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
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 May 2016

1)Again silly argument. Whatever it is- if one receives punishment, it means he will have Bhakti sanskaar till the end. So, how come the first explanation becomes valid? Are you able to understand what you are saying/implying?
2)OK, let us accept it. So, do you mean to say- some PBKs even if have Bhakti sanskaars, will get chance to experience in the same body, but some will not? Why? Is that not partiality?
3)After all- what greatness is there- in getting same body transformed- if except the top 8 all the rest get punishment?

Baba clearly says- one who gets punishment, his status would be lower.
We receive punishment, for the sins which we have not cut down with the power of Yoga. And Bhakti sanksar is a sanskar, and is not a sin. Baba has said that to do Bhakti is not bad, it is not harmful, one does not accumulate sin like this, but there is no benefit in it. The heaven of the Confluence Age is for the souls who have knowledge. If one has Bhakti sanskars it means he believes God to be up there, so their mind will follow that and leave the body. Knowledge says that God is practically present here. Or one could believe that Brahma Baba (the soul of Krishna) is the corporeal form through which God is revealed to the world, so they could follow that in leaving the body.
Already proof is given to you. Arjun soul himself had given statement that- purity of Sister Vedanti is also cowardice. Already shown even to you.
It is not about people, but knowledge. We are the same souls who become demons, we are the same souls who become deities also. It is a matter of our attitude, stage, acts etc. If one follows purity like a sanyasi it is purity of the coward. It does not mean that the person is a coward. A smart person can do stupid things, he is still a smart person who has done something stupid. With this I don't imply that someone is smart or does stupid things. It is an example.

Baba explains about purity and sanyasis also explain about purity. What do we follow and when and why, there is some reason in that. The purity that is followed by the mothers is that of a very high level. Now no one is complete yet, but Baba has said to see the perfect stage. In their perfect stage, the mothers follow true purity, not like that of sanyasi and they follow better than men. It is men who have invented sanyas due to their cowardice, they run away from the mothers and defame them, they cannot control themselves. Mothers can control themselves better than men. They receive the title of Sheetla, the one who is cool. You are wrong to think PBKs think about women to be cowardice. They hold them in very high esteem. Ask Arjun.

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 » 15 May 2016

sita wrote:We receive punishment for the sins we have not cut down with the power of Yoga. And Bhakti sanksar is a sanskar and is not a sin. Baba has said that to do Bhakti is not bad, it is not harmful, one does not accumulate sin like this, but there is no benefit in it. The heaven of the Confluence Age is for the souls who have knowledge. If one has Bhakti sanskars it means he believes God to be up there, so their mind will follow that and leave the body. Knowledge says that God is practically present here. Or one could believe that Brahma Baba (the soul of Krishna) is the corporeal form through which God is revealed to the world, so they could follow that in leaving the body.
Are there PBKs who remember God up above, OR believe B baba is the corporeal form of revelation of God? [I doubt.] Because the basic qualification to become a PBK itself is going against these.
Many PBKs have left their body. I believe - some honest PBKs (who had followed the above two aspects properly) also have left their body due to old age or some cause. Do you deny it?
-------------------------

# Flaw No. 244) Hot ghee in the MOUTH of PBKs- can neither drink, nor spit out:-
It is also about people. We are the same souls who become demons, we are the same souls who become deities also. It is a matter of our attitude, stage, acts etc. If one follows purity like a sanyasi it is purity of the coward. It does not mean that the person is a coward. A smart person can do stupid things, he is still a smart person who has done something stupid. With this I don't imply that someone is smart or does stupid things. It is an example.

Baba explains about purity and sanyasis also explain about purity. What do we follow and when and why, there is some reason in that. The purity that is followed by the mothers is that of a very high level. Now no one is complete yet, but Baba has said to see the perfect stage. In their perfect stage, the mothers follow true purity, not like that of sanyasi and they follow better than men. It is men who have invented sanyas due to their cowardice, they run away from the mothers and defame them, they cannot control themselves. Mothers can control themselves better than men. They receive the title of Sheetla, the one who is cool. You are wrong to think PBKs think about women to be cowardice. They hold them in very high esteem. Ask Arjun.
I know PBKs hold sister Vedanti in high esteem. I will tell you what forced arjun soul to reply- "purity of sister Vedanti is also cowardice". It is just like what you now say- "No, we do not call Mr Dixit as Narayan now"- and have taken U-turn. It is now like hot ghee to PBKs, they can NEITHER even drink, NOT spit it out!

PBKs usually say- "their Vijayamala group of 2.25 lakh souls are better in dharna and service, and their Rudrmala group 2.25 lakh souls are better in Gyan and Yaad. And- in the end, each group will become perfect by imbibing good qualities of the other group".
But, when a question was put to them- " it violates karma philosophy itself, as without putting any effort, how can each group become complete in the other two subjects - (just by company)?
ALSO- it puts Mr Dixit in weaker position in the two subjects - especially purity when compared to that of sister Vedanti. "- Due to the above, arjun soul WITHOUT ANY CHOICE, gave statement- "purity of sister Vedanti is also cowardice".
That is why you are surprised to believe it, is it not? *

The discussions are mostly here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42272&hilit=umpteen#p42272

viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42388&hilit=umpteen#p42388

Trick of Mr Dixit, PBKs are yet to know:-

Of the four subjects- Gyan, Yoga/Yaad, dharna, and service, why Mr Dixit said- each group is ahead in two subjects, and in the end- they will get benefited from the other group? Has any PBK ever thought of it?
--Gyan can be mis-interpreted, and Yoga is gupt, cannot be evaluated easily. But, the other two subjects are easily visible. So, to make his followers satisfied, Mr Dixit said- "No need to worry about dharna and service- you will automatically get it from the other group".
---Else, PBKs would have got discomfort or guilty consciousness in their progress- either dharna or service. So, by saying so, Mr Dixit relieved PBKs for their shortcomings and faults in their dharna/actions, INCLUDING HIMSELF, as well as from the responsibility of doing service. How clever Mr Dixit is, and how foolish PBKs are- is it not?

A simple logic- Without right Gyan and Yaad, can the purity be right? If it is right, then it should be obviously cowardice or fake. It cannot be eligible for Golden Age.

PBKs believe/agree sister Vedanti is (at present) just a BK following and practicing false Gita (BK Murlis without any clarifications of AIVV) and Bhakti sanskaar (teaching and remembering God up above) would be in the same state almost throughout the Conf. Age (in PBK view), how can her purity be of high esteem (in PBK view)

Ridiculous thing is- PBKs here compare purity with lowkik mothers and claim they are good or better then sanyaasis! Are lowkik mothers just 2.25 lakhs in numbers? What are they trying to prove or explain?
--Moreover, a person who has female body in this birth can get male body in the next birth. So- what do PBKs achieve by saying purity of mothers are great? Is it not that they delusively imply that greatness is due to their body, and not related to soul?
--So- purity (in PBK view) is related MORE to a body, and not to soul? They are much lesser bothered about the sanskaar in the soul, just thinking of bodies.
How low level the PBK thinking is! Is there need of any other proof?
---------------

* -
sita wrote: The difference is that it is not so easy to find out the BK stand so clearly, there are differences of opinion in the BKWSU itself. But whatever is said about the Advanced Knowledge, it could be verified. - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51406&hilit=verified#p51406
Is this not a plain lie? PBKs sometimes do not hesitate to give some statements even against their own Guru - like what arjun had replied above. And, you do not agree with that. Even PBK harikrishna had done the same thing. Statement of one PBK contradicts with another PBK.

But, all of them are very much lesser when compared to the mutual contradicting statements and erroneous interpretations of Guru of PBKs himself. So, their fault is nothing, when compared to the BLUNDERS of their bodily Guru.

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 » 15 May 2016

Are there PBKs who remember God up above, OR believe B Baba is the corporeal form of revelation of God? [I doubt.] Because the basic qualification to become a PBK itself is going against these.
Many PBKs have left their body. I believe - some honest PBKs (who had followed the above two aspects properly) also have left their body due to old age or some cause. Do you deny it?
I have given just examples. There are various types of Bhakti sanskars a PBKs can also have.
I know PBKs hold Sister Vedanti in high esteem. I will tell you what forced arjun soul to reply- "purity of Sister Vedanti is also cowardice".
I stand by what Arjun Bhai has said. It is a matter of knowledge and recognition. Without knowledge and recognition one follows a wrong path. The path of the sanyasi is to remember just a point of light. Sanyasis receive only mukti. Real purity is the purity of the household path when man and woman cooperate with each other, for which the symbol of Vishnu has been given. Now both in the BK and the PBK this path is not visible, no one has become a deity couple as yet, still there is difference between the knowledge in both. In the Bk it is believed and practiced that God is most of the time hidden and they remember him in the form of a point of light and make effort to leave their body and become a deity in their next life. In the PBK it is believed God is in his practical form, having entered a human form and changes us now with his practical ever pure company. To fear this benevolent god is ignorance, but still it is the present stage. The slogan of the end is that of the Bharat mata, the avatar of ShivShakti, at that time there is no matter of fear. We fear we may become impure and act like a sanyasi when we don't have the practical company of the ever pure one.
It is just like what you now say- "No, we do not call Mr Dixit as Narayan now"- and have taken U-turn. It is now like hot ghee to PBKs, they can NEITHER even drink, NOR spit it out.
You continue with your U turns. I told you to go through all my posts and bring a single one where I have said that Narayan has become practically a deity already now. You will not find, because I have not said it, because our knowledge does not say it. The fact that you come to know it only now shows it takes a long time for you to understand a basic thing about the advanced knowledge, but you think you know. You need to find reason to argue, so you speak lies that I have said like this, whilst it is your wrong assumption.
PBKs usually say- "their Vijayamala group of 2.25 lakh souls are better in dharna and service, and their Rudrmala group 2.25 lakh souls are better in Gyan and Yaad. And- in the end, each group will become perfect by imbibing good qualities of the other group".
But, when a question was put to them- " it violates karma philosophy itself, as without putting any effort, how can each group become complete in the other two subjects (just by company)?,
ALSO- it puts Mr Dixit in weaker position in the two subjects - especially purity when compared to that of Sister Vedanti. "- Due to the above, arjun soul WITHOUT ANY CHOICE, gave statement- "purity of Sister Vedanti is also cowardice".
That is why you are surprised to believe it, is it not? *

The discussions are mostly here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42272&hilit=umpteen#p42272
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42388&hilit=umpteen#p42388

Trick of Mr Dixit, PBKs are yet to know:- Of the four subjects- Gyan, Yoga/Yaad, dharna, and service, why Mr Dixit said- each group is ahead in two subjects, and in the end- they will get benefited from the other group? Has any PBK ever thought of it?
--Gyan can be mis-interpreted, and Yoga is gupt, cannot be evaluated easily. But, the other two subjects are easily visible. So, to make his followers satisfied, Mr Dixit said- "No need to worry about dharna and service- you will automatically get it from the other group".
---Else, PBKs would have got discomfort or guilty consciousness in their progress- either dharna or service. So, by saying so, Mr Dixit relieved PBKs for their shortcomings and faults in their dharna/actions, INCLUDING HIMSELF, as well as from the responsibility of doing service. How clever Mr Dixit is, and how foolish PBKs are- is it not?

A simple logic- Without right Gyan and Yaad, can the purity be right? If it is right, then it should be obviously cowardice or fake. It cannot be eligible for Golden Age.

PBKs believe/agree Sister Vedanti is (at present) just a BK following and practicing false Gita (BK Murlis without any clarifications of AIVV) and Bhakti sanskaar (teaching and remembering God up above) would be in the same state almost throughout the Conf. Age (in PBK view), how can her purity be of high esteem (in PBK view)

Coming into the right company is also karmic account, effort and brings result. We get colored by the color of the company we keep and we become the same. This is a law.

Ridiculous thing is- PBKs here compare purity with lowkik mothers and claim they are good or better then sanyaasis! Are lowkik mothers just 2.25 lakhs in numbers? What are they trying to prove or explain?

It is not a mater of the body of 2.25 lakhs being lokik mothers. No. 2.25 lakhs are such souls who have followed purity for many births, who have these sanskars, irrespective of the body.

Is this not a plain lie? PBKs sometimes do not hesitate to give some statements even against their own Guru - like what arjun had replied above. And, you do not agree with that. Even PBK harikrishna had done the same thing. Statement of one PBK contradicts with another PBK.

You can verify what our knowledge says, because in PBK one authority is accepted and this one authority is accessible.

But, all of them are very much lesser when compared to the mutual contradicting statements and erroneous interpretations of Guru of PBKs. So, their fault is nothing when compared to their bodily Guru.

Yes, for me it would also be easier if you enter a debate with our Baba.

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 » 16 May 2016

sita wrote:I have given just examples. There are various types of Bhakti sanskars a PBKs can also have.
Deviating from the point. The question was- do you believe- not even a single PBK who had not violated the two matters/conditions left body?
I stand by what Arjun Bhai has said.
So, do you believe purity of sister Vedanti is cowardice? - (in PBK view). If yes, then you took U turns again, as you had questioned - "do they/PBKs believe so?"
You can verify what our knowledge says, because in PBK one authority is accepted and this one authority is accessible.
Not accessible to anyone. Letter of faith needs to be given in advance. Even Virendra Dev Dixit gets uncomfortable when he has difficulty in replying to some PBKs, as well. He then expects letter of faith once again.
Yes, for me it would also be easier if you enter a debate with our Baba.
You may ask your Baba to reply to the questions put in the posts put here- (if you are interested).
Some points- you have clearly written - "It is out of my capacity". You may at least try to give views from your Baba - if you like.

--------------

Flaw No. 245) Trying to defend lies again and inability to understand BASIC aspects:-
You continue with your U turns. I told you to go through all my posts and bring a single one where I have said that Narayan has become practically a deity already now.
Speaking lies again.
--Arjun had already said in the forum - "For me, Mr Dixit is Narayan even now".
--And- you have argued that- "Birth of LN took place in 1976". It clearly implies you give title Narayan to that personality from 1976 itself. No other proof is required. If we say- Krishn Jayanti occurred on so and so date, it means he is eligible to carry that name from that date itself. BKs believe Jayanti of Brahma took place in 1936 (not Krishna). But, PBKs believe/declare Jayanti of Krishna took place in 1936.

---If you wish to see further proofs, - PBKs being caught in the trap of Mr. Dixit had been using the Murli point and claiming that- the rule of LN did exist in Conf. Age itself. - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2180&p=41493&hilit ... hed#p41493
If you are interested, you may say- from which year to which year in the Conf. Age rule of LN exists?

--Now- another proof is given below.
sita wrote: Brother, I cannot give clarifications, because I am not ShivBaba. The points about LN as fools, and as intelligent, I was not able to resolve it on my own. I study the Advanced Knowledge and get clarifications there - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51364&hilit ... ent#p51364
You may explain - which LN are intelligent and which are fools - and the period for which they are known by the name Lakshmi or/and Narayan?
sita wrote: Who has said that he is Narayan now or he has become Narayan in 76. In 76 Lakshmi and Narayan were born. To sit on the throne means that at least some souls must accept him as their Father like king. So even if he is Narayan and there is no one who accepts it it is as good as nothing. - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51422&hilit=Father#p51422
--Both lie and (some) ignorance are visible here.
--The lie is- Some souls(PBKs) had accepted is it not? So, in your own words, it is as good as you give him title Narayan from 1976 (or at least 1980s when AIVV practically started).
---The ignorance is - there is no need for someone to accept him. The moment ShivBaba entered into DLR, he becomes Brahma, he gets title Brahma, others may realize it later. But, DLR is eligible to get title Brahma. Even we all- the moment we get gyaan (even if we have not yet realized the gyaan fully), we are eligible for the title braahmin. [But,

Similarly, the condition for a deity is- one who had pure soul and mind. And- Narayan means- emperor, practically ruling.
-------------

Flaw No. 246) PBKs inadvertently imply they would be weak even till the final moment:-
Coming into the right company is also karmic account, effort and brings result. We get colored by the color of the company we keep and we become the same. This is a law.
So, mostly, PBKs believe - the two groups depend on the other to become perfect. Without the other group, each group is imperfect. So, Mr Dixit depends on sister Vedanti to become pure or perfect?

But, mu Point clearly says- Jo sabhee sangdosh se parey hain, vahee asht mani may aayenge
= Those who are free from effect/influence of company come in top 8.


The above law of PBKs applies only to weak souls. Strong souls do not get affected by others' company. Baba also says- you should not get influenced by others, but should be able to influence others.

[Even in this world, there are many people who maintain their individuality- (in few limited things, attributes). They usually do not get affected by others' company.]

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 » 17 May 2016

Deviating from the point. The question was- do you believe- not even a single PBK who had not violated the two matters/conditions left body?
Certainly PBK are leaving their bodies, but I cannot possibly know why. There are ignorant souls in PBK.
We are all ignorant to some extent. Ignorance means Bhakti.
So, do you believe purity of Sister Vedanti is cowardice? - (in PBK view) If yes, then you took U turns again, as you had questioned - "do they/PBKs believe so?"
To be honest I am discouraged every time you use names. If you put things more impersonally I could reply more straightforwardly.
Not accessible to anyone. Letter of faith needs to be given in advance. Even he gets discomfort when he gets difficulty in replying to some PBKs as well. He then expects letter of faith once again.
That is not true. Many people have received replies to their emails personally who have not done the bhatti. Me too. Many people also forward their questions to people who will meet Baba.
Not accessible to anyone. Letter of faith needs to be given in advance. Even he gets discomfort when he gets difficulty in replying to some PBKs as well. He then expects letter of faith once again.
You can make a list. You can make a list of questions you have or of questions you have not received satisfactory answers to. If you remember where I said that it is out of my capacity to reply, you could include that, because I remember I said like this, but don't remember where and when and what was the point. But sometimes this could be a rhetorical reply, because you also have to see where you ask me to interpret that will be just a waste of time. If you receive some reply you have to respect that even if you don't like it or agree, but you have to value there is a reply. And if you are not happy with the answer, you have to provide a better one. Because I also have the impression we go through the same questions and answers. If you expect we will change our stands because you are not happy with that, it means you don't respect our stand. You have to accept and respect everything we say, and try to understand it in the way we mean it and not try to deliberately twist it so that it loses its value. You are discrediting your own self like this, because this is not a fair play, people see that and it does not seem right. Then you can politely disagree and give your arguments. You are turning it into a propaganda that means that you don't need arguments but effect. This way the quality of the discussion diminishes.
Speaking lies again.
--Arjun had already said in the forum - "For me, Mr Dixit is Narayan even now".
--And- you have argued that- "Birth of LN took place in 1976". It clearly implies you give title Narayan to that personality from 1976 itself. No other proof is required. If we say- Krishn Jayanti occurred on so and so date, it means he is eligible to carry that name from that date itself. BKs believe Jayanti of Brahma took place in 1936 (not Krishna). But, PBKs believe/declare Jayanti of Krishna took place in 1936.

---If you wish to see further proofs, - PBKs being caught in the trap of Mr. Dixit had been using the Murli point and claiming that- the rule of LN did exist in Conf. Age itself. - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2180&p=41493&hilit=established#p41493 If you are interested, you may say- from which year to which year in the Conf. Age rule of LN exists?

--Now- another proof is given below.
You seem to gain some strange pleasure from telling I lie. I am sorry, but you have understood wrongly. Please, allow me to know what I mean. You have understood wrongly even what Arjun Bhai has said. The key word in what he has said is ....For me....In 76 it is a birth like revelation. It is revealed there is such a part like confluence aged Lakshmi and Narayan. The knowledge about that is revealed, the actors are revealed, as to who is to play that part, but the role has not started at that time, it is not enacted at that time. Like the director says you will play this, you that, but is the role or the play ready at that time. No, rehearsals are going on, As you have said the bodies have to be pure, obviously we don't have that now nor in 76. We also don't have information about how far even the souls have become pure so far. But anyway, if you are unable to accept that, let me take a U turn. OK. Lakshmi and Narayan got birth as pure deities in 76, they are deities even now. So what. What do you like to prove?
The moment ShivBaba entered into DLR, he becomes Brahma, he gets title Brahma,
But does, he become Krishna or Narayan?. No. But do we have the knowledge that he will become Krishna and Narayan? Yes. Were people looking at him as future Krishna and Narayan? Yes. It is the same here with 76.
You may explain - which LN are intelligent and which are fools - and the period for which they are known by the name Lakshmi or/and Narayan?
Both Lakshmi and Narayan of the Confluence and Lakshmi and Narayan of the Golden Age are intelligent when they are in the Confluence Age and fools when they are in the Golden Age, but the Lakshmi and Narayan of the Golden don't become Lakshmi and Narayan in the same life, they don't make the complete effort, don't follow the complete knowledge, so they are not as intelligent as those who become in the same life, as Baba has said in the Murli that we have to become. The whole Confluence Age is the time to make effort and it is said that we become compete only at the end and after that the war starts. The soul of Radha and Krishna also make effort for the whole period of the Confluence Age, they have not become complete so far, but they make the effort not through their own bodies now. At the end, when all souls have reached their complete stage we have it there revealed that there are parents like Lakshmi and Narayan and their children Radha and Krisna and the parents are more experienced that is more intelligent than the children. They are more intelligent, because in the Confluence Age they understand and put into practice better the knowledge given by the supreme Father.
So, mostly, PBKs believe - the two groups depend on the other to become perfect. Without the other group, each group is imperfect. So, Mr Dixit depends on Sister Vedanti to become pure or perfection?
All souls are weak till the end, no one is perfect as yes and for the transformation to happen we need the cooperation of every single soul. Every single soul can put hurdles to this process. We are codependent, we are in the same boat, the sooner we realize that - the better. But I know there are people who hide there in the corner and separate from the others, they don't think they are weak and impure, they think themselves as better than the rest. No. Everyone is impure that means weak, but everyone has some power as well. Some can imbibe knowledge better, some can imbibe virtues more. Mama has said that we have to make effort in what we find to be easy for us. The world will be transformed through cooperation and everyone cooperates with everything he has. The material of the whole world is sacrificed for the new world.

We can imbibe the virtues of others. Baba has said to gobble the pearls. By gobbling the pearls from other, be seeing and imbibing their virtues we become more perfect than when we were and we are on our own and by ourselves. Through giving and receiving cooperation we learn and develop. Your aim is to prove someone high and other low, someone weak and someone strong, but sometimes we are weak, sometimes strong, sometimes up and other times down. When we are in a weak position, at that time someone else is in a powerful position and helps us, or what is our shortcoming is a talent for someone else. We also help others when we can, it does not mean we are better. We all have ours ups and downs. Even the highest souls have their shortcomings. To know your shortcoming and to seek help to overcome it is a great power of humility and courage and strength and reason.
But, mu Point clearly says- Jo sabhee snagdosh se parey hain, vahee asht mani may aayenge
= Those who are free from effect/influence of company come in top 8.
You have understood it wrongly. All souls come into bad company and fall. If they did not, they would not fall and all souls do fall. Only one soul does not fall. But there is an effort involved in picking oneself up. Those who even though they come into bad company, even though they fall, but are able to neutralize this bad company with the power of Yoga, they are able to transform the bad into good, they are elevated.

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 » 17 May 2016

We can imbibe the virtues of others. Baba has said to gobble the pearls. By gobbling the pearls from other, be seeing and imbibing their virtues we become more perfect than when we were and we are on our own and by ourselves. Through giving and receiving cooperation we learn and develop.
Even to imbibe, there is effort necessary. Simply just by company, one cannot imbibe. And, it is random or flexible. Anyone can imbibe any good from others. By saying the 2.25 lakh souls would be weaker in the two subjects and will become perfect from the company of the others is- totally out of the context. Because it obviously proves one group is dependent on the other group. But, Baba never said so. Baba has said- each one should put effort by himself to pass in all the four subjects.
You have understood it wrongly. All souls come into bad company and fall. If they did not, they would not fall and all souls do fall.

Sorry, it is clear that- It is you who have not understood and going totally out of context. Every BK or PBk knows every human soul falls down. You need not say that.
What the Murli point says is- One who attains such a high state by or before the end of Conf. Age reaches to top 8. But, in PBK view, even in the end, each group depends on the other to become perfect.
--BTW- I believe- great souls like top 8, need not imbibe quality from others. They will have capacity to move of their own - just with Baba and knowledge, and drama. It is for low level people Baba says- you imbibe good qualities from others. A Murli point also says- "kisee ke visheshathaa se bhee prabhaavith naheen honaa = You should not even get influenced from specialties of others. "
To be honest I am discouraged every time you use names. If you put things more impersonally I could reply more straightforwardly.
I do not think mentioning name of the top souls- like chariots and the Trimurti personalities is wrong.
BTW, it is PBKs who like to use not only names of Mama, and B baba, but also names of many senior BKs.
That is not true. Many people have received replies to their emails personally who have not done the bhatti. Me too. Many people also forward their questions to people who will meet Baba.
Why personal emails only? When AIVV can put matters on blogs and websites - why not become a member of the forum and reply? Mostly- when strong questions are put, Mr Dixit also may stop responding to them or just argue like you- like my cock has three legs.
[I also had mailed some matter personally (mostly it was of Baba of AIVV). After one reply, the next one came as - "visit AIVV Gitapathashalas for further knowledge- something like that"]

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 » 17 May 2016

# Flaw No. 247) PBK arguments now coming to lower levels to such an extent to (inadvertently) leaving their own claims:-

Usually PBKs compare with BKs and criticize what they do, and call them as Bhakti or manmath, etc. (eg- the TWO aspects/things what soul sita had SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED just couple of posts earlier, which are reproduced below).
sita wrote:We receive punishment for the sins we have not cut down with the power of Yoga. And Bhakti sanksar is a sanskar and is not a sin. Baba has said that to do Bhakti is not bad, it is not harmful, one does not accumulate sin like this, but there is no benefit in it. The heaven of the Confluence Age is for the souls who have knowledge. If one has Bhakti sanskars it means he believes God to be up there, so their mind will follow that and leave the body. Knowledge says that God is practically present here. Or one could believe that Brahma Baba (the soul of Krishna) is the corporeal form through which God is revealed to the world, so they could follow that in leaving the body.
But, when they fail to defend their own claims, they come down from their own arguments and just say- ignorance in Bhakti.- as below.
sita wrote:Certainly PBK are leaving their bodies, but I cannot possibly know why. There are ignorant souls in PBK. We are all ignorant to some extent. Ignorance means Bhakti.
We can see how silly their arguments are!
But- they fail even here. Because except the top 8, all others will have some ignorance/Bhakti- even till the end. So, how can 2.25 lakh souls become eligible to get the SAME body transformed?
-----

Few more examples of PBK ignorance or lies:-
Please, allow me to know what I mean. You have understood wrongly even what Arjun Bhai has said. The key word in what he has said is ....For me....In 76 it is a birth like revelation... As you have said the bodies have to be pure, obviously we don't have that now nor in 76.....
I believe- just revelation cannot be called as birth- either logically or even from Murli point of view. It is just like predicting or announcing something. Many things are predicted even in this world- like after some years, some personality will take birth in such and such country and will perform some great deeds, etc, etc. But, such things cannot be called as birth.
--Taking birth means actually beginning to play that role. Brahma Jayanti means- task of creation should practically start. Similarly, Krishn Jayanti means first deity should practically take birth with pure body and soul. [because definition of deity means pure soul in a pure body].
But does, he become Krishna or Narayan?. No. But do we have The Knowledge that he will become Krishna and Narayan? Yes. Was people looking at him as future Krishna and Narayan? Yes. It is the same here with 76.
It is NOT the same. You are continuing speaking lies either intentionally or by ignorance.
BKs neither believe, nor say Krishn jayanti(birth of Krishna) took place in 1936 even though he was looked as future Krishna and Narayan. But, PBKs claim and write brith of LN took place in 1976.
But anyway, if you are unable to accept that, let me take a U turn. OK. Lakshmi and Narayan got birth as pure deities in 76, they are deities even now. So what. What do you like to prove?
Already proved that you are speaking lies and mutually contradicting yourselves also.
Both Lakshmi and Narayan of the Confluence and Lakshmi and Narayan of the Golden Age are intelligent when they are in the Confluence Age and fools when they are in the Golden Age,
See, you again automatically give title Narayan to Mr Dixit in both the ages. And- then say- we do not give him title Narayan in Conf. Age, it is just revelation. If it is just revelation, then even role of Brahma Baba as Narayan in Golden Age was reveled in 1936 itself. So, why B baba cannot be called as "Conf. Aged Narayan" - "in PBK view?"
but the Lakshmi and Narayan of the Golden don't become Lakshmi and Narayan in the same life, they don't make the complete effort, ...
That should not matter for the above title, as explained above.

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 » 17 May 2016

But- they fail even here. Because except the top 8, all others will have some ignorance/Bhakti- even till the end. So, how can 2.25 lakh souls become eligible to get the SAME body transformed?
Bhakti means whatever is taught by human beings. 2,25 lakhs will be called knowledgeful souls, as they learn from God. For the 8 it is said that they become civil eyesed. The rest are knowledgeful in knowledge, but practically do not manage to achieve it in practice. Knowledge is easy. Bhakti sanskars is sanskar of following humans, so this attachment will take you away from God. It is said that the new world is for those who have conquered attachment.
It is NOT the same. You are continuing speaking lies either intentionally or by ignorance.
BKs neither believe, nor say Krishn jayanti(birth of Krishna) took place in 1936 even though he was looked as future Krishna and Narayan. But, PBKs claim and write brith of LN took place in 1976.
The birth of Krishna is also a matter of the Confluence Age and a matter of revelation like birth, but we have taken it in literal sense.
--Taking birth means actually beginning to play that role. Brahma Jayanti means- task of creation should practically start. Similarly, Krishn Jayanti means first deity should practically take birth with pure body and soul. [because definition of deity means pure soul in a pure body].
There is no confusion of whether birth took place or not. It took birth. Baba has said in the Murli. The matter is what do we understand to be taking of birth. You require pure bodies and souls. Revelation like birth means there are such souls who are like parents who sustain and through them this revelation takes place. For them the Murli point is there that they are not that elevated.
So, why B Baba cannot be called as "Conf. Aged Narayan" - "in PBK view?"
Because he does not become Narayan in the Confluence Age.
Already proved that you are speaking lies and mutually contradicting yourselves also.
For you it is not a problem to prove I speak lies or contradict myself, even if I don't. You just cannot accept you misunderstand.

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 » 19 May 2016

sita wrote:Bhakti means whatever is taught by human beings. 2,25 lakhs will be called knowledgeful souls, as they learn from God.
So, now, the definition of Bhakti got changed. Let it be. Still PBKs are speaking wrong. Because they believe even Sakar Murlis are taught by God, so all the BKs are also knowledgeable. (as per their own above statement).
But, they may say- Oh- it was not understood properly till 1976 or till AIVV has not come up. So, they cannot be called as knowledgeful. But, in that case, even there would be many PBKs who have not yet understood even the clarifications given by/through Mr. Dixit.
BTW- Mr Dixit himself has committed blunders and blunders while giving his interpretations, so to what extent Guru of PBKs is knowledgeful- is clearly visible.
There is no confusion of whether birth took place or not. It took birth. Baba has said in the Murli.
Baba has said many things. Baba has clearly said in Sakar Murlis- through DLR- "I come ONLY in THIS ONE, and none other, I begin from this" Then- the PBk claim of Shiv had entered into some other Chariot as Prajapita - gets ruled out. PBKs may argue, taking isolated Murli points, TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT.
You require pure bodies and souls.
Why you add manmath by introducing (just) my name here? Has not Baba said- Deities means pure bodies with pure soul?
Because he does not become Narayan in the Confluence Age.
Give proper reasons. This is what has been asked so far. How Mr Dixit is Narayan from 1976? How sister Vedanti is Lakshmi from 1976? LN means they should rule the world - or all those exist in corporeal world. But, Mr Dixit himself is ruled by a ghost, he dozes while doing Yaad, his Lakshmi and Jagadamba both are not with him. ...
For you it is not a problem to prove I speak lies or contradict myself, even if I don't. You just cannot accept you misunderstand.
Check yourself from your own arguments. If you still feel I am wrong, you may continue to think so. Let readers decide for themselves.

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 » 19 May 2016

So, now, the definition of Bhakti got changed. Let it be. Still PBKs are speaking wrong. Because they believe even Sakar Murlis are taught by God, so all the BKs are also knowledgeable. (as per their own above statement).
But, they may say- Oh- it was not understood properly till 1976 or till AIVV has not come up. So, they cannot be called as knowledgeful. But, in that case, even there would be many PBKs who have not yet understood even the clarifications given by/through Mr. Dixit.
BTW- Mr Dixit himself has committed blunders and blunders while giving his interpretations, so to what extent Guru of PBKs is knowledgeful- is clearly visible.
Baba has said that when someone does not understand some point, we should not insist on that point but try to explain taking other points, in a different way. Yes, BKs are knowledgeable but on a basic level. Then those who are firm believers of the Murli, those who are firm followers of Brahma Baba, sooner or later they will get the advanced knowoledge. But there are many BKs who follow human beings, there are also PBKs who follow human beings. But also, although The Murli is words of God, the form of Brahma Baba is not form of God. God is in his form of Father, Teacher and Satguru in one, it is about studying from this one.
Baba has said many things. Baba has clearly said in Sakar Murlis- through Lekhraj Kirpalani- "I have come only in this one, and none, I begin from this" Then- the PBK claim of Shiv had entered into some other Chariot as Prajapita - gets ruled out. PBKs may argue taking isolated Murli points.
Baba has said many things which may be confusing. This is why he has to play the part of explaining. On our own we would not be able to solve it. For example, Baba himself has said that there used to be such children who used to teach even Mama and Baba and Baba entered them. So Baba has himself said that he entered other children before Brahma Baba. Isolated or not, and it is not isolated, i thing there are few points, but Baba has said so. We cannot dismiss it. Certainly he has said also that I come only in one. So how to resolve this controversy? The way we understand it is that this part that is revealed to the world as God, as Father, Teacher and Satguru is one. But he also plays part of mother through Brahma Baba. Baba has said that he comes only in one, but has also said that i enter also children to do service. So we understand it that where does he come and go, no one knows, but he has one fixed Chariot through which he gives Shrimat for salvation and leads souls to muktidham and this has to be a practical part. And we believe that this part is going on at present in the Advance Party.
Why you add manmath by introducing (just) my name here? Has not Baba said- Deities means pure bodies with pure soul?
Yes, he has said, that's why according to these requirements, these requirements are met only at the end, but still in the Confluence Age.
Give proper reasons. This is what been asked so far. How Mr Dixit is Narayan from 1976? How Sister Vedanti is Lakshmi from 1976? LN means they should rule the world - or all those exist in corporeal world. But, Mr Dixit himself is ruled by a ghost, he dozes while doing Yaad, his Lakshmi and Jagadamba both are not with him. ...
I will tell you. Brahma Baba got to know he will be Krishna and he will. At the moment he came to know, it is like a seed in his intellect. It takes time for that to grow end develop and give fruit. It gives fruit in the next life. With the case of 76, it is the same, it is just that it gives fruit in the same life. So in 76, there was birth of Lakshmi and Narayan, because birth means that the body of the child is revealed to the world. Before that we still have the baby, but he is not visible. In the same way the bodies of Lakshmi and Narayan got revealed in that year, the corporeal personalities got revealed. Still they have to reach their maturity, they have to transform themselves to pure deities and achieve liberation in life.
Check yourself from your own arguments. If you still feel I am wrong, you may say so. Let readers decide themselves.
You are wrong in thinking I am wrong. You are baselessly accusing me of lies and having told things i have never told and then act merciful. You twist and misunderstand and then accuse me. How insolent!

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 » 19 May 2016

# Flaw No. 248) PBKs use even 'ShivBaba' as a 'scapegoat' when they lose everything-
Baba has said that when someone does not understand some point, we should not insist on that point but try to explain taking other points, in a different way. ...
So, that is their reply instead of replying to the point. Let it be.
Baba has said many things which may be confusing. This is why he has to play the part of explaining. On our own we would not be able to solve it. ...
Do you think- by explaining the problem is getting solved? Mr Dixit created AIVV, which further created other splinter groups.
Simple logic is- if explanation can make us understand, then why not all the 7 billion people understand in the same way?
Baba has clearly said- the way to become knowledgeful is by the realization, and with the feeling of ONE Spiritual Father and brotherhood - Post No. 206) - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... =25&t=1167
For example, Baba himself has said that there used to be such children who used to teach even Mama and Baba and Baba entered them. So Baba has himself said that he enter other children before Brahma Baba. Isolated or not, and it is not isolated, i think there are few points, but Baba has said so. We cannot dismiss it. Certainly he has said also that I come only in one. So how to resolve this controversy.
Mr Dixit's explanation has increased the controversy beyond all levels as proved on the forum. BTW- it is very simple to resolve this controversy- Post No. 12 to 14 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 7&start=10
I will tell you. Brahma Baba got to know he will be Krishna and he will. At the moment he came to know, it is like a seed in his intellect. It takes time for that to grow end develop and give fruit. It gives fruit in the next life. With the case of 76 is the same, it is just that it gives fruit in the same life.
Again just MORE LIES. It (1936 incident) CAN NEVER BE CALLED AS BIRTH (of Krishna) even in seed form. It was birth of Brahma. Of course, we may say- "during 1936, it was Brahma in seed form (baby intellect). Brahma became real Brahma (matured) later".

So, I tell you 100 times- BKs never say- "Krishn jayanti took place in 1936 like PBKs say- birth of LN took place in 1976".
---If you still like to argue - you should say- birth of LN (of AIVV) took place (will take place) in 2018! How come 1976 as DOB? RIDICULOUS, and BLATANT LIES to make COMPLETE FOOLS of your OWN SELVES, NOT OTHERS!!!

Further more - There are lots of cases of bhaagantis. What will you say- the seed took place, but did not give fruit? Like birth took place, but did not take place?
--Wonderful example is Premkanta of PBKs who was given one of the highest seat, 'Jagadamba'. As per PBK philosophy, fruit of Jagadamba would be in the same birth. But- did it give?
So in 76, there was birth of Lakshmi and Narayan, because birth means that the body of the child is revealed to the world.
Many times the question was asked - to whom all- LN were revelaed in 1976? No reply had come from any PBK. Body of Mr Dixit was revealed to many in 1942 itself, when he took physical birth. Even to BKWSU, it was revelad in 1969 itself. WHAT WAS SPECIAL IN 1976 THAT MR DIXIT REVEALED TO BKWSU???
You are wrong in thinking I am wrong.
Obviously, YOU ARE WRONG, in that Murli point. Those who are on top- will never get affected by adverse 'company' or remarks of others. This is in a Murli point, as well as, plain logic from any point of view. You have no hesitation to accuse others, and just keep on arguing, "my cock has three legs", as though repeating same things, like a parrot, will make the untruth into truth, somehow!!!
HEY PRESTO! EUREKA! CARRY ON CLEO!!!

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 » 19 May 2016

Do you think- by explaining the problem is getting solved? Mr Dixit created AIVV, which further created other splinter groups.

Mr Dixit's explanation has increased the controversy beyond all levels as proved on the forum. BTW- it is very simple to resolve this controversy- Post No. 12 to 14 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 7&start=10
Certainly. War is inevitable. It is the Supreme Soul himself who inspires destruction through Shankar, and it is for good, and for that separating is needed. This is the way he solves it, by igniting a war in which the truth will triumph.
Simple logic is- if explanation can make us understand, then why not all the 7 billion people understand in the same way?
Certainly we understand by explanation and then we get marks about putting it into practice. People understand according to their mind, sanskars etc. The knowledge is one and the same, but people read it differently. Like for one and the same person - one finds it to be sweet, another as sour. Baba also does dance the dance of knowledge according to the audience, but he does not teach anyone personally some special knowledge. He teaches personally in public. Whilst he speaks to everyone, one and the same knowledge, he speaks it for you.
So, I tell you 100 times- BKs never say- "Krishn jayanti took place in 1936 like PBKs say- birth of LN took place in 1976".
Because it is expected that Krishna jayanti is a physical birth of a physical baby. But in the unlimited sense it is a revelation like birth in the Confluence Age. Krishna Jayanti is in the Confluence Age and not in the Golden Age.
you should say- birth of LN (of AIVV) took place (will take place) in 2018! How come 1976 as DOB? RIDICULOUS, and BLATANT LIES to make COMPLETE FOOLS of your OWN SELVES, NOT OTHERS!!!
Why should we say 2018? Baba has said in the Murli about 1976. You call him fool and a liar.
Furthermore - There are lots of cases of bhaagantis. What will you say- the seed took place, but did not give fruit? Like birth took place, but did not take place?
Certainly. If you plant a seed on stone (like intellect) it will not give fruit at all. One and the same seed of knowledge gives different fruit according to the different soil of the intellect.
Many times the question was asked - to whom all - LN were revealed in 1976?
Many times it was answered to you.

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 » 20 May 2016

Another definition of knowledge is purity. So although every soul becomes pure numberwise, still there is a whole group who get pass marks and enter the highest heaven, due to their purity they achieve through Yoga power.

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 » 21 May 2016

sita wrote:Certainly. War is inevitable.
There is no much things, like actual war, required. AIVV will fall itself down, and 'crumble', like their own 'Jagadamba' had left them; and for each such 'crumbling', they will keep on inventing new excuses and convincing 'justifications', (making all the 'idiots' actually believe that they are 'unlimited clarifications'), to keep on sustaining themselves, till the end - as they have done in the case of their 'Jagadamba'!
They are ready to believe in ANYTHING, in order to 'survive', if not in this EXISTENCE, then in the NEXT EXISTENCE! Same principle is used to brain-wash all those who 'BLOW THEMSELVES UP', with the firm assurance and STAUNCH BELIEF that they are on their way to Paradise and God! The 'shooting' of same is currently taking place in AIVV, with the PBKs!

And- PBKs had given the date of revelation as 2016, and by their own view, there should be 2.25 lakh rudrmala souls. Are both of these conditions going to happen in 2016? With what face can PBKs come up, other than BLIND BELIEF?


# Flaw No. 249) PBKs finally 'opening their mouth' FULLY:-
Krishna Jayanti is in the Confluence Age and not in the Golden Age.
Many times 'Sita' soul used to argue- "Who had said- birth of Krishna took place in 1936? He is Krishna of G Age, etc, etc." - trying to hide, when they failed to defend their claims logically, or as per proper Murli points of view.
But, now- the soul could not continue any longer with the 'masquerades', and said/accepted it openly what they actually believe. And- they now start of speaking about war. What else they can say after losing every point of view?

But- as already explained, PBKs fail here- as the Murli point clearly says- Radha and others too come in this. - Error No. 29 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=50566&hilit=bachchi#p50566
Three CLEAR points of failures of PBKs in the above Murli point are -
i)-Baba has named Radha AFTER Krishna, which implies Radha took birth after Krishna. But, PBKs believe 'Radha' first took birth and then gave birth to Krishna. (according to them, sometimes they say- 'Radha' here refers to Conf Aged, while 'Krishna' refers to Golden Aged)! TOTAL CONFUSION & CHAOS!!!*
ii)--Ridiculous thing is- Baba says- GitaMata is the mother of Krishna, but PBKs believe Radha bachchi, (who is the TRUE Gita of Conf Age, according to them), is the real mother of Krishna (of Golden Age, according to them). Should Radha be yugal/couple of Krishna or mother of Krishna? - which logic is this? No Murli point or lowkik scripture will support this.
iii) - Also- the Murli point says- With Radha, all others also come(are included). This Murli point clearly implies that- the study refers to Conf. Age, while the actual births refer to G Age. But, Mr. Dixit misinterpreted same, to apply fully for Conf Age, and PBKs cannot explain it properly, and are themselves TOTALLY CONFUSED. Who all had been there along with Radha (of Conf Age) in 1936 incident?

Roy Soul once replied - "birth of Krishna refers to Conf. Age, and birth of Radha and all others refers to Golden Age",- in the attempt to somewhat fit the Murli point, but failing at every attempt.
SIMPLE JUGGLERY and TOM-FOOLERY, to DECEIVE ONLY THEMSELVES!!!
Why should we say 2018?
I said in "PBK view". PBKs believe the practical date of birth of Conf. Aged Narayan is 2018 (initially, they had BELIEVED it to be 2008 - then got postponed).- :laugh:
Baba has said in the Murli about 1976.
Without understanding the real unlimited meaning, PBKs are using Baba as 'scapegoat', while NOT REAL-EYEsing that they are CONTINUING to PERSISTENTLY and CONSISTENTLY OPPOSE, MOCK, INSULT and DEFAME God, at EACH and EVERY step, by their MISINTERPRETATIONS, MISREPRESENTATIONS & MISAPPROPRIATIONS of EACH and EVERY PURE Version of God in the SMs and AVs - IN SPITE of CLEAR CLARIFICATIONS being CONSISTENTLY provided on this forum, as well!
Interested viewers may review the following post - viewtopic.php?f=40&t=2642&start=75#p51407
You call him fool and a liar.
I never said so. I had mentioned, to motivate children, Baba may have spoken so.* But, PBKs have made their own bodily Guru, as God; and CONFIRM & PROVE all of themselves to be - EVIDENT FOOLS & DOWNRIGHT LIARS! (Viewers may like to review the post mentioned in the link above).

* - Even though it may appear as a lie, it is not a lie, but a technique employed for the benefit of the children. Because baba says- "I speak as per drama. I speak what I had spoken 5000 years before. So, if the children are weak and have to be filtered- as per drama- egoless Baba will have no hesitation to speak so, because he completely surrenders HIMSELF to drama."

THE PBKs SIMPLY REFUSE TO LOOK AT, CONSIDER or ACCEPT any of those Murli Points, (in the CORRECT CONTEXT and PROPER PERSPECTIVE), which go ABSOLUTELY AGAINST their philosophy. At such times, their INTELLECT seems to FREEZE, and DOES NOT SEEM TO ACCEPT THE FACT that REAL ShivBaba or God Himself has spoken these Versions! They DO NOT seem to consider that they are inadvertently calling God a FOOL and a LIAR, in such cases! This is the EXACT reason why God has declared that if one desires to see 'MAHA-MURKHs' or GREATEST SPIRITUAL IDIOTS, one should see here, in the Yagya - the VERY BEST and MOST CLASSICAL EXAMPLE being 'MAHA-MURKH' Virendra Dev Dixit and the EQUALLY 'MAHA-MURKH', BLIND PBKs! (Viewers may like to review the post mentioned in the link above).
Certainly. If you plant a seed on stone (like intellect) it will not give fruit at all. One and the same seed of knowledge gives different fruit according to the different soil of the intellect.
So, by giving seat of Jagadmaba to Premkanta, it reflects the intelligence of Mr Dixit as well, is it not?
So, according to you, who planted the 'seed' on stone (like intellect) of Premkanta, and made her believe that she was the 'real Jagadamba? Was it God or REAL ShivBaba, or Ravan or FALSE 'ShivBaba', or your bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, or the imaginary 'ghost' who is riding Virendra Dev Dixit, (according to him and the PBKs)???
Many times it was answered to you.
Just a lie. Never answered, as required- who all had witnessed the incident 1976 in AIVV and what was their experience? As- "in your own view"- you had said- birth or revelation means "AT LEAST SOME SOULS SHOULD ACCEPT HIM AS Father". Who are these souls???
PBKs describe the incidents of 1936 in many pages in their literature, BUT how many lines of text in their literature describe the incident of 1976?
DOES NOT THIS AGAIN PROVE THAT Mr. DIXIT HAS NO FOUNDATION AT ALL, AND IS STANDING (VIRTUALLY) ON DLR - from all viewpoints and dimensions?

You may please carry on your false propaganda, if it makes you FEEL happy, and helps you to achieve your soul-conscious stage - ACCORDING to your understanding, and as per Drama. I have to eventually surrender to Drama. Even those who are 'BLOWING' themselves up, ALMOST EVERYDAY, with the FIRM & STAUNCH belief that they are going to 'Paradise', are doing so, as per Drama, is it not?
So, CARRY ON CLEO!!!

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 » 22 May 2016

# Flaw No. 250) Why only "Brahma so Vishnu", why not
"Ram so Vishnu" or "Shankar so Vishnu"?


1)PBKs are yet to explain properly how it is Brahma so Vishnu in one second. PBKs give names- Ram, Shankar, Prajapita Brahma, Narayan, etc., to Mr Dixit almost throughout Conf. Age.
They even give both the names- Brahma and Krishna to Brahma Baba throughout the Conf. Age.
2)Now, to the point- The memorial in Bhakti is - "Brahma so Vishnu", not "Shankar so Vishnu" , "Krishna so Vishnu", or "Ram so Vishnu", etc.
3)As per PBK philosophy, ALL these names - Krishna, Ram, etc- apply to Conf. Aged human personalities.
4)In their view- (mostly) it is their Prajapita Brahma(Mr Dixit) who gets transformed into Vishnu in a second. Now, the questions arise are-

5)Why the memorial in Bhakti is NOT "Shankar so Vishnu"- which would be MOST APPROPRIATE to avoid confusion (as in PBK view- 'Brahma' are many) or at least "Ram so Vishnu"? or at least "Prajapita Brahma so Vishnu"???

6)The point is- the above memorial should have been either "ALL THE NAMES so Vishnu" or just one "(Prajapita Brahma or Shankar) so Vishnu", is it not? [because in PBK view- Prajapita and Shankar are just one- throughout the Kalpa).
sita wrote:Another point about the name being given to the soul is with the religious fathers that when they come, when a new souls comes in the body the name gets changed from Jesus to Christ, from Sidhartha to Buddha. - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51473#p51473
7)So- the argument is- when a human soul enters into another human being, the name of the body changes (Of course, it is true- if the soul that enters plays a specific role in that body).
PBKs believe God entered into Mr Dixit in 1976, then his name changed to Brahma or Prajapita Brahma. They then give him all other names too. OK, already said.

8)PBKs believe a human soul (B Baba) too enters into body of Mr Dixit. So, NAME OF Mr. DIXIT SHOULD ONCE AGAIN CHANGE, or SHOULD HAVE ANOTHER ADDITIONAL NAME BASED ON THIS, IS IT NOT?

9)PBKs believe B Baba enters into body of Kamala Devi too. So, name of Kamala Devi should also ONCE AGAIN changed, and/or even she should have another ADDITIONAL NAME, IS IT NOT?

How many spiritual suicides Mr Dixit and his followers had committed by OFFICIALLY inviting human souls in their body!

10) Another reason- why Mr Dixit had to say- B Baba enters into his body is - Murli point says- BapDada are combined. So, when Mr Dixit gives the title Dada to B Baba, and includes his name in Baap, (just to misinterpret the Murli point, and enacting his HK Hood indirectly) OBVIOUSLY he had to say- B Baba also enters into his body. [Other reasons are already mentioned in earlier posts].

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests