Dharmaraj:-

PBKs believe Lekhraj Kirpalani will play role of Dharmaraj. But, they believe he does not get seat in the first 4.5 lakh souls. And, they also believe, except 8, all others get punishment.

1)So, as per PBk concept, how can Lekhraj Kirpalani play role of Dharmaraj? How a lower level soul can give punishment to higher level souls?

2)So, as per PBKs, it is MOTHER who gives punishment [Also, a weak, cowardice - as per PBKs, all the mothers are cowardice].

3)Lots of Murli points say- Dharmaraj Baap (Father Dharmraj). No Murli point says- Mother is Dharmaraj.- Post No. - 138 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 552#p12552

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 » 10 Jan 2016

# Flaw No. 77) Why Mr Dixit had to announce name of Sister Vedanti?

1)This is continuation to Flaw No. 72). To misuse the Murli point saying about birth of L & N in 1976, Mr. Dixit obviously needed ONE MORE PERSONALITY who should be in gyaan with him by 1976 itself. But, no one had been with him till almost 1980s, till AIVV started. So, he had to name sister Vedanti as Lakshmi.

2)Now, this leads to further great errors. As per PBKs, sister Vedanti is the same personality(next birth of) whom they call "Radha bachchi/child", and Kamala Devi is the same personality whom they call "GitaMata = Adi/first Brahma". PBKs believe God first entered in Gitamata and believe she is the most senior Mother(Badi Maa) and Vedanti as smaller/junior mother (choti Maa).

But, Kamala Devi came quite later to AIVV, only after 1983. If PBKs believe sister Vedanti was revealed in 1976 itself, then as per PBK philosophy, the SMALLER MOTHER was revealed before the SENIOR MOTHER.

So, Mr. Dixit had no other choice except announcing sister Vedanti as Lakshmi.

Not sure what do PBKs believe sister Vedanti now?- BK or PBK? If PBK, has she undergone PBK bhatti or their 7 days course? Has she given letter of faith to AIVV?...

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11585
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by arjun » 13 Jan 2016

mbbhat wrote:Why not kanyaas live together as a group? Any wrong in it?
Baba has nowhere said that virgins (BK sisters) can live as a group outside the Yagya in the outside world. He has only said that Kumars can live together. The above statement only shows how you feel yourself to be superior to ShivBaba and feel egotistic about your half baked knowledge.
mbbhat wrote:So, no PBKs from 1942 to 1947? Mr Dixit says- when Sevakram left body, and ENTIRE Yagya was in control of the two mothers. Did the status of the two mothers suddenly changed from PBK to non PBK or something else?
When there was no Prajapita at that time, how can there be Prajapita Brahmakumar-kumaris (PBKs) after 1942? Irrelevant question.
PBKs believe in the absence of (their) Father, soul of Lekhraj Kirpalani played role of title holder Father in Yagya from 1947 till 1969. Now, who was title holder Father in Yagya from 1969 till 1976 (and from 1942 to 1947)?
None from 1969 to 1976. And from 1942 to 1947 Dada Lekhraj must have assumed that title upon himself, as is proved from the documents obtained from the London museum.
mbbhat wrote:From the above, not sure whether PBKs believe Lekhraj Kirpalani Plays role of Mother in Mr. Dixit. Some say yes, some say No. But, if yes, obviously he should get title as Jagadamba. But, PBKs believe that title goes to Kamala Devi IN PRACTICAL, and that is why Lekhraj Kirpalani has no place in their Trimurti. So, role of Mother through Dixit is not practical. So, how come adoption taking place in AIVV from 1998 in CORPOREAL?
We PBKs have both mother and Father with us. It is the BKs who are orphans because they have neither mother nor Father with them in corporeal form. So, instead of pointing fingers at others, first look at your own position.
# Flaw No. 71) Had Sevakram lost faith in 1942 or not?
Initially PBKs used to say- faith of Sevakram was lost and he LEFT Yagya in 1942. They usually relate the Murli point- "Ram failed" for that. But, when the Murli point saying- "Shankar does not lose faith" was put in front of them, a PBK said- "Sevakram did not lose faith" . But, when asked why he left Yagya? the reply was "he was killed in Yagya".
Sevakram's part was not that of Shankar. It was the part of Prajapita or Ram. So, the point 'Ram failed' applied to him. Ram failed because he lost faith due to the knowledge being rudimentary or incomplete in the beginning of the Yagya.
# Flaw No. 73) PBK philosophy (unknowingly & INADVERTENTLY) declares- "Shiv ENTERS IN SUBTLE Brahma"!
This is another example of PBKs falling into their OWN TRAP. PBKs quote the Murli point that says-
"I do not enter in subtle Brahma", and say that ShivBaba cannot enter into the subtle body of DLR (WITHOUT understanding what ShivBaba is ACTUALLY speaking about or referring to). But, they themselves unknowingly & INADVERTENTLY STRONGLY CERTIFY that Shiv enters in subtle Brahma.
PBKs strongly believe that "whenever Shiv enters body of Mr. Dixit to speak and give clarifications,
B Baba would also be present in the body of Mr. Dixit". [They believe soul of Lekhraj Kirpalani reads the Murli and Shiv/ShivBaba gives clarifications, while Mr Dixit is LOST in his so-called 'nirakari' stage (what a JOKE). So, it is as good as SUBTLE Brahma is combined with Shiv, and BOTH of them, i.e. BapDada are ACTIVELY operating through the body of Veerendra Dev Dixit, while Veerendra Dev Dixit is TOTALLY LOST in oblivion!]
BKs say that incorporeal Shiv enters into Brahma's subtle body in the Subtle Region and then both enter in Gulzar Dadi's body which goes against the above Murli point that Shiv doesn't enter in Subtle Region dweller Brahma.

But in case of Shankar, PBKs believe that Shiv is always there. He does not come from any physical Paramdham along with Brahma from Subtle Region. PBKs also believe that Brahma's soul doesn't remain in Baba Virendra Dev Dixit's body always. It enters in many others to do Godly service. Moreover, when Brahma's soul enters in Shankar it attains temporary seed form stage. So, at that time there is no effect of the subtle body. So, the above Murli point does not apply to Shankar's part at all as mbbhat is trying to falsely assume.
As dates of Avyakt BapDada's milan are announced in advance (not sure whether these were announced in 1969-70 period itself, when number of children were few), PBKs say- "Oh, see, the dates are already announced, Krishna comes there, not Shiv". But, Murli point says- Krishn kee aane ki ghadi dikhaate hain = The INSTANT of coming of Krishna is shown, not just about date- which is a clear proof that what Baba had said was for number one prince Krishna of Golden Age.
You can continue to believe that Krishna in above case refers to Golden Age Krishna, whose history is not available with human beings.
But, ShivBaba says- "I never take a book and read". But, Dixit takes written Murli and reads. To cover up this, Mr. Dixit said- "It is soul of Lekhraj Kirpalani who enters in Dixit and reads". Now, PBKs should be able to give dates of entrance of B Baba in Mr Dixit too, since they call/refer him as Krishna. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO ANNOUNCE IT IN ADVANCE, IS IT NOT? Else, their claims are one sided, and double standards.
We see Shiv through Shankar and not Krishna. And Murli says that you should always think that it is ShivBaba who speaks and not any other bodily soul or the Chariot.
Another thing is- Mr Dixit calls himself as Conf. Aged Krishna. They even call B Baba as Krishna.
Dada Lekhraj is only Golden Age Krishna and not Confluence Age Krishna.
# Flaw No. 76)False concept of Dharmaraj:-
PBKs believe Lekhraj Kirpalani will play role of Dharmaraj. But, they believe he does not get seat in the first 4.5 lakh souls. And, they also believe, except 8, all others get punishment.
1)So, as per PBK concept, how can Lekhraj Kirpalani play role of Dharmaraj? How a lower level soul can give punishment to higher level souls?
There will not be any Dharmaraj in physical form to announce punishment for each and every soul. Each soul gets punishment based on its own sins.
# Flaw No. 77) Why Mr Dixit had to announce name of Sister Vedanti?
1)This is continuation to Flaw No. 72). To misuse the Murli point saying about birth of L & N in 1976, Mr. Dixit obviously needed ONE MORE PERSONALITY who should be in gyaan with him by 1976 itself. But, no one had been with him till almost 1980s, till AIVV started. So, he had to name Sister Vedanti as Lakshmi.
Sister Vedanti's name has not been taken in AIVV literature or CDs anywhere. She is only referred to as the head of Vijaymala or Confluence Age Lakshmi. Just as the Confluence Age Narayan developed faith about his part in 1976, similarly the Confluence Age Lakshmi developed faith in her part as Lakshmi in 1976. One developed faith on the basis of knowledge and the other on the basis of visions.
2)Now, this leads to further great errors. As per PBKs, Sister Vedanti is the same personality(next birth of) whom they call "Radha bachchi/child", and Kamala Devi is the same personality whom they call "GitaMata = Adi/first Brahma". PBKs believe God first entered in Gitamata and believe she is the most senior Mother(Badi Maa) and Vedanti as smaller/junior mother (choti Maa).
But, Kamala Devi came quite later to AIVV, only after 1983. If PBKs believe Sister Vedanti was revealed in 1976 itself, then as per PBK philosophy, the SMALLER MOTHER was revealed before the SENIOR MOTHER.
Irrelevant question. When BK Vedanti had not accepted Baba Virendra Dev Dixit as Shankar or Narayan and when she had not at all entered AIVV, how can she become the senior mother? It was Jagdamba who entered AIVV before her and remained in AIVV for a long period and also gave sustenance because of which she got the title of senior mother.
Not sure what do PBKs believe Sister Vedanti now?- BK or PBK?
She is a BK for all others, but for PBKs she is the junior mother. We see her as a mother only.

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 » 13 Jan 2016

Flaw No. 78) Half Baked replies and acting superior to ShivBaba:-

Our beloved brother souls- PBKs' replies are half baked, which are clearly seen here.
arjun wrote:Baba has nowhere said that virgins (BK sisters) can live as a group outside the Yagya in the outside world. He has only said that Kumars can live together. The above statement only shows how you feel yourself to be superior than ShivBaba and feel egotistic about your half baked knowledge.
I have not said Baba had recommended kanyas to live in a group. I had said, why should the kanyas be suggested to marry if they just do not like to surrender? Why not stay single, or in group(if they have some fear) and continue in Gyan? Has Baba said anywhere kanyas should not live in group? And- which is better? To continue in gyaan by any means or marry? Or do you believe no kanya in AIVV has ability to do so, that is why She recommends so? Or kanyas living so is like disservice?
When there was no Prajapita at that time, how can there be Prajapita Brahmakumar-kumaris (PBKs) after 1942? Irrelevant question.
I believe the reply is irrelevant here. Anyhow, from the reply, it seems that PBKs believe the title PBK vanished from 1942.

Now, the point is- what was their title from 1942 to 1947- BK? But, as per PBKs, ShivBaba still had not entered B baba till 1947, but had been coming in the other mother till 1947. So, what was the title during 1942 to 1947? BK, or anything else?
None from 1969 to 1976. And from 1942 to 1947 Dada Lekhraj must have assumed that title upon himself as is proved from the documents obtained from the London museum.
PBKs believe ShivBaba entered in Lekhraj Kirpalani only in 1947 and the entire Yagya was in control of the two mothers and ShivBaba used to enter in mothers. Then how can Lekhraj Kirpalani assume even title holder Brahma from 1942 to 1947 as per PBK logic?

BTW, documents recovered from London museum are from almost 1936 itself.

And- if PBKs believe there was none from 1969 till 1976, then the PBK concept of TITLE HOLDER logic loses its value greatly. [PBKs say- In the absence of Father/principal, someone takes charge of it]. If PBKs can say- B baba was title holder Prajapita forperiod 1947 till 1969, why not give the same title to the other mothers from 1942 to 1947 and Prakashmani Dadiji from 1969 till 1976 (or till 1983 when AIVV Practically started)?

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 » 13 Jan 2016

Flaw No. 79)Continuation
Sevakram's part was not that of Shankar. It was the part of Prajapita or Ram. So, the point 'Ram failed' applied to him. Ram failed because he lost faith due to The Knowledge being rudimentary or incomplete in the beginning of the Yagya.
So, you believe Sevakram lost faith? But, the other PBK had said he had not. Do different PBKs have DIFFERENT views of the very ELEMENTARY BASICS of advanced knowledge? Now, I will take your words as right.
BKs say that incorporeal Shiv enters into Brahma's subtle body in the Subtle Region and then both enter in Gulzar Dadi's body which goes against the above Murli point that Shiv doesn't enter in Subtle Region dweller Brahma.
The Murli point that "Shiv doesn't enter in Subtle Region dweller Brahma" was said for period PRIOR 1969 when Brahma Baba was an effort-maker UNTIL 1969, and DOES NOT APPLY THEREAFTER! But, baba has also said- he will enter in subtle Brahma. - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... aan#p12446
What do PBKs understand by the point, "the unlimited Father speaks of unlimited matters to the unlimited children"? Does it mean that any point which is interpreted differently to God's ORIGINAL INTENT, and which is CLEARLY in OPPOSITION to God's ORIGINAL INTENT, becomes unlimited?
Anyhow, that is not the issue or question here.
But in case of Shankar, PBKs believe that Shiv is always there.
So, now PBKs go against the Murli point that says- God does not ride the Chariot whole day. Acting superior to ShivBaba?

But, then how can Mr Dixit slap some sister during Amrit Vela or can doze while during Yaad, while giving drushti if Shiv is present in him always?

So as per PBk philosophy, subtle Brahma enters in Prajapita Brahma and God! (as PBKs say- God is always in Dixit). But, as said before it again turns to be God in subtle Brahma, because God is a point, and subtle body is larger, so after entrance of Lekhraj Kirpalani into body of Dixit which also has a point, then it is as good as God within corporeal Dixit and subtle Brahma too. But, if PBKs argue in other way, it is up to them.

Also, if Brahma Baba enters and leaves, (at his free will), the corporeal body of Virendra Dev Dixit in which Shiv is always present, (according to them), that would imply that the soul of BB is the RIDER or CHARIOTEER, and the souls of Virendra Dev Dixit and Shiv combined would take the secondary position of the 'Chariot', making the soul of BB superior even to ShivBaba or God. Do not their presumptuous assumptions blatantly and glaringly imply such baseless and ridiculous insinuations??? Leaving Shiv aside, even if BB is supposed to be entering and leaving the corporeal body of Virendra Dev Dixit at will, that in itself would mean that BB is the CHARIOTEER and Virendra Dev Dixit is the 'Chariot', making BB MORE POWERFUL than the soul of Virendra Dev Dixit, is it not? Or, can the PBKs not understand even the very BASICS of the DIFFERENCE between the CHARIOTEER and the Chariot or the RIDER and the HORSE? How can the 'horse' be more powerful than the 'rider'? This proves the poor intellectual capability of the PBKs and their bodily guru, is it not? Besides, how can a soul with a subtle body 'ride' over a bodiless soul, like INCORPOREAL ShivBaba?
Moreover, when Brahma's soul enters in Shankar it attains temporary seed form stage. So, at that time there is no effect of the subtle body.

But, then how can Lekhraj Kirpalani misuse body of Mr Dixit?(PBKs claim so) Totally illogical.
Not a SINGLE point is being addressed in accordance with the PURE ORIGINAL INTENT of God or ShivBaba, or with any sensible degree of intellectual propriety!

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 » 13 Jan 2016

Flaw No. 80) Totally illogical:-
We see Shiv through Shankar and not Krishna. And Murli says that you should always think that it is ShivBaba who speaks and not any other bodily soul or the Chariot.
Double standards. But, OK. [Whenever PBKs wish to hide errors of Mr Dixit, they will point at Lekhraj Kirpalani, as the scapegoat].
Dada Lekhraj is only Golden Age Krishna and not Confluence Age Krishna.
Then why do PBKs call B baba as Krishna at present, by interpreting the points relating to Krishna of G A, as meant for Brahma Baba of Confluence Age? Again double standards? Again violation of Shrimat and acting superior to ShivBaba? But, all the best.
Sister Vedanti's name has not been taken in AIVV literature or CDs anywhere. She is only referred to as the head of Vijaymala or Confluence Age Lakshmi. Just as the Confluence Age Narayan developed faith about his part in 1976, similarly the Confluence Age Lakshmi developed faith in her part as Lakshmi in 1976. One developed faith on the basis of knowledge and the other on the basis of visions.
PBKs utter word sister Vedanti in their 7 days course itself. They show her in their Trimurti picture as well. Again lies dear. But, OK.

Now, if PBKs believe sister Vedanti developed faith that she is Conf. Aged Lakshmi on the basis of vision in 1976, would not she search for the so called Conf Aged Narayan as well, and be with him all along, in practical?

Also- what is the proof that she got vision in 1976?

But, how Mr Dixit got knowledge? By his own churning or by entrance of ShivBaba? When Shiv first spoke through Mr Dixit and who all realized it?
Irrelevant question. When BK Vedanti had not accepted Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit as Shankar or Narayan and when she had not at all entered AIVV, how can she become the senior mother? It was Jagdamba who entered AIVV before her and remained in AIVV for a long period and also gave sustenance because of which she got the title of senior mother.
I never said PBKs call sister Vedanti as senior mother. You only assumed so. I said- since PBKs believe sister Vedanti and Mr Dixit took birth (got revealed) as LN in 1976 itself before Kamala Devi who came much later, how can kamala Devi be called as senior mother?*
She is a BK for all others, but for PBKs she is the junior mother. We see her as a mother only.
Reply Not clear. The question was whether PBKs consider her as BK or PBK? Seems that they neither believe her as Bk, nor PBK. But still mother. Do PBKs believe that sister Vedanti had begun to play role mother from 1976 itself?

So, as per PBKs, their so called Conf Aged Lakshmi got birth by VISION, and Narayan got birth by some INSPIRATION in 1976, and their SENIOR/REAL MOTHER came only after 1983. So, without their REAL MOTHER, the CHILD(smaller mother) took birth.

And, even birth of Mr Dixit was not through MOUTH. PBKs believe Sevakram took alowkik birth through mouth of their Adi Brahma in 1936. But here, Mr Dixit took birth WITHOUT KAMALA DEVI! PBKs believe God had entered first in Adi Brahma in 1936, but, here, it is Kamala Devi who came last to Yagya!(got revealed only after Mr. Dixit and Vedanti)


PBKs are also confused what title should be given to the children from 1942 till 1947. They do not even know what title is fit for their OWN MOTHERs in that period whom they believe had been controlling the entire Yagya!

*- Now, if PBKs believe birth of sister Vedanti in 1976 is not real, it was just vision, etc, and not fit for title PBK? So, in practical, just Narayan took birth, not Lakshmi? ...?

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

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by fluffy bunny » 14 Jan 2016

mbbhat wrote:Flaw No. 80) Totally illogical:-
I said it before and I'll say it again.

Until you do the Advance Course, you don't know what you are talking about. All you are doing is proving you don't know. That you were a bad student of the poor teachers you listened to in an informal situation. No matter how BIG and HOW RED you say, until you do, you are wasting your time.

Imagine I met some university students in a tea shop, and listened to them talk, and then left saying universities are stupid and don't know what they are talking about ... I never even entered the university or met their teacher ... that is exactly what you are doing.

OK, so now you have conquered this forum to carry out your campaign against the PBKs, taking advantage of Shivsena's tiredness ... well, if you want to be successful, you're going to have to study PBKism systematically and start at the beginning by doing the course.

All you are doing at present is proving you're wrong and confused ... again, and again, and again.

You're wasting your time because you simply don't know. Even I can see that.

You don't need to "believe" in PBKism to study it. You don't need to study it to "believe". Even if all you want to do is destroy Virendra Dev Dixit, then you are going to have to study him at first hand, and properly. If you don't, you don't know what you are talking about.

And you cannot accuse the PBKs, because the BKs are FAMOUS in India for avoiding direct debates with religious scholars, pundits, etc.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself well, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.
If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.

If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

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 » 14 Jan 2016

Dear fluffy bunny,

I think the arguments of mbbhat are well informed and he is making valid points. I don't know why you attack him again and again.

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

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by fluffy bunny » 14 Jan 2016

Do you think he would benefit by doing the Advance Course systematically, and speaking to Virendra Dev Dixit/senior teachers in person?

That's the point I am making. What's the point to all this?

He's spoken to a few students and decided what he thinks of an entire university.

If he hasn't done it and hasn't met, how can he know?

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 » 14 Jan 2016

# Flaw No. 81)Why Mr Dixit and the other two mothers took so much time to return back?

Baba says- If a GOOD BK leaves body, (s)he is likely to take gyaan during CHILDHOOD itself in the next birth. But, Mr Dixit took 27 years to come back, and Kamala Devi took even more time.

More interestingly, Gitamata (whom PBKs believe same soul of kamala Devi), should have been in her 50s during 1936 as per PBKs. Now, Kamala Devi took birth very late, around 1970s and came to Gyan in around 1983. What was she doing for such a long period? Where do such shootings fit in their time cycle?

Also, Baba says- The RECORD of top most souls would be RIGHTEOUS from beginning till end. But, the record of the top souls of AIVV are out of order or ambiguous for so many years.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11585
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by arjun » 14 Jan 2016

mbbhat wrote:Has Baba said anywhere kanyas should not live in group? And- which is better? To continue in gyaan by any means or marry? Or do you believe no kanya in AIVV has ability to do so, that is why She recommends so? Or kanyas living so is like disservice?
Why will He say when He knows and has said umpteen number of times that the Iron-Age world is dangerous place for the virgins to live openly. They are chased and troubled by Keechaks, Duryodhans and Dushasans. Whether virgins live alone or in groups, they will be harrassed by the lustful men. And that is why Baba never made such a recommendation. But you do because you think you are greater than ShivBaba. You think you are greater than the greatest among the BKs. You think you are the mahapundit among the BKs who can purify the virgins with your purity. That is why you are giving them such suggestions. See the Murli point below if you haven't:

“शरीर निर्वाह भी करना है। ऐसे नहीं कहा जाता कि कन्या को भी शरीर निर्वाह अर्थ माथा मारना है। कन्या को पति के पास रहना है। शरीर निर्वाह पति को करना है।“ (रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक ८.०३.०८, पृ. ३ एवं ४)

“One should also earn his/her livelihood. It is not said that the virgin should also spoil her head for earning her livelihood. A virgin should live with her husband. The husband should earn for their livelihood.” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 08.03.08, pg 3&4)
Now, the point is- what was their title from 1942 to 1947- BK? But, as per PBKs, ShivBaba still had not entered B Baba till 1947, but had been coming in the other mother till 1947. So, what was the title during 1942 to 1947? BK, or anything else?
Baba has said that in whomsoever I enter is a Brahma. So, they were definitely Brahmakumar-kumaris (BKs) but not PBKs. The mention of Prajapita can be found in the Murlis only after Mama left her body.
PBKs believe ShivBaba entered in Lekhraj Kirpalani only in 1947 and the entire Yagya was in control of the two mothers and ShivBaba used to enter in mothers. Then how can Lekhraj Kirpalani assume even title holder Brahma from 1942 to 1947 as per PBK logic?
The Yagya in the beginning was a result of visions (saakshaatkaars) which were caused to and from Brahma Baba primarily. So, he was the focus of attention and not the mothers. So, it was natural for Lekhraj Kirpalani to assume that title.
And- if PBKs believe there was none from 1969 till 1976, then the PBK concept of TITLE HOLDER logic loses its value greatly. [PBKs say- In the absence of Father/principal, someone takes charge of it]. If PBKs can say- B Baba was title holder Prajapita forperiod 1947 till 1969, why not give the same title to the other mothers from 1942 to 1947 and Prakashmani Dadiji from 1969 till 1976 (or till 1983 when AIVV Practically started)?
The above logic does not apply to the period from 1969 to 1976 because the BKWSU had developed very strongly by then and ShivBaba/Brahma Baba was guiding them indirectly through Gulzar Dadiji. So, you cannot say that the Yagya was orphan or without any guide at that time.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests