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: 3261
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 29 Mar 2016

# Flaw No. 209) PBKs trying to collect milk fallen on the floor:-
No, it is not the Murli through Brahma Baba that causes downfall. It is the way we read it. We can see truth in it, we can churn on it and elevate ourselves, but we can also follow it blindly like Bhakti. It is about how we follow.
1)If the way WE read is the one that matters, would the PBKs now say, that the word "Pitashree" put in Sakar Murlis is actually not a wrong?
FOR ONCE, YOU HAVE ARRIVED AT THE CORRECT CONCLUSION THAT -Virendra Dev Dixit, THE BODILY GURU OF THE PBKs, CAUSES THEM TO DELUSIVELY FOLLOW - (THE CORRUPTED & ADULTERATED MISINTERPRETATIONS & MISAPPROPRIATIONS OF THE WORDS OF REAL ShivBaba OR GOD IN THE SMs AND AVs, WHICH WERE SPOKEN THROUGH BRAHMA BABA) - BLINDLY, LIKE Bhakti - AND IT IS ALL ABOUT HOW THEY (MIS)UNDERSTAND AND FOLLOW THE WRONG PATH OF Ravan Rajya TOWARDS DEGRADATION & PERDITION!!!

2)But- PBKs believe God himself played role of (only) a mother, They openly say- God did not play role of F, T and G through B Baba. So, now WHOM ARE THEY BLAMING? Whose mistake is it? Is it the way we read, or God did not give enough clarification?

Whatever PBKs may try to justify, they would be mutually contradicting with their own statements- as already put in the flaw No. 173 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51149&hilit ... ree#p51149 .
The head of the Vijaymala, as we understand it, is not the moon. It is not the moon who becomes the sun. But someone following the moon become like the moon and when the same one follows the sun he becomes like the sun.

3)PBKs say- till almost end, moon controls/rides Sun/Shankar. And- PBKs believe when moon (DLR) takes birth he then automatically becomes sun dynasty. Where is following here?
--PBKs believe even sister Vedanti would be (not sure) like moon dynasty only, till almost end of Conf Age- as she is part of BKWSU at present, and they themselves say that she has not yet recognized the role of their Chariot till now. So- she too would be like moon (in PBK view). And- when would she begin to follow sun? After coming to AIVV? in year 2016?

You may see here- some discussions are put here. - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42388&hilit=umpteen#p42388 .

4)BK view is simple- Highest is sun, next is moon.
--In Conf. Age, ShivBaba is highest, next is B baba. So, Shiv is sun, and B baba is moon.
--In heaven, (there is no ShivBaba). So, LN would be sun dynasty, and RS would be moon dynasty.
--------------

# Flaw No. 210) Is aim of PBKs to create heaven or hell?
Mothers are inferiors in the Iron age. In the laws of Manu, it is said that woman has to be protected by her Father, husband or child. This is the situation now. But then they become Shivshakti, when given protection by ShivBaba.
5)So- are PBKs going to create heaven or hell? So- are PBKs saying, till almost end, the mothers are going to draw/receive energy from (only) a human being(Dixit)? Their mental Yaad would be with human sun(Mr Dixit)? And, from this Yaad, they become ShivShaktis? Yaad of them becomes accurate only after they become Shiv Shaktis? And- they receive protection from Shiv only in the end? In the end, does a gyaani soul need a protection? Because people will bow down to Shiv Shaktis.

Moreover- who are husband and child here? According to manu, each mother/female has her own Father, husband or child/son. So- do you say - in AIVV, each female should do Yaad with her lowkik Father, husband, etc? And- what about males in AIVV? They are exempted from this low level of Yaad?

6) So- funny thing here is- By receiving energy from one or multiple (not sure), mothers/females can become Shiv Shaktis. Great logic, indeed.

BTW- in this link- arjun had said- purity of sister Vedanti is cowardice - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42267#p42267
There is also Anusuya, who make even BVS their children....

Just Bhakti kanras. You may believe so.
Like in our path of knowledge in the beginning there used to be clarification of the Gita and later the Murlis came. It is the Gita that is our religious scripture and not the vedas.

7)In the beginning, since there was nothing, so those were used temporarily. And- the sanscrit Gita were NOT words of God. But, here- PBKs believe Murlis were words of God.
8)BKs do not depend on lowkik Gita at present. They had left it VERY SOON, even before 1947 itself. Their service activities are also not dependent on lowkik Gita. It is based on their own pictures, seven days course, and then Murlis.
-- But, for PBKs, their whole knowledge, service are STILL dependent on BKWSU Murlis and Vanis. They believe till almost end, false Gita episode will continue in AIVV as well, in one or other way- like B baba reading the false Gita(SM and AVs), and Bull controlling Shankar, creating eclipse, etc.

8) But, you have contradicted in your own words- as you had said- in point 1). BKs believe in whatever way they may read lowkik Gita, that will not uplift them. But, you meant/implied- by reading in RIGHT way, we will get all the necessary things from Murlis.

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 » 29 Mar 2016

1)If the way WE read is the one that matters, do PBKs now say that the word "Pitashree" put in Sakar Murlis is actually not a wrong?
Everything is right, according to the drama.
2)But- PBKs believe God himself played role of (only) a mother, They openly say- God did not play role of F, T and G through B Baba. So, now WHOM ARE THEY BLAMING? Whose mistake it is? Is it the way we read, or God did not give enough clarification?
I don't know what mistake are you talking about. There is no mistake. How can advance knowledge be given to small children. The role through Brahma is perfect for its time.
4)BK view is simple- Highest is sun, next is moon.
--In Conf. Age, ShivBaba is highest, next is B Baba. So, Shiv is sun, and B Baba is moon.
--In heaven, (there is no ShivBaba). So, LN would be sun dynasty, and RS would be moon dynasty.
Brahma Baba is moon. But Brahma baba takes birth as Krishna and takes birth in the sun dynasty. So his Father must be of the sun dynasty. The moon does not become the sun, but the moon reflects the light of the sun.
5)So- are PBKs going to create heaven or hell? So- are PBKs saying, till almost end, the mothers are going to draw/receive energy from (only) a human being(Dixit)? Their mental Yaad would be with human sun(Mr Dixit)? And, from this Yaad, they become ShivShaktis? Yaad of them becomes accurate only after they become Shiv Shaktis? And- they receive protection from Shiv only in the end? In the end, does a gyaani soul need a protection? Because people will bow down to Shiv Shaktis.
People cannot create heaven. People create hell. The protection is the hand of Shrimat.
8) But, you have contradicted in your own words- as you had said- in point 1). BKs believe in whatever way they may read lowkik Gita, that will not uplift them. But, you meant/implied- by reading in RIGHT way, we will get all the necessary things from Murlis.
In the beginning, when the Murlis were not there, there was the clarifications of the Gita, these clarifications were accurate and were knowledge. In the history, in the beginning, when it is created, every scripture has some truth in it, because the one who had created it used to have some purity in his mind. Then the world degrades, mind of people degrades, clarifications they make degrade.

As I have said, clarification can be made or truth can be seen even in the newspaper. It depends on the mind with which you make the clarification. Through the Shrimat of the incorporeal one we get salvation, when human beings give clarifications we degrade.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 30 Mar 2016

# Flaw No. 211) PBKs inadvertently imply - there is no need of either scripture, Murlis or Vanis. Just a newspaper is enough:-
I don't know what mistake are you talking about. There is no mistake. How can Advanced Knowledge be given to small children. The role through Brahma is perfect for its time.
1)Many times- you do not understand the point of argument. Is it not the PBKs who claim, "God just gave narrations of Gita - through DLR", and the SAME GOD gave/gives clarifications through Dixit? And- say/imply that there is need of additional Chariot and second role of God?- and take another spiritual birth.

2)Also- why PBKs say- the Sakar Murlis are false Gita and the clarifications are true Gita? Actually PBKs should say(as per their these arguments) - Sakar Murlis are true Gita*, and clarifications are Gita's clarifications. HOW COME the QUESTION of FALSE Gita ARISES?- (in PBK view)

* 3)PBKs may say- Avyakt Vanis are false Gita - as in their view - it is just Krishna there. But, they will themselves get trapped in their own view- because they give clarifications even to Avyakt Murlis or Vanis. See how many suicides PBKs and Mr dixit together are committing. But, as an ADDICTED person, they will not be in a position to realize it now.
Brahma Baba is moon. But Brahma Baba takes birth as Krishna and takes birth in the sun dynasty. So his Father must be of the sun dynasty. The moon does not become the sun, but the moon reflects the light of the sun.
4)No need. Because he had already drawn energy from Sun (incorporeal ShivBaba) in his previous birth. He had been son of ShivBaba in his previous birth. PBKs can see only corporeal Father. So, they do not understand even after replying. They again ask same questions again and again.

Sun means independent. Moon means dependent. In Conf Age, B baba is moon, because he is dependent on ShivBaba. In Golden Age, he is independent, and almost fully glowing as if like a sun.

But, from Silver Age, the glow reduces- so the name becomes moon dynasty. [Even B baba will get name moon dynasty from Silver Age- in his later births].

5)The ridiculous logic of PBKs:- PBKs call Mr Dixit as sun. But, how is he Sun? They cannot explain even a bit. They still believe the Sun is an EFFORT-MAKER. Even in lowkik world, a sun cannot be influenced by moon, even to a slightest extent. But, here in PBK view- the moon rides on sun. :laugh:
People cannot create heaven. People create hell. The protection is the hand of Shrimat.
6)It is not just people. It was said about gyaani tu atmas. Is AIM of gyaani tu atmas also to create hell by following scriptures of Manu- that too, till almost end of Conf Age?
In the beginning, when the Murlis were not there, there was the clarifications of the Gita, these clarifications were accurate and were knowledge.
7)I do not believe so. Because, there was concept of Aham Brahmaasmi- "I am God, you are God, everyone is God. " It is definitely against the truth. Also soul and God was initially considered to be ling shaped or thumb, (the point of light concept came only later) But, those pure feelings will have some benefit temporarily. According to your argument, it implies that- it is OK to continue with the same knowledge.
In the history, in the beginning, when it is created, every scripture has some truth in it, because the one who had created it used to have some purity in his mind. Then the world degrades, mind of people degrades, clarifications they make degrade.
8)I (or we) am not talking about SOME. I am talking about FULL. Because we are discussing TG and FG.

And- everyone knows there would be some truth in everything. Baba says- the soul battery never becomes zero.

Also- some truth in every religion- exists even now, not just in the beginning when it had been created. I have put all these views in say- post No. 128 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... cret#p4375. But, the ultimate Truth is God and drama. This is to be understood. "Was there full or enough knowledge of God and drama in the beginning of Yagya?" - This was my point.
As I have said, clarification can be made or truth can be seen even in the newspaper. It depends on the mind with which you make the clarification. Through the Shrimat of the incorporeal one we get salvation, when human beings give clarifications we degrade.
9)Then better Mr Dixit or God (in PBK view) give clarifications from a newspaper. Why need of Murlis or Vanis or even Bhakti scriptures? :laugh:

And- "in their view" - every scripture can be given title Gita. Just think- why Gita is called mother of all the scriptures? Because it defintely has something special in it.

10) BTW- a GREAT POINT TO BE NOTED IS - ShivBaba HAS SAID IN Murlis -

--- Sometimes as - "Gita IS MOTHER OF ALL THE SCRIPTURES. "
--- Sometimes as - "Gita IS MOTHER AND Father OF ALL THE SCRIPTURES. "
But, mostly PBKs do not touch the later ones, as they equate Gita to a female form. Let us see how drama goes.

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 » 30 Mar 2016

It is a a double machinery. First shudras are made into brahmins, then these brahmins are made into deities. First people from the outside world of the path of Bhakti are taken and they are given the Murli, then these brahmins are taught to become deities. That is why in the beginning the Gita from the path of Bhakti was being clarified and now the Murli is being clarified.

For the Avyakt Vanis it is said that the temporary part that is being played through the sandeshis (messangers) cannot be called Murli, because it does not contain the power of the transformation. That is why it is said that the Murlis have to be revised. If the Avyakt Vanis were the advanced form of Murli, why it is said that the Murlis have to be revised and why not study the Avyakt Vanis only.

The difference between the sun and the moon is that moon gives cool light, it has cool nature whilst the sun is hot. On the path of Bhakti, for hundreds of years it has been said that the god of the Gita is Krishna. When Brahma Baba develops faith that I am to become Krishna in the Golden Age, when he starts narrating Murlis from Karachi, his faith becomes firm that the corporeal form of God that is revealed to the world, this is the present form of Brahma. So it takes time for the concept of Shiv-Shankar as God of the Gita to be established, but once it is established, then the study of the soul of Krishna will commence and he will be getting power from the sun, then his nature would also change, the cool nature will turn to destruction. Brahma is Jagadamba and it is the Shaktis who do the destruction. Shankar gives inspiration.

When it is said that Gita is mother or mother and Father, it means there are children. The other scriptures are like creation.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 » 31 Mar 2016

# Flaw No 212) Erroneous Arguments due to Erroneous Understanding & Misinterpretations:-
For the Avyakt Vanis it is said that the temporary part that is being played through the sandeshis (messangers) cannot be called Murli
1)It is NOT SAID for the Avyakt Murlis or Vanis, it is said for the trance messages through the sandeshis.
You may interpret in any way you like. It does not matter. Because- see 2).
If the Avyakt Vanis were the advanced form of Murli, why it is said that the Murlis have to be revised and why not study the Avyakt Vanis only.
2)Baba has said- "main teachings are already over". - Post No. 117 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... &start=160

So, from where the question of claiming Avyakt Murlis as greater to Sakar Murlis arise? [Where is it said they are of advanced form? Quote Murli points, if you have any.]
---You or PBKs assume somethings of your/their own, and say something irrelevant, and continue to generate and propagate BLATANT lies (MANY TIMES), and the PBKs themselves get trapped in these WEB of DECEPTIVE LIES - which is intended by Ravan or Maya.
---Both Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Murlis are given importance due to the reasons already mentioned. Baba/BapDada gives advanced hints in Avyakt Murlis, and carries out drill, as necessary.

3)BTW- Why do PBKs need Avyakt Murlis, why do they use even trance messages, sometimes? Why not use just Sakar Murlis? Double standards, is it not?
On the path of Bhakti, for hundreds of years it has been said that the god of the Gita is Krishna. When Brahma Baba develops faith that I am to become Krishna in the Golden Age, when he starts narrating Murlis from Karachi, his faith becomes firm that the corporeal form of God that is revealed to the world, this is the present form of Brahma.
So it takes time* for the concept of Shiv-Shankar as God of the Gita to be established, but once it is established, then the study of the soul of Krishna will commence and he will be getting power from the sun, then his nature would also change, the cool nature will turn to destruction. Brahma is Jagadamba and it is the Shaktis who do the destruction. Shankar gives inspiration.
4)Has the study of Child Krishna not yet commenced in AIVV?
6) Actually, if we see there, it is PBKs who study even from Child Krishna. In their view, , Avyakt Murlis are words of just Child Krishna. They believe God gives clarifications even to words spoken by Child Krishna.

7)But in BK view- lowkik Gita are NOT words of Krishna. BKs believe lowkik Gita is yaadgaar of words of God only, but also has mixtures, because of long gap, and they are written by human beings later. BKs believe the name Krishna has been placed in it, instead if Shiv (through Brahma).
But, in their own words, PBKs study even the scripture which contain - all the words- 100% of them which belong to just "Krishna only"- the Avyakt Murlis/Vanis

So- even if God had used the lowkik Gita to give clarifications as a temporary measure- (which is the BK view) it will not be like such a low level of PBKs who read the words of just Child Krishna (in their view). Moreover, God has to adopt his own scripture, as said in Post No. 11- http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 7&start=10.

If PBKs also like to argue in the same way- they lose validity. Because it would look improper, for God to give clarifications of words of someone else. This is what has been said before- by giving Avyakt Murli a great importance, and inviting Child Krishna in Dixit, he has committed spiritual suicide.

8)On one hand, PBKs say- yaadgaars would be of end stage. So if at end stage, it is Shiv-Shankar who would be revealed as God of Gita- why in yaadgaar, there is name of Child Krishna?

*9) Another great controversy is- I think PBKs may agree that (physical) part of Dixit is much more than part of Child Krishna, even in Conf Age. (Am I right?) In their view, part of Child Krishna was just from 1947 till 1969, as Chariot. But, Mr Dixit played role of Chariot from 1976(or 80s- whatever they may take) till date. So- which duration is higher? So- even from this point of view- yaadgaar should have been of their one, is it not?

*9b)B baba might have developed faith that he is the Chariot, but if no one else in the world recognizes him as the Chariot, and if he just has faith by himself for himself, how can that be criteria for yaadgaar?

*9c)Suppose say- even if we consider even Avyakt role of (Child Krishna) also into this, even then Avyakt Murlis are spoken just few days in a year. But, the frequency of Mr Dixit giving his clarification classes would be more, I think (you may mention totally how many clarification classes he has given, and the current frequency of giving such classes - whether everyday, or otherwise).

*9d) Even in BKWSU, no BK believes God of Gita to be Krishna (or even just B Baba). They believe it is Shiv or Shiv through Brahma (PBKs may take it as Shiv through Child Krishna or Shiv through (just Brahma, not Prajapita) "in their view" So- who has done the 'shooting' of 'God of Gita', as Krishna MORE?

Some related points are also said in flaw No. - 173.
When it is said that Gita is mother or mother and Father, it means there are children. The other scriptures are like creation.
10) That is fine. This is even from BK point of view. I expected PBKs to explain this from the point of LIVING Gitas. That you did not try. But, I agree it is not a necessity.

11) But- a question to PBKs- As PBKs believe all the seed souls of all religions are already present in AIVV or BKWSU (not sure)- when there is TG and FG, why not True and False scriptures (living and non living) in OTHER religions too? If they wish, they may reply.

According to them, many 'shooting' have already taken place. Even some splinter groups have come up.

In BK view:- Other religious heads will come only in the end, during or after revelation. So, no question of 'false' there.

======
sita wrote:It is a a double machinery. First shudras are made into Brahmins, then these Brahmins are made into deities. First people from the outside world of the path of Bhakti are taken and they are given the Murli, then these Brahmins are taught to become deities. That is why in the beginning the Gita from the path of Bhakti was being clarified and now the Murli is being clarified.
From - viewtopic.php?f=40&t=2602&start=75#p51238
" Ravan, through the ‘mukrar-rath’ of Ravan, indoctrinates the Unrighteous children into DELUSIVELY believing that God DOES NOT TEACH through BB or soul of DLR; and ONLY changes 'Shudras' into 'Brahmins' through soul of DLR; while the task of changing those 'Brahmins' into Deities is carried out through another embodied soul; WHEREAS, such other embodied soul is ACTUALLY instrumental to change them into Demons, in order to carry out the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya, TREACHEROUSLY TRICKING them into DELUSIVELY BELIEVING that they are being transformed into Deities ".

From the points of Knowledge in above post, it becomes CLEAR, to ALL CONCERNED, that REAL ShivBaba or God transforms 'Shudras' into 'Brahmins', by FIRST giving them Spiritual re-birth, through the LOTUS mouth of REAL Prajapita Brahma, Brahma Baba or soul of DLR - as the Spiritual Mother-Father of the concerned Righteous Children, by re-planting the 'SEED' of Knowledge into their INTELLECTS; and THEN, IMMEDIATELY proceeds to transform these re-born 'Brahmins' into Deities, by SIMULTANEOUSLY TEACHING them, and giving them proper comprehension of the Knowledge, through the VERY SAME LOTUS mouth/intellect of REAL Prajapita Brahma, Brahma Baba or soul of DLR (first in 'Sakar' until 1969, and then in 'Akar' to date) - as the Spiritual TEACHER of the concerned Righteous Children, (by facilitating the CLEAR emergence of the subtlest aspects of Knowledge into their INTELLECTS, which get PROGRESSIVELY PURIFIED, with the passage of time, with ACCURATE & UNADULTERATED remembrance), - thus carrying out the 'shooting' and establishment of RamRajya through His 'mukrar-rath' of REAL Prajapita Brahma, BB or soul of DLR.

SIMULTANEOUSLY, APPARENT 'ShivBaba' or Ravan, SENSING A THREAT TO VERY OWN EXISTENCE, vigorously embarks on the task of transforming as many of these newly re-born 'Brahmins' back into 'Shudras', by COMPLETELY 'DEADENING' their INTELLECTS, through the BOGUS mouth of APPARENT 'Prajapita Brahma', APPARENT 'Shankar' or soul of -Virendra Dev Dixit - as the DEMONIAC Mother-Father of the concerned Unrighteous children, by re-planting the 'seed' of REVERSED advanced knowledge into their intellects;
and THEN, proceeds to transform those rejuvenated 'Shudras' into STAUNCH Demons, by SIMULTANEOUSLY INDOCTRINATING them with the CORRUPTED & ADULTERATED clarifications of the REVERSED advanced knowledge, through the VERY SAME BOGUS mouth/intellect of APPARENT 'Prajapita Brahma', APPARENT 'Shankar' or soul of -Virendra Dev Dixit - as the DEMONIAC TEACHER of the concerned Unrighteous Children, (by facilitating the emergence of the distorted aspects of the REVERSED advanced knowledge into their INVERTED INTELLECTS, which get PROGRESSIVELY CORRUPTED with the passage of time with INACCURATE & ADULTERATED remembrance), - thus carrying out the 'shooting' and establishment of Ravan Rajya through Ravan's 'mukrar-rath' of APPARENT 'Prajapita Brahma', APPARENT 'Shankar' or soul of -Virendra Dev Dixit!

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 » 31 Mar 2016

The Avyakt Vanis and sometimes trance messages are clarified, because they are above our understanding. Like the film songs used to be clarified. The ones who have written them themselves did not know their meaning. In the same way we know the meaning of the Avyakt Vanis when they are clarified. But apart from this, in the Avyakt Vanis there are such matters about dharna that can be put into practice. In the Murli it is said that we have to follow Brahma. The points of dharna - we can follow these, that's why we study the Avyakt Vani.

Memorials are of the Confluence Age. When it is said that Krishna is the God of the Gita, it does not mean Krishna from the Golden Age, it means Krishna of the Confluence Age. But whether it is Krishna of the Golden Age or Krishna of the Confluence Age, both are human beings. God does not become a human being, but he enters into a human being, into the confluence aged Krishna, but still that is a separate soul. This combination of two souls, on the path of Bhakti is known as Shiv-Shankar, not Shiv-Krishna. This is with respect to the actual giver of knowledge, that is not the human soul, but the Supreme Father.

Then, one can argue that the form of Brahma was that God who is a combination of two souls, he was Krishna of the Confluence Age, he was Shiv-Shankar. But in the Murli it is said that Brahma is a separate soul and Shankar is a separate soul.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 Apr 2016

# Flaw No. 213) Silly tricks of Mr Dixit, trying to maintain his 'Jhutsang':-
sita wrote:The Avyakt Vanis and sometimes trance messages are clarified, because they are above our understanding. Like the film songs used to be clarified. The ones who have written them themselves did not know their meaning. In the same way we know the meaning of the Avyakt Vanis when they are clarified.
1)Clever argument, but it is again ONE-SIDED and EMPTY INSIDE. Because Avyakt Murlis give MANY directions, straight away, without any ambiguity whatsoever. Adequate clarifications have already been posted on this forum, and CONTINUE to be posted.
But- Mr Dixit while giving his so-called 'advanced clarifications' goes against majority of the Murli points. And- ShivBaba never certifies those film songs or the lowkik Gita* as- words of God (or the Chariot).
Also- ShivBaba has taken responsibility for even the words of Brahma Baba.
---So- there is such a GREAT DIFFERENCE of DAY & NIGHT between Sakar Murlis (or Avyakt Murlis), and film songs (or lowkik Gita) - which are incomparable.
* - Again- all those clarifications were of just side scenes for BKs, and for temporary use ONLY.

2)But, countless errors, and blunders of Mr Dixit, put on the forum, PROVE the 'clarification' DISABILITY of Mr Dixit.
The difference between the sun and the moon is that moon gives cool light, it has cool nature whilst the sun is hot. ....Shankar gives inspiration.
3)The above was the reply for the question asked - "how Mr Dixit is a sun". But, if we practically ANALYSE the role of Mr Dixit in Conf Age -
---Mr Dixit/SEvakram failed in 1942. (in their OWN view - DOES the ELEMENTAL SUN EVER FAIL???).
---He was playing role of thorn till 1969. (in their own view).
----Mr. Dixit was sent to jail, after being SLAPPED and BEATEN by the Police.
----Mr Dixit even dozes while giving drusthi.
----Mr Dixit needs letter of faith, on STAMP paper from the students.
---Mr Dixit sometimes even requires the 7-DAY 'bhatti' to be undergone, once AGAIN, and demands a letter of faith, once again, from those students, who argue or question more. (mostly I am right, else- I will take back my words).
--- Most of the time in Conf Age, moon rides of sun.
(DOES the elemental MOON EVER ride the elemental SUN)???

4) So- Is Shankar giving inspiration or clarifications? PBKs believe the words- inspiration, subtle body, etc- are all low levels. But, they never hesitate to use it. let them use it. If they wish, they may list what all and to whom all Mr Dixit has given inspiration so far. At least they may express - whether he had sent inspiration to their own Jagadamba.
Memorials are of the Confluence Age.....But, in the Murli....
4) Not answering to the point. Also- one sided argument. Murlis clearly say- 'Gaayan' or PRAISE is of Braahmins and 'poojan' or WORSHIP is of Deities. So, it is of both. Murli clearly says- when there is Brahma, THERE CANNOT BE Krishna.

You may take isolated Murli points, and play your OWN flute, to YOUR HEART's CONTENT!

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 » 04 Apr 2016

And- ShivBaba never certifies those film songs or the lowkik Gita* as- words of God
Yes, but the clarifications of the film songs are words of God.
4) So- Is Shankar giving inspiration or clarifications?
The clarifications, the words act as inspiration.
'poojan' or WORSHIP is of Deities.
The Deities of the Confluence Age.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 Apr 2016

# 214) PBKs inadvertently bring down the Murlis (Godly versions) to the level of lowkik film songs, and again commit spiritual suicide:-

1)Mr. Dixit has brought level of God to a human being, or even lower- as already put. Now to the next one.

Continuing from previous post- Flaw No. 213:-
sita wrote:Yes, but the clarifications of the film songs are words of God.
2)ShivBaba says- I give the essence of the Vedas, scriptures, etc. So, Baba takes few words from scriptures, Gita, newspapers, or songs. But, Baba usually says- "Bhaktimarg ke shaastron may AATEY MAY NAMAK misal theek hai = The truth in the scriptures of Bhaktimarg is just to the extent of a pinch of SALT, when compared to the GROSS."

[Sometimes Baba even says- inmay sach ki raththi bhee naheen = there is NO TRACE of truth even.
jhoothee Gita ko haath bhee lagaaney ki darkaar naheen hai = There is no need even to touch the false lowkik Gita. Sometimes baba may exaggerate to make children realize that there is need to turn 180 degrees from what all you had studied earlier, before coming into the Knowledge.]

3)So, by comparing the words of God to film songs, PBKs have brought down the level of Murlis to the level of lowkik film songs- A GREAT CRIME indeed.

4)But, ShivBaba has taken VERY FEW WORDS from there. There can be lakhs of even crores of film songs and newspapers. But, has ShivBaba given clarifications for all those words? Definitely NOT.
But- Mr Dixit takes plenty of Murlis, Vanis, trance messages, and gives his clarifications. As said previously, Mr Dixit and PBKs still HEAVILY depend on the so called* film songs, newspapers (in their view)

*5) - PBKs imply - Murlis/Vanis are LIKE (or can be compared to) film songs or newspapers. And, they extensively study them, even use them to highest extent. So, they inadvertently imply that their level is also equal to (or not much better than) the lowkik film songs, newspapers, or scriptures, is it not?

This is another example of spiritual suicide of Mr Dixit and his followers.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 Apr 2016

# Flaw No. 215)PBKs inadvertently imply Vishnu/Krishna-so-Brahma in one birth:-

# Flaw No. 216) PBKs inadvertently imply God enters in Krishna:-
sita wrote:the Deities of the Confluence Age.
6)More insight into the silly clarifications of Mr. Dixit:- According to Mr. Dixit, Krishna Jayanti took place (DLR gets TITLE Krishna) in 1936 itself.

7)But, according to PBKs, God entered in DLR in 1947, so DLR gets title Brahma only from 1947 onwards. (in their view). So, Vishnu/Krishna becomes Brahma in one/same birth?
[Baba usually says- For Vishnu/Krishna to become Brahma, it takes (nearly) 84 births or 5000 yrs.]

8)But, this leads to another great suicide of PBKs. Murlis clearly say- "I do not enter in Krishna, I enter in Brahma".
But, as per PBKs, God entered into Krishna (DLR) in 1947, and then he became Brahma.

9)By giving the title deities to the Conf Aged personalities, PBKs have committed multiple spiritual suicides. According to them, all are said for Conf Age. So, when Baba says- I do not enter into Krishna, it should refer to Conf Aged Krishna.

Interestingly, PBKs give title Krishna even to Mr Dixit. But, they believe God enters in that 'Krishna' too.

# Flaw No. 217)Is Mr Dixit just TITLE HOLDER Krishna/Brahma/Narayan?:-

10) PBKs believe Mr Dixit is still in womb period, and hence not yet taken birth fully, and not revealed EVEN TO BRAAHMIN FAMILY. So, till he is revealed (within the braahmin family, at least), is he eligible for the real title?*
So, in their own view, or from logical point of view, Mr Dixit can fit just to TITLE HOLDER POSITION, is it not?

11)And- what is Mr Dixit saying there (in womb theory)? If Mr Dixit believes he is in womb period, how can the children be outside (already taken birth)? He is saying that the child's position is already known to all (every braahmin- either Bk or PBk), but the father's position is not known. In their own view, every BK knows about himself correctly (that they become deity in their next birth).
--So, PBKs agree here that "what they know about BKs, BKs are ALREADY aware of it". Is this not a mutual contradiction?

- But, Mr Dixit HAD TO deliberately agree (say so). Else, if he gives a total different philosophy/clarification, then it will go FULLY out of the track, and there cannot be any similarity between his clarifications and BK beliefs, and no BK will have any interest to listen to his clarifications. So, HAD TO SAY - BKs know about their future properly. .

*12- But, most important thing is- let us see how Mr Dixit falls into his own trap.
---According to Mr Dixit, even the mother(DLR) DID NOT know about father. They believe the mother DLR has faith (even at present) that he himself is the real Chariot, and hence yet rides/controls the father.
---And- the mother Kamala Devi is only a false 'Gita'. And- from 1998 has left father himself, (has expressed, in writing, that she has no faith since 1998).
--- Sister Vedanti is also yet to know the role of their Chariot.

So- HOW CAN THE CHILDREN (PBKs) realize Corporeal father, when the corporeal mothers HAVE NOT YET recognized the role of Chariot/father properly? Is this not totally ABSURD (in PBK view)?

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 Apr 2016

# Flaw No. 218) Double Machinery of PBKs:-

# Flaw No. 219)PBKs inadvertently imply God's entrance can make someone impure too:-

Many times Baba uses the word - 'double' - eg- double engines, two fathers, two mothers, double light, etc. But, let us see how the machinery of PBKs looks like.

[quote=""sita"]It is a a double machinery. First shudras are made into Brahmins, then these Brahmins are made into deities. First people from the outside world of the path of Bhakti are taken and they are given the Murli, then these Brahmins are taught to become deities. That is why in the beginning the Gita from the path of Bhakti was being clarified and now the Murli is being clarified.[/quote]
1)As per PBKs, Krishna took birth in 1936 itself. So, it was a DIRECT and INSTANTANEOUS CONVERSION from a Shudra into DEITY(in 1936). Then the DEITY Krishna becomes a BRAHMIN/BRAHMA after 10 years (in 1947), when God enters him. So- God transforms even deities into braahmins? [Usually Baba says- "I transform braahmins into deities"].

2)Usually Baba says- Krishna is number one pure and Brahma is impure. So- "in PBK view", by the entrance of God into a deity/Krishna/PURE, he became Brahma/IMPURE. Is aim of God to make someone impure too?

3)As per PBKs, Krishna (1936) then becomes Brahma(in 1947), then he becomes a ghost (from 1969), then rides on Shankar, then rides Kamala Devi too. Totally HOW MANY machinery here?

4)If we take case of Mr Dixit, - "in PBK view" - he was Prajapita from 1936 till 1942, so a braahmin.
---Then he again became Shudra and started playing role of number one thorn from 1942 (sorry, after few years, when the child Dixit grows at least to some extent) till 1969.
---Then from 1969 till 1976- he was in his own churning, inside the womb.
---In 1976, the womb got matured, got title Conf Aged Narayan.
---In 2016, he will get external birth as Narayan.

HOW MANY machinery here?

5)Let us take Kamala Devi.
---From 1936 till 1947- the first machinery - from Shudra to Brahmin/Adi Brahma (but still false Gita)!
---From 1947 - again to Shudra.
---Then took birth as kamala Devi and came to gyaan in some 1970s or a little bit later.
----Got title Jagadamba in 1983, after sister Premkanta failed. (so it was borrowed from others). In this view, also Kamala Devi loses the title Adi Brahma, since it was Premkanta who had been first given chance after the so called 're- entry' story of PBKs.
---From 1998 she again became Shudra, gave letter in writing which says- she has no faith at present.
--- ...???
= CARRY ON CLEO ! = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2F1r4Jh7CA

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 » 05 Apr 2016

3)So, by comparing the words of God to film songs, PBKs have brought down the level of Murlis to the level of lowkik film songs- A GREAT CRIME indeed.
I have not compared them. Baba has clarified film songs in the Murli. We were talking about the Murli.
As per PBKs, Krishna took birth in 1936 itself.
How? I don't understand what you speak about. Which Krishna took birth in 1936?
3)As per PBKs, Krishna (1936) then becomes Brahma(in 1947), then he becomes a ghost (from 1969), then rides on Shankar, then rides Kamala Devi too. Totally HOW MANY machinery here?
Do you mean to say that because Brahma Baba realized his part as Krishna this is like his spiritual birth. OK, but you are mixing Brahma Baba with God. Double engine, the power is of the Supreme Soul, not of Brahma Baba.
---In 2016, he will get external birth as Narayan.
What do you mean by external birth of Narayan. According to the Murli, Lakshmi and Narayan took birth in 1976.
8)But, this leads to another great suicide of PBKs. Murlis clearly say- "I do not enter in Krishna, I enter in Brahma".
But, as per PBKs, God entered into Krishna (Lekhraj Kirpalani) in 1947 and then he became Brahma.

9)By giving the title deities to the Conf. Aged personalities, PBKs have committed multiple spiritual suicides. According to them, all are said for Conf. Age. So, when Baba says- I do not enter into Krishna, it should refer to Conf. Aged Krishna.
Interestingly, PBKs give title Krishna even to Mr Dixit. But, they believe God enters in that Krishna too.
That is alright. God definitely enters the soul of Krishna, but it is not the soul of Krishna who is the God of the Gita. It is the soul that enters who is the God of the Gita. This is the case if you consider the soul of Brahma Baba or Prajapita, it is not the corporeal one who is the God of the Gita, but the one that enters.

Krishna also means the one who attracts. If we like to attract others with our eyes, words, actions etc, this is not a Godly like act. Ram means the one in whom the yogis reside with their mind, in whom their mind receives relief.
has expressed that she has no faith since 1998.
No, this is not true. All the PBKs who have done the bhatti after Mama has left are given her letter to read it and there it is not said that she has no faith.
So- HOW CAN THE CHILDREN (PBKs) realize Corporeal Father without any of the corporeal mothers HAVE NOT recognized the role of Chariot/Father properly? Is this not a total ABSURD (in PBK view)?
Children fluctuate. They may even realize, but then they may come into the influence of someone.
2)ShivBaba says- I give essence of ved, scriptures, etc. So, Baba takes few words from scriptures, Gita, newspapers, or many things. But, Baba usually says- "Bhaktimarg ke shaastron may AATEY MAY NAMAK misal theek hai = The truth in the scriptures of Bhaktimarg is just to the extent of SALT when compared to the GROSS."
There was an interesting clarification about this saying that the truth in the scriptures is like the salt in the flour. We all were thinking that it means little. The quality of salt is little, but Baba has said that when we mix the salt, when we put the salt in to the water, when we put it in the flour - then the saltiness reaches every part, you can taste the salty taste in every part, the salt goes in every part. In the same way one day we will come to know the truth in every matter of the scriptures, we will receive clarification about every matter and see its truth. We can do this even now, the so-called unlimited matter. We can see every matter and see some unlimited meaning in it, it depends on what intellect we look at it with. We can read and see some truth in every matter when we tally it with the knowledge.
But- Mr Dixit takes plenty of Murlis, Vanis, trance messages, and gives his clarifications. As said previously, Mr Dixit and PBKs still HEAVILY depend on the so called* film songs newspapers (in their view)
No, I have not said that the Murli is like the songs or the newspapers. No. I said that just like the writers of the songs did not know their meaning, but write the song with some limited meaning, But then when Baba clarifies it he brings the unlimited meaning. In the same way the Murli was understood only in a limited way when spoken through Brahma Baba. When it is clarified, we understand about its unlimited meaning. Here also I don't mean that ShivBaba did not know what he was saying through Brahma Baba. No, he certainly knows very well, but neither Brahma Baba, nor the children understood. In the Murli it was said about the destruction in 76. Brahma Baba understood that there will be physical destruction, so did the children. At that time no one understood the meaning of the destruction in 76. Only later when we receive the clarification we come to know.

Similarly in the Ayakt Vanis, BapDada speaks in a limited way to the limited children who are there in front of him at mount Abu, but when Baba clarifies the Avyakt Vani, he clarifies it with an unlimited intellect and reveals the unlimited meaning to the unlimited children, who may not be physically present, but he speaks to them by emerging them.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 Apr 2016

Flaw No. 220) # PBKs trying to make fool of others, but unsuccessful, and inadvertently make COMPLETE FOOLS of themselves:-
sita wrote:I have not compared them.
You had compared. You had already IMPLIED there. You have compared Murlis to lowkik Gita, films songs. You may read your own posts.
How? I don't understand what you speak about. Which Krishna took birth in 1936?
How silly? Refer to the Murli point, in error No. 29 -
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=50566&hilit=bachchi#p50566

PBKs give title Krishna to B baba, from 1936 itself. Mr Dixit misinterpreted the Murli point, to prove that there had been three personalities. The other several failures are put there, you may read them. If you cannot understand, it is left to you. No problem.

Even after 1969, PBKs still call subtle Brahma, as Krishna - To misinterpret the Murli point which says- "Krishn ki aaney ki ghadee dikhaate hain = The instant of coming of Krishna (into womb) is shown " -
To misuse this Murli point, Mr Dixit gives title 'Krishna' to B baba, even after 1969.

So- both- to Sakar DLR, and Avyakt DLR, PBKs give title 'Krishna'.
[Not just to the soul of Krishna].

WHO took birth from (your) Gitamata in 1936? Is it Brahma, or Krishna? Lekhraj Kirpalani becomes eligible to get title Brahma only in 1947 (in PBK view).
Just like PBKs believe Mr Dixit is eligible for title "(Conf. Aged) Narayan" from 1976 itself, in the same way Mr Dixit had declared "Lekhraj Kirpalani to have title Krishna from 1936 itself". [actually in MUCH better way, as Mr. Dixit says- Krishna Jayanti had already happened in 1936 itself(FULLY), but he himself is just in WOMB).
Do you mean to say that because Brahma Baba realized his part as 'Krishna', this is like his spiritual birth. OK, but you are mixing Brahma Baba with God. Double engine, the power is of the Supreme Soul, not of Brahma Baba.
Useless argument. There is no question of mixing there (in that post). I just said that Baba uses the word "DOUBLE" many times in Murli.
You simply reacted to some other matter, which is irrelevant, and started to give your interpretation.
The point was- about 'double machinery', what you had said earlier.

BTW- I believe that in the 'double engine' - one engine is ShivBaba and one engine is B Baba. You may not agree. That is OK. The point there was- to what extent PBKs are able to prove their claims regarding 'double machinery'. List had been put there itself.
What do you mean by external birth of Narayan. According to the Murli, Lakshmi and Narayan took birth in 1976.
Guru of PBKs has said - till 2016 - Mr Dixit would be in womb only. Refer to the womb concept posted earlier in this topic - where there is link to the clarifications given by Mr Dixit.
That is alright. God definitely enters the soul of Krishna, but it is not the soul of Krishna who is the God of the Gita. It is the soul that enters who is the God of the Gita.
Do PBKs have any sense what they are speaking? See error No. 05-
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=48800&hilit=ordinary#p48800
No, this is not true. All the PBKs who have done the bhatti after Mama has left are given her letter to read it and there it is not said that she has no faith.
OK, fine. So- mostly, she has left herself, without saying anything about faith. Thank you. So, how many other PBKs, like her, have ALSO LEFT, and GONE INTO VAISHALAYA, and the others who have not left, STILL DELUSIVELY THINK or BELIEVE that those who left must STILL be having faith???
There was an interesting clarification about this saying that the truth in the scriptures is like the salt in the flour. We all were thinking that it means little. The quality of salt is little, but Baba has said that when we mix the salt, when we put the salt in to the water, when we put it in the flour - then the saltiness reaches every part, you can taste the salty taste in every part, the salt goes in every part. In the same way one day we will come to know the truth in every matter of the scriptures, we will receive clarification about every matter and see its truth. We can do this even now, the so-called unlimited matter. We can see every matter and see some unlimited meaning in it, it depends on what intellect we look at it with. We can read and see some truth in every matter when we tally it with The Knowledge.
Good. You again implied- just newspaper or film songs are enough, no need of Murlis.

There are TWO, MUTUALLY CONTRADICTORY, UNLIMITED INTERPRETATIONS to above.

1. The Righteous Children will CLEARLY PERCEIVE the MINUTE QUANTITY of TRUTH prevalent in EVERY LITTLE ASPECT of the WHOLE of the COLOSSAL FALSE SCRIPTURES of Ravan Rajya, through the CLEAR MIRROR of ACCURATE Knowledge, spoken by God, through His 'mukrar-rath' - soul of DLR - REPRESENTING the Day of the Cycle!

2. The Unrighteous children will DELUSIVELY PERCEIVE the FALSEHOOD prevalent in the WHOLE of the COLOSSAL FALSE SCRIPTURES of Ravan Rajya, and DELUSIVELY BELIEVE same to be the 'TRUTH', in EVERY LITTLE ASPECT, through the CLOUDED MIRROR of the CORRUPTED & ADULTERATED REVERSED advanced knowledge, propagated by Ravan or Maya, through the 'mukrar-rath' of Ravan, -Virendra Dev Dixit - REPRESENTING the Night of the Cycle!!!

[ BTW- this salt is VERY SIMPLE to understand. Baba says- what all has happened in 5000 yrs, the same is happening AGAIN. If we are in this 'DRAMA' consciousness, it is as good as we are connected to salt, which is present in everything, everywhere, all the time.
This is already available. There is no need of Mr Dixit for that, EXCEPT, of course, for the BLIND PBKs ].
--But, from your words, it implies that- Mr Dixit may one day try to give clarifications even to ALL the lowkik films songs, or ALL the newspapers, etc. Wish him and all of you the very best.

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 Apr 2016

When it is said Krishna, it means the soul of Krishna, Brahma Baba, Dada Lekraj, that particular person. When it is said Krishna in 36 or 69, or any age, it does not mean he is Krishna at that time. No, he becomes Krishna in the Golden Age, but the soul is the same. When it is said Krishna, it refers to the same personality - call it the soul of Krishna, Brahma Baba or Dada.

No, I have not said that just a newspaper or the Gita of Bhaktimarg is enough. Nor have i compared them to the Murli. In fact when the Gita or a film song or a newspaper is being clarified, this clarification becomes a Murli.

I was saying that one could see unlimited matters in the limited matters, and it depends on the stage of the mind. Baba teaches us to have unlimited intellect, to think only of knowledge, not to see whilst seeing, etc. We can read the Murli also with a limited and with unlimited intellect. When Baba clarifies the Murli we see new knowledge, where we used to see old. The knowledge in the Murli is not limited, but we used to read it with a limited intellect and here there is no margin for arrogance. No one knew the unlimited meaning before. We were reading the Murli and were thinking that there will be golden palaces, etc., we were taking everything literally, because through Brahma Baba, the Knowledge was only narrated, not explained.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3261
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 Apr 2016

1)You may keep on speaking open lies*, (OBVIOUSLY NOT BEING AWARE that you are ACTUALLY doing so, including twisting and double standards), some of them you may be aware of, and some of them you may not be aware of, and may NOT EVEN CARE to be aware of. There is no surprise, even if you are not aware, because an addicted person is not expected to have any power of TRUE REAL-EYEzation. (PBKs are MORE addicted to Mr Dixit and to what he says, rather than what, either incorporeal ShivBaba, Shiva or God, or the Murlis, ACTUALLY say). It is OK, since it is obviously, in accordance with Drama.

Just a point to note/say is-
sita wrote:No one knew the unlimited meaning before. We were reading the Murli and were thinking that there will be golden palaces, etc., we were taking everything literally, because through Brahma Baba, The Knowledge was only narrated, not explained.
2)By keeping on saying- knowledge was "narrated, not explained," - is of no use. The point is- to what extent PBK clarifications fit, is it not? It is becoming increasingly CLEAR that the explanations of Mr Dixit pertain to Ravan Rajya and NOT RamRajya.

3)An important point is- By saying, "knowledge was not explained, only narrated"- you or PBKs are again inadvertently defaming the creator ShivBaba himself. Because Murlis never say so. Avyakt Murlis of 1969 - (as soon as B Baba became FULLY avyat) say- "(Main) teaching is already over". Already put.

4)Avyakt Murlis say- "Kathni aur karni ko ek karo = Make saying and doing same". [= Follow what you say]. Murli NEVER says- "kathni ko badlo = Change what you say".
So- if PBKs wish to convey something else against teachings of BKWSU, even that goes AGAINST the Murlis or Vanis.

But, as per drama, PBKs are free to do so. Left to them.

* - You may take this as my perception. You need not agree. Let readers decide for themselves, according to their individual roles within Drama.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests