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 » 01 Aug 2016

The idea behind Brahma riding on Shankar is that Brahma is a symbol of the mind. Now nobody's mind is under control, so instead of us controlling our mind, our mind influences us with its desires etc. It is like this because controlling the mind requires effort and practice of concentration and it takes time. Nothing happens in a snap of a second. The one in whom the Supreme Soul enters is also an ordinary human being and an effort maker, so it also takes time for him to control his mind. It is not that because the Supreme Soul enters him, that his mind will come under control in that very snap of a second.

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 » 01 Aug 2016

sita wrote:Now nobody's mind is under control, ....Nothing happens in a snap of a second. The one in whom the Supreme Soul enters is also an ordinary human being and an effort maker, so it also takes time for him to control his mind. It is not that because the Supreme Soul enters him, that his mind will come under control in that very snap of a second.
The point of discussion was something DIFFERENT. No one has claimed that everything happens in a snap of second. No one has claimed that, just because Supreme Soul enters Brahma Baba, his mind comes under control in a snap of a second.
It is only PBKs who claim that Mr Dixit is eligible for the titles of Narayan, Shankar, Ram, etc., in the Confluence Age itself, which are actually meant for PURE DEITIES, and NOT for those who are still in the effort-making stage. ALL those titles have been declared by God, to PRIMARILY belong to the FIRST TWO LEAVES of this ENTIRE CYCLE - EXCLUSIVELY the souls of Brahma Baba (DLR) & Saraswati Mama (Om Radhe) - ALL the others being ONLY SECONDARY to the ABOVE TWO SOULS. But IN SPITE of CLEARLY HIGHLIGHTING ALL SUCH POINTS, which CLEARLY DECLARE ABOVE ABSOLUTE TRUTH, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, on this forum, the PBKs, under the MAYAVI SPELL from their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, continue to OPPOSE, DEFAME, INSULT & MOCK God CONSISTENTLY & PERSISTENTLY, MUCH to their own PERIL!!! THEY SIMPLY REFUSE TO EXAMINE THOSE POINTS, IN THE PROPER PERSPECTIVE, OWING TO THEIR ABJECT BLINDNESS & RANK ARROGANCE!!! AND EVEN WHEN THEY DELUSIVELY BELIEVE THAT GOD IS GIVING CLARIFICATIONS THROUGH THEIR BODILY GURU, Virendra Dev Dixit, THEY SIMPLY DO NOT BOTHER TO OBTAIN CLARIFICATIONS ABOUT THESE POINTS, AND POST THEM ON THIS FORUM FOR THE BENEFIT OF OTHERS, BUT CONTINUE TO WASTE THEIR TIME AND THE TIME OF OTHERS IN USELESS COMMENTS & RIDICULOUS ASSUMPTIONS!!!
The idea behind Brahma riding on Shankar is that Brahma is a symbol of the mind.
1)Mostly- you are saying
Brahma Baba = Mind,
Dixit = Intellect
Vedanti = Sanskaar? Am I right?

2) Even in that case, it fails or is erroneous; but of course, a good 'kanras'.
---Because PBKs believe lot of other things, as well, regarding "the Bull riding on Shankar", as already put. Nothing tallies - except just some part of the tail looks fitting somewhere, APPARENTLY!

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 » 02 Aug 2016

We also play the part of Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar by creating thoughts, discriminating and sustaining or dismissing them. It is said we should achieve the stage like that of Shankar - incorporeal stage. Mind should be under control. When we reach the point like stage - mind becomes peaceful. The aim is that our mind gets purified - Brahma to become Vishnu.
2)Further, the Murli point which they quote to prove their claims that- "there had been some children who used to teach drill to Mama, Baba, etc"- it also clearly says- "they went into stomach of python"
This was not the final paper. The final paper is at the end. They failed in some exam in between. It is said they failed, but it is not said that they will fail in future and in the final exam. One who fails in the beginning becomes experienced.
FIRST TWO LEAVES of this ENTIRE CYCLE - EXCLUSIVELY the souls of Brahma Baba (DLR) & Saraswati Mama (Om Radhe) - ALL the others being ONLY SECONDARY to the ABOVE TWO SOULS.
That is fine, but it is about the beginning of the Golden Age. Baba has said that Confluence Age is higher than the Golden Age, brahmins are higher than deities, so the greatest form will be there in the Confluence Age. Among the deities who are there in the Confluence Age - Brahma, Vishnu, Shankar - it is Shankar who is worshiped the most and is shown in the highest stage. He is also said to be the biggest in the Murli. BKs deny the existence of Shankar, but in the Murli it is clearly said that the part of Shankar will certainly be played practically, that's why there are his memorials.

Baba has also said clearly in the Murli that the memorials refer to the Confluence Age, but BKs think Krishna, Narayan, refer to the Golden Age.

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 » 02 Aug 2016

# Few more examples of PBKs defending lies (as usual) :-
sita wrote:We also play the part of Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar by ....
Already known. Baba has clearly said- "become master Trimurti". No need of clarification lecture on this, from bodily gurus.
Among the deities who are there in the Confluence Age - Brahma, Vishnu, Shankar - it is Shankar who is worshiped the most and is shown in the highest stage.
No. In Murlis, sometimes Brahma is kept ahead, sometimes Vishnu, sometimes Shankar.
OK- even if your words are taken to be strictly correct, Prove Mr. Dixit is Shankar. What do PBKs gain just by saying Shankar is the highest? It seems that PBKs just think that- if no one in BKWSU speaks about Shankar, they can hijack that seat?- like take it for granted!PBKs will also have to prove that- "there is a lot of gap between Brahma and Shankar, and Vishnu and Shankar". But, Murli point clearly says- "next to ShivBaba are trimurtis". But- in PBK view, their Trimurti personalities - kamala Devi, sister Vedanti, DLR and Om Radhe-whom they include as hands- do not come in top 8!.
He is also said to be the biggest in the Murli. BKs deny the existence of Shankar, but in the Murli it is clearly said that the part of Shankar will certainly be played practically, that's why there are his memorials.
BKs do not deny existence of Shankar. Since the Murli point ALSO says- "There is no part of Shankar, etc, etc, ", some BKs would have said so. That is different.
FYKI, memorials of Shankar are very much less when compared to Shivling or Krishna. Shivling does not represent Shankar. It represents point of light. So, your argument may fit only "in PBK view"- neither in general, nor logically.
This was not the final paper. The final paper is at the end. They failed in some exam in between. It is said they failed, but it is not said that they will fail in future and in the final exam. One who fails in the beginning becomes experienced.
Mr. Dixit did not get any "useful" experiences. You can see how much blunders the so-called "experienced" Guru of PBKs and their followers have done here and are still doing.

So- instead of delivering some lectures, prove that Mr. Dixit is Shankar. Mr. Dixit or PBKs just take the advantage of the lack of knowledge about Shankar in BKWSU, and have started their own philosophy, and they have been caught in their own trap, as it is clearly seen.
So- if you like to prove something righteously, prove it in proper way, not just like- a story- "there was a lady who got confused about something in/about her husband. Some cheater seeing this, said- I am your husband and tried to misuse her. Such weak ladies will fall into trap of such men. Similarly, Mr Dixit fooled such weak BKs (who were confused about Shankar, etc)".
But, as Baba has said- jhoot toh chal naheen saktaa = Lies cannot be sustained. - Post No. 54 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... alse#p7817
Baba has also said clearly in the Murli that the memorials refer to the Confluence Age, but BKs think Krishna, Narayan, refer to the Golden Age.
Again lies. Baba has said- memorials are of both - Conf. Age and Heaven. (braahmins as well as deities).

But, the pitiable state of PBKs is- even if their words are taken to be right, they themselves can neither explain nor prove their own claims as applicable even in their own views. Hundreds of questions have already been put in this topic. But, you or any PBk could not give right replies. For some questions - you did not even try to reply. And- for many others- you wrote lies, argued in double standard, twisted manner, and violating other many Murli points. But, it is OK. It is your part in drama. So, nothing new/wrong.

Sita: "We also play the part of Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar . . ."
Similarly, Brahma Baba, who is the HIGHEST AMONG ALL EMBODIED SOULS, ALSO PLAYS the roles of Brahma, Shankar & Vishnu – in this SPECIFIC ORDER!
The role of Prajapita Brahma, through his corporeal body from the VERY BEGINNING of Confluence Age until 1969; the role of Avyakt Brahma or Shankar, through his subtle body, after 1969 until the VERY END of Confluence Age; and the role of Vishnu, (COMBINED with his soul-mate or ‘yugal-dana’, Saraswati Mama or soul of Om Radhe), as MAHA-LAKSHMI, (Lakshmi & Narayan COMBINED), in the VERY BEGINNING of Golden Age - followed by similar combinations of sovereigns, thereafter, until the VERY END of Silver Age – all of whom would be enacting the designated roles, as ‘Vishnu’, during the first half of the Cycle!
BKWSU SM, Revised 02.08.2016 wrote: 1. भगवान को न जानने के कारण बहुतों को भगवान मान लेते हैं। अब तुम बच्चों को सच्चे बाप का परिचय देना है।
Because of not knowing God, they (BLIND PBKs) believe many to be God (God to be taking MORE THAN ONE Chariot). You (Righteous) Children now have to give the introduction of the TRUE Father.

2. त्रिमूर्ति का चित्र भी बहुत-बहुत वैल्युबुल है। ब्रह्मा द्वारा विष्णुपुरी की स्थापना होती है, फिर वही पालना भी करेंगे। बच्चों को अथाह खुशी रहनी चाहिए– बेहद का बाबा हमको पढ़ाते हैं, स्वर्ग का मालिक बनाने के लिए। बाबा आकर स्वर्ग की स्थापना और नर्क का विनाश कराते हैं इसलिए महाभारत लड़ाई भी साथ में है।
The picture of the Trimurti is also very valuable. The land of Vishnu is established through Brahma (soul of DLR) and he will ALSO, THEN sustain it (as Vishnu). You children should have a lot of happiness that the UNLIMITED Baba is TEACHING You to make You into the Masters of Heaven. Baba comes and establishes Heaven, and 'INITIATES' the destruction of hell (as Shankar - through the VERY SAME SOUL of Brahma Baba, or soul of DLR). Therefore, the great Mahabharat War is connected with this.
Sita: "It is said we should achieve the stage like that of Shankar - incorporeal stage. Mind should be under control. When we reach the point like stage - mind becomes peaceful."
Above stage, “like that of Shankar”, has ALREADY BEEN ACHIEVED by Brahma Baba in 1969, ITSELF; (as CLEARLY DECLARED by God HIMSELF, in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, in innumerable AVswhile Virendra Dev Dixit has trained the PBKs to TURN A BLIND EYE TO SAME, by POLLUTING & INVERTING their intellects with the CORRUPTED & ADULTERATED MISINTERPRETATIONS of innumerable SMs); and this is why Brahma Baba becomes the HIGHEST AMONG ALL EMBODIED SOULS, on this corporeal sphere, (ALONG WITH his soul-mate or ‘yugal-dana’, Saraswati Mama or soul of Om Radhe)!

Sita: "That is fine, but it is about the beginning of the Golden Age. Baba has said that Confluence Age is higher than the Golden Age, Brahmins are higher than deities, so the greatest form will be there in the Confluence Age."
This CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES the CORRUPTED & INVERTED intellectual mind-set of the PBKs, generated by the TREACHEROUS MISINTERPRETATIONS & MISREPRESENTATIONS of the SMs and AVs, initiated by their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, under the active influence of the NEGATIVE ENERGY of Ravan or Maya!
Radha & Krishna, or the VERY FIRST Lakshmi & Narayan of G A, DO NOT SUDDENLY LAND UP in the VERY BEGINNING of G A (from NOWHERE, or JUST ONLY from ‘Paramdham’)!!! BOTH of them (Brahma Baba, or soul of DLR; and Saraswati Mama, or soul of Om Radhe) have been the HIGHEST Brahmins in the Confluence Age (and NO OTHER embodied souls CAN EVER ACHIEVE A HIGHER STATUS than BOTH of them - as Brahmins, in the Confluence Age), which is HIGHER than G A. The status of these VERY SAME TWO HIGHEST SOULS is HIGHER, as Brahmins, in the Confluence Age (since God HIMSELF is COMBINED with BOTH of THEM, at THIS TIME); and the status of the VERY SAME TWO HIGHEST SOULS, in the VERY BEGINNING of G A, is considered to be lower (since God is NO LONGER COMBINED with them, at THAT TIME)!
IT IS NOT THAT THEY ARE THE HIGHEST IN G A, and SOME OTHER SOULS ARE HIGHER THAN THEM IN the Confluence Age!!! NOT AT ALL!!! THIS IS THE CORRUPTION & ADULTERATION GENERATED BY Ravan OR Maya, THROUGH THE ‘MUKRAR-RATH’ OF Ravan, Virendra Dev Dixit – THUS COMPLETELY FOOLING THE PBKs, and MAKING THOROUGH IDIOTS OUT OF THEM!!!

Sita: "Among the deities who are there in the Confluence Age - Brahma, Vishnu, Shankar - it is Shankar who is worshiped the most and is shown in the highest stage. He is also said to be the biggest in the Murli."
As already HIGHLIGHTED INNUMERABLE TIMES BEFORE, on this forum, as well, Brahma Baba, or soul of DLR, HIMSELF, ALSO PLAYS the roles of Brahma, Shankar & Vishnu – in this SPECIFIC ORDER! It is EXCLUSIVELY the role of Brahma Baba, or soul of DLR, COMBINED with REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God, AS Shankar, which is worshipped the MOST and is shown in the HIGHEST STAGE! This role of ‘Shankar’ (REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God COMBINED with REAL Prajapita Brahma, Brahma Baba or soul of DLR), is referred to as the BIGGEST or HIGHEST, in the concerned versions in the SMs and the AVs!

Sita: "BKs deny the existence of Shankar, but in the Murli it is clearly said that the part of Shankar will certainly be played practically, that's why there are his memorials."
PBKs have been brain-washed into DELUSIVELY believing that BKs DENY the ‘existence’ of Shankar; whereas TRUE BKs are PRACTICALLY EXPERIENCING the COMBINED ROLES of REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God COMBINED with REAL Prajapita Brahma, Brahma Baba or soul of DLR, as REAL Shankar, through the subtle body of Brahma Baba, TO DATE! While the PBKs have DIVORCED themselves from such SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCES, by allowing themselves to be drawn to the ‘Godly Form’ or ‘Ishwariya Rup’ of Ravan or Maya, MASQUERADING, as ‘Prajapita Brahma’, ‘Shankar’, etc., etc., etc., in the Confluence Age!

Sita: "Baba has also said clearly in the Murli that the memorials refer to the Confluence Age, but BKs think Krishna, Narayan, refer to the Golden Age."
PBKs have been brain-washed into DELUSIVELY believing that BKs think THIS & THAT & THE OTHER, by THEMSELVES - which is TOTALLY WRONG! BKs THINK & STATE, what God has ACTUALLY DECLARED, in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, in the Murlis – WITHOUT MISINTERPRETING, MISREPRESENTING & MISAPPROPRIATING them, as the PBKs do, under the ACTIVE influence of Ravan or Maya, through their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, DELUSIVELY BELIEVING same to be ‘Shrimat’!!!
The memorials DEFINITELY REFER to the Confluence Age. ACTUAL ROLES of REAL Krishna, Narayan, etc., DEFINITELY REFER to the Golden Age – BUT THE MEMORIALS OF THESE VERY SAME SOULS, WHEN THE VERY SAME SOULS ENACT THEIR RESPECTIVE ROLES IN THE Confluence Age are remembered!!! IT IS THESE SUBTLEST ASPECTS OF KNOWLEDGE, WHICH THE CORRUPTED, ADULTERATED, POLLUTED & INVERTED INTELLECTS of the PBKs, CAN NEVER ASSIMILATE OR ABSORB OR APPRECIATE OR CORRELATE!!!

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 » 02 Aug 2016

# Flaw No. 283) Past Tense, Present tense or future tense? - "FAILED" or "WILL FAIL"?

Mr. Dixit has brainwashed PBKs to such an extent that they have lost all of their intellectual prowess, as if fully hypnotized. PBKs argue worse than children or fools. One fine example is below.
sita wrote:This was not the final paper. The final paper is at the end. They failed in some exam in between. It is said they failed, but it is not said that they will fail in future and in the final exam. One who fails in the beginning becomes experienced.
Actually, Baba is referring this to the previous Kalpa. But, Mr. Dixit misinterpreted this to the early period in Yagya- just to manipulate and justify failure as correct or a matter of casual consequence!. - so that- cunningly he can act like- "even after falling, the mustache did not get dirtied". But-
--You had already been shown a Murli point which says- they will fail in the other topic. Still you argue in the same way. This PROVES that the intellects of PBKs are UNABLE to ABSORB the Pure Knowledge of God! Few more Murli points are put below.

1) SM 6-9-87(2):- Koyi toh naapaas bhee ho jaate hain jiski nishaani bhee Ram ko dikhyaai hai. Baaki koyi hinsaa kee koyi baath naheen. -86 [Ram, tense]

= Some (will) fail whose sign is given as bow and arrows to Ram.

2) SM 11-9-77(2):- Tumko tamopradhaan se satopradhaan ban_na hai. KOYI TO NAAPAAS BHI HO JATE HAIN. JISKI NISHAANI BHI Ram KO DIKHAAYI HAI. Baaki koyi hinsaa aadi ki baath nahin. Tum bhi kshatriy ho. Yuddh ke maidaan may Maya par jeeth panevaale. JEETH NA PAANEVAALE NAAPAAS HO PADTEY HAIN. 16 KALA KE BADLEY 14 KALA BAN PADTEY HAIN. Koyi satopradhaan, koyi sato bante hain. Vaise hee phir rajadhaani may bhi numberwaar pad honge. -15.

= ...Some fail.... Those who cannot attain victory, fail. Instead of 16 degrees, they become 14 degrees.
[This is not a past tense dear soul. It is either present or future tense, but logically it refers to future and soul of human Ram]. This Murli point was the one that was shown to you earlier.

3) SM 6-11-82(1):- JAANTEY HO AAGE BHI IS GYAAN YAGY MAY SAARI PURAANI DUNIAAYAA SWAAHAA HO GAYI THI. -44 [past tense]

= You know even earlier/before, in this yagy, THE WHOLE IMPURE WORLD HAD GOT 'SWAHA' (DESTROYED).

Baba is referring to the previous Kalpa, is it not? Or do you like to argue that even this incident can pertain to the beginning period of the Yagya?

4) SM 1-9-82(1):- Kamaayi knowledge se hoti hai. God fatherly student life hai. Sooryavamshi chandravamshi gharaaney kaa maalik bante hain goyaa swarg ke maalik bante hain. Paavan duniyaa may bhi sab ek pad toh nahin hotey. SIRF EK LN TOH RAAJY NAHIN KARTE HAIN NA. YAH BHI KISKO PATAA NAHIN HAI SIRF DYNASTY HOGI (YAA) AUR RAAJAYI BHI HOGI. ShivBaba NE NAYI DUNIYAA STHAAPAN KI HAI. -1 [Kings, past_tense]

As per your arguments, then the above Murli point can be interpreted as- ShivBaba has already established the new world.

5) SM 3-11-87(1):- Main parampita parmaatmaa hun jisko Shiv paramaatmaaya namaha kahaa jaataa hai. Main ismey aayaa hun. MAIN SOOKSHMVATANVAASI BRAHMA DWARAA PRAVESH NAHEEN KARTAA HUN. Mujhe toh yahaan patition ko paavan banaanaa hai. MERE DWAARAA HEE VAH SOOKSHMVATANVAASI BRAHMA PAAVAN BANAA HAI. Isliye inko sookshm may dikhaayaa hai.

As per PBK argument above, Brahma had already become pure- even before 1969!

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 » 02 Aug 2016

Or do you like to argue that even this incident can pertain to the beginning period of the Yagya?
Certainly. Could be.
MERE DWAARAA HEE VAH SOOKSHMVATANVAASI Brahma PAAVAN BANAA HAI.
As per PBK argument above, Brahma had already become pure- even before 1969!
No. This is clearly an expression about some occurrence in the future.

You gave the example about those who failed in the beginning, who used to teach Mama and Baba and then they failed and left, and Maya ate them and went into the stomach of the python. This is clearly an indication about the beginning of the Yagya, referring to a period before the Murli was spoken. There is no need to argue about that. It is said that we (Brahma Baba and Mama) thought they would attain a very high number in the rosary, but they failed. It means that now they don't think they will attain a high number. In fact, even today the numbers are not clear, so still we cannot say who will achieve high or low number.
Shivling does not represent Shankar. It represents point of light.
Shivling does not represent Shankar, but it represents the corporeal one in whom the supreme souls enters. The point of light is represented by the diamond in the ling. Shankar is a mixed part, there are 3 souls playing part, and it represents subtle stage, whilst the ling represents incorporeal stage.

All the memorials represent actions of God and not the deities. Krishna does not represent Brahma Baba, in the Golden Age. Krishna represents the role of the Supreme Soul in the Confluence Age who delivers the Murli of knowledge. Similarly Ram is not about some other soul who fails. Why would there be worship of failures. Ram is about the role of God in the Confluence Age. Ram is victorious in the Confluence Age in defeating Ravan.

Similarly you say that Lakshmi and Narayan is about the Golden Age, but the image of Lakshmi and Narayan is Vishnu. Vishnu is a deity of the Confluence Age. Vishnu is a symbol of the combined form of Lakshmi and Narayan. In the Murli it is said that these ornaments of Vishnu, the chakra etc. refer to you children, because in the Golden Age there is no knowledge. These Lakshmi and Narayan with the ornaments belong to the Confluence Age.

In the original picture of the Trimurti (prepared and corrected by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba) it is said that the status of Shri Narayan or Shri Ram and Shri Lakshmi or Shri Sita is once again obtained through this knowledge and Yoga. There are various possibilities about why the names of Ram and Sita are also mentioned. First is that Lakshmi and Narayan are the same ones who become Ram and Sita, that is supported in the Murli. it is said that these Lakshmi and Narayan then become Ram and Sita. If this is the case it would mean that Ram failing refer to Brahma Baba. (If we accept that, as you say, Narayan refers to Brahma Baba). The other option is that it refers to 4 souls, like the 4 souls, like helping hands, in the explanation of Vishnu of the PBKs. Or Lakshmi and Narayan could refer to Lakshmi and Narayan of the Confluence Age who become from man, or Nar to Narayan and woman, or Nari to Lakshmi, in the same life (body). They become from man to Ram and from woman to Sita also, when they have been declared to have failed and to have taken the post of Ram with the arrow. God establishes the warrior religion too. So first they achieve their post of Ram and Sita in the Confluence Age when they fail and later in 76 they achieve their post of Lakshmi and Narayan.
Radha & Krishna, or the VERY FIRST Lakshmi & Narayan of G A, DO NOT SUDDENLY LAND UP in the VERY BEGINNING of G A (from NOWHERE, or JUST ONLY from ‘Paramdham’)!!! BOTH of them (Brahma Baba, or soul of DLR; and Saraswati Mama, or soul of Om Radhe) have been the HIGHEST Brahmins in the Confluence Age (and NO OTHER embodied souls CAN EVER ACHIEVE A HIGHER STATUS than BOTH of them - as Brahmins, in the Confluence Age), which is HIGHER than G A. The status of these VERY SAME TWO HIGHEST SOULS is HIGHER, as Brahmins, in the Confluence Age (since God HIMSELF is COMBINED with BOTH of THEM, at THIS TIME); and the status of the VERY SAME TWO HIGHEST SOULS, in the VERY BEGINNING of G A, is considered to be lower (since God is NO LONGER COMBINED with them, at THAT TIME)!
The role through Brahma Baba was not that great, because it is the role of establishment. Even religious fathers used to come and establish their religion, but none of them could destroy the other religions. The part through Shankar is of the true God Father, because truth is one and in the face of the truth, LIE is destroyed. God not only establishes the Brahmin religion, but also makes these brahmins deities. That part was not played through Brahma Baba. And also the Supreme Father has to destroy the other religions and for that he has to be there practically on earth and face the falsehood and lead a religious war and win. This is the greatest part we witness in the Confluence Age and we have not witnessed it through Brahma Baba. But he does that with a great tact, so he becomes famous as Kalankidhar. All the other religious leaders shed blood, but the Supreme Father, like with the story of Krishna and Kansa or Shankar and Basmasur leads a nonviolent war, that people start thinking he is a coward, for not confronting and for running away. But there is a plan for the benefit of everyone. We may quarrel among ourselves, still we are bringing loss to ourselves. Still both mine and your benefit lies with the benefactor Father.

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 » 03 Aug 2016

sita wrote:Certainly. Could be.
No. This is clearly an expression about some occurrence in the future.
1) So, you like to change the tense here, (just to suit your malicious and treacherous arguments), and not REAL-EYEsing that you are going against your own claims (owing to your inverted and 'segmented' intellect).
You gave the example about those who failed in the beginning, who used to teach Mama and Baba and then they failed and left, and Maya ate them and went into the stomach of the python. This is clearly an indication about the beginning of the Yagya, referring to a period before the Murli was spoken. There is no need to argue about that.
2)Great! True dear. Wonderfully argued. But, you FAILED to see the WHOLE of the Murli point.
It clearly says- "children who had been in Yagya for 5, 10 years", hence your argument totally fails.
--In case 1), you argue against your own claims,
--and in 2) you took ONLY HALF, and failed to notice the clear words said there. This is another wonderful example- how PBKs are DELIBERATELY made to misunderstand the Murli points, by thinking in LIMITED way (owing to their inverted and segmented intellects). It clearly shows the LIMITED capacity of PBKs, as to what extent they are able to view and think, and comprehend the Murli points in the CORRECT, UNLIMITED PERSPECTIVES (instead of the CORRUPTED, UNLIMITED PERSPECTIVES).
Shivling does not represent Shankar,..
It is just PBK theory. No Murli points say so. PBKs may believe so. Let them, ACCORDING to their roles in Drama! (Already discussed).
All the memorials represent actions of God and not the deities. ...
Just 'kanras', and speaking in double-standard ways, as usual, (just to suit your malicious and treacherous arguments). Sometimes PBKs say- all the titles pertain to Mr Dixit while in his corporeal body; (just to argue pointlessly, and assume/declare that they do not pertain to Brahma Baba, while in his corporeal body, since he left his corporeal body in 1969 - they simply cannot comprehend that he is STILL PLAYING HIS MORE ACTIVE & DYNAMIC ROLE in his subtle body TO DATE, COMBINED with REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God); sometimes when they FAIL, or perceive that they are getting CORNERED, they say- all TITLES belong to God ONLY. Sometimes they say- the titles go to the embodied soul of the body, through whom God plays his roles. All these have been already discussed EXTENSIVELY earlier.
But NONE OF THESE VALID POINTS CAN BE ABSORBED by the CORRUPTED & INVERTED INTELLECTS of the PBKs!!!

In all these cases, then the title 'ghost/Bull' should go to either God, or to Dixit, as well as Kamala Devi- as they believe ghost enters in both of these human corporeal bodies, and the roles are played by God. :laugh:
[Anyhow, all these issues have already been discussed. There is no benefit in going round and round, IN SAME CIRCLES, with the same issues again and again. There can be no purpose in such conduct, other than to waste one's precious time - better involve yourself in developing your spiritual stage, PRACTICALLY]!

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 » 03 Aug 2016

# Flaw No. 284) How silly PBKs' concept of Krishna and Radha, Ram Sita, TG, FG, Brahma, etc are!:-

1)Part of this is already discussed earlier. PBKs still have not yet said- when Mr. Dixit gets title 'Prajapita', when 'Krishna', when 'Shankar', when 'Ram', etc. So far they have said- Mr Dixit becomes eligible to get title 'Narayan' from 1976 itself [and consequently sister Vedanti as 'Lakshmi', also in the same year].

2)According to PBKs, B baba took birth as 'Krishna' (gets title Krishna) in 1936 itself. And- sister Vedanti gets title 'Radha' at almost same time. [But, the whole logic fails- as already explained here - Error No. 29 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=50566&hilit=Radha#p50566 ].

OK, still if we agree to their claims-

-- So, according to PBk theory, we can say- Mr Dixit gets title 'Ram', at least before 1942 (then only they can use the Murli point, saying "Ram failed", at the beginning period of Yagya). And- they will have to agree even sister Vedanti's previous birth, 'Radha bachchi/child'- failed in 1947- she too would be eligible for title 'Sita' before 1947.
----Now- ridiculous things are - their 'Radha bachchi'- is entitled to first get title 'Radha' (in 1936 itself), then 'Sita' (between 1936 and 1947), then 'Lakshmi' (in 1976). So, first 'Radha', then 'Sita', then 'Laksmhi'? - what logic is this?
----Similarly, Mr Dixit/Sevakram - (may be getting title 'Prajapita' in 1936 itself- do they say so?), then before 1942 - he should get title 'Ram', is it not? Then gets title 'Narayan' in 1976. Then probably after sometime, or at the same time he gets title 'Shankar'. [They cannot say Mr. Sevakram gets title 'Shankar' in 1936 itself- as Sakar Murlis clearly ignore part of 'Shankar' for the initial period- or let us see what they say].

--- So- in "PBK view"- Mr Dixit becomes first 'Prajapita' (in 1936), then 'Ram' (before 1942), then 'Narayan' (in 1976); so when is he going to get title 'Krishna' in Confluence Age? PBKs cannot say- Mr. Dixit/Sevakram gets title Krishna in 1936, as it would be then totally ambiguous regarding who is Krishna bachcha/child in the relevant Murli point.

3)If we see all the above- it is as good as- their 'Radha' takes birth as 'Radha' in 1936, but not the soul-pair Sevakram. Sevakram does not get title 'Krishna', EXACTLY at the same time.
--And- their 'Ram' fails in 1942 itself, but 'Sita' fails only in 1947! :laugh:

4) 'Radha' gives birth to 'Krishna'! [They believe their 'Radha' is the True Gita and gives birth to 'Krishna']. But, the Murli point says- Mother Gita gives birth to Krishna. So, "a bachchi(female child) giving birth to another bachchaa (male child)"
--In PBK logic, 'Radha' is True Gita. So, is God of True Gita, Shiv, or Shiv through Brahma, or just Radha? PBKs cannot say- God through Radha is God of Gita. Because they do not say God entered into their Radha in 1936. And- they cannot give certificate that God of Gita to her, as then the Chariot Dixit would lose all of his status, as they believe Dixit is the instrument for God of Gita.
--If PBKs say- all the titles are for actions of God, then does it mean God played roles of 'Radha' and 'True Gita' through sister Vedanti, and played role of Mother (while giving birth to child 'Krishna' in 1936?) But, it again goes against their claims as they do not believe God entered into her in 1936.
--- And PBKs believe Kamala Devi is the false Gita, and God really entered into her. So, do PBKs believe it is God who played the role of False Gita too??? :laugh:

5) And- as per PBKs, B baba gets title 'Krishna' in 1936 itself, but 'Brahma' in 1947. So, first is 'Krishna', then Brahma?
Similarly they believe God entered in sister Vedanti only later(after 1942). So, here also first 'Radha', then Brahma?

6)If PBKs believe all these personalities get all the titles in 1936 itself, - even then it fails. As Murli points clearly say- Krishna took birth; they do not say- Narayan took birth or Shankar, Ram, Sita took birth, etc.
---Also- then their own claims - what they say- Lakshmi and Narayan took birth in 1976 will totally fail.

Total contradictions beyond imagination, but they APPARENTLY, definitely DO MAKE SENSE to the CORRUPTED, ADULTERATED, POLLUTED, SEGMENTED & INVERTED INTELLECTS of the PBKs -
ALL, PERFECTLY, AS PER DRAMA PLAN - NOTHING NEW!

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 » 03 Aug 2016

I think shooting in reverse order is logical. Baba has said that we have to climb the reverse ladder. Although we may have satopradhan stage in our initial times in the knowledge, but we don't have that much knowledge at that time and we have many worldly thoughts also, because it requires time to detach from the world, so we would naturally do the shooting of the Iron and Copper ages first. When we cross the border of the confluence between copper and Silver Age in reverse order our waste would stop, we would enter a secure stage.

About the people from the beginning of the Yagya who failed it was said the reason also that at that time there used not be that much knowledge.

Regarding the titles and timings...names are given based on the acts and everything happens first in the mind. In the beginning Brahma Baba came to know that he would become Krishna in the Golden Age, later he came to know he would play the role of Brahma. These two don't contradict. The two conceptions can coexist in the mind at the same time, that now I am Brahma, then I'll be Krishna. You can even call it the swadarshanchakra, we see our many forms. Chronologically, which is first - Krishna or Brahma? I would say Brahma, because the oldest of old age is the Confluence Age, the beginning.

About the soul or Prajapita he first becomes Brahmin, because it is said that...was he Prajapita without being a brahmin. Brahmin means child of Brahma. Brahma means big mother. Prajapita becomes a brahmin through some female Brahma in the beginning.

There is an interesting point from the Murli, that on the path of Bhakti they have copied the concept that Brahma emerges from the navel of Vishnu and have shown Nehru to emerge from the navel of Gandhi. This is a good point, because it demonstrates that it does not refer to one and the same soul in different times in the cycle. Gandhi is not the perfect form in the Golden Age of Nehru in the Confluence Age. No, both are separate souls who even coexist, interact, know each other and even act together. But here the matter is that Nehru emerges from the navel of Gandhi, that is Prajapita emerges from the navel of Brahma Baba in the beginning. This is regarding your claim that why it was Brahma Baba who had visions first. But in the Murli also the matter is said that then Vishnu emerges from the navel of Brahma, that is regarding the clarifications of the visions.

So first the title of Prajapita is there, because he sows the seeds of knowledge. When he fails he becomes Ram. When he claims his birthright, he is Narayan and when the part of destruction is played he is Shankar. Confluence aged Krishna is when there is a sudden light in the Brahmin family when in one year 9 sisters surrender in the Advance Party and it creates some wave of amusement in the Brahmin family. Krishna means the one who attracts. Then later when through him inheritance will be obtained, he will be again Prajapita. He will also be Prajapati - the husband of the world. Meanwhile he could adopt many forms according to the situation. According to the role that is played the title will be there.

No. In 36 it is not that Brahma Baba gets the title Krishna. It is said in the Murli that we will become perfect only at the end. Till we are not perfect we cannot claim we are, but still we may have the knowledge of what we are to become. It is like winning the lottery. You can be happy about it, you can know you will have billions, buts till money are not transferred. It takes some time. So in 76 we can say that the title of Narayan is only in a subtle form, on the level of the mind.

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 » 03 Aug 2016

# Flaw No. 285) PBKs inadvertently imply "Realization of Truth can be a Failure" !

An excellent example how INVERTED the intellects of PBKs ACTUALLY are! Baba has said- when the 'Minister' Mind has control over the Intellect (actually, it should be the other way around), then it will even make the Intellect a slave, and judge wrong as right and right as wrong. [See the last points- 5 to 9 below]!
sita wrote:I think shooting in reverse order is logical. Baba has said that we have to climb the reverse ladder.
You may take any order, it does not fit. You said-
1)For Mr. Dixit/Sevakram:-
-- first is Prajapita(1936), then Ram(in 1942), then Narayan(in 1976),
--then Krishna (mostly in 1983, or later, when 9 sisters got surrendered to AIVV- you may mention the year),
---Which year is Shankar? - should be 1976 itself- as PBKs believe the Bull had started to ride him from 1976 itself!
---Then again Prajapita?
So, the PBK order looks like- "Prajapita/Brahma, Ram, Narayan, Shankar, Krishna, Prajapita". But, in the time cycle (From Golden Age till Conf. Age)- the order is " (Narayan= Dixit), Krishna(DLR)-Narayan(DLR), Ram (S Age), Prajapita, Shankar". You may take straight or reverse. It does not fit. [If you like to take the order as Confluence Age to Iron Age, even then it will not fit. You may try].

2) Now, take the soul-pair of Mr. Dixit:-
--First is Radha (in 1936), then in 1942 Brahma, when God enters her, when she fails, she gets title Sita(1947).
---Then in 1976, she gets title Lakshmi. When she gets title Parvati- and how?
So- if you take order- it is like- Radha, Brahma, Sita, Lakshmi, Parvati(?). It does not fit anywhere.

3)Now, take case of PBK Kamala Devi:- she gets title Brahma in 1936, then false Gita. She gets title Jagadamba in 1983. But, in between Premkanta was Jagadamba!
Regarding the titles and timings...names are given based on the acts and everything happens first in the mind. In the beginning Brahma Baba came to know that he would become Krishna in the Golden Age, later he came to know he would play the role of Brahma. These two don't contradict.
4) Useless argument. Brahma Baba got visions that he will become Vishnu, not (just) Krishna. But, Murli point says- "Krishna took birth". PBKs too say- their TG and FG together gave birth to only Krishna in 1936 (not to Vishnu!) :laugh:
---Can you see however erroneously you try to fit something to something by hook or crook, Mr Dixit or PBKs will fail = can explain/fit/manipulate only a part/tail of a thing.
The two conceptions can coexist in the mind at the same time, that now I am Brahma, then I'll be Krishna. You can even call it that the swadarshanchakra, we see our many forms in that.
5)That is a good point. Then why do PBKs stick to 1976 as date of birth of Narayan? Was not Mr. Dixit/Sevakram sure that he would become Narayan before? Had he initially thought/felt that he was only Ram before 1942?
Or do you like to say- He felt himself as Ram just(as soon as) because he left Yagya? Means- he knew title 'Ram' means failure, so to get title 'Ram', he failed- or something like that? :laugh: Actually you are implying that**.

6)In any case, the argument fails. Because if a person realizes that he is Ram, he cannot lose faith or leave Yagya.
Also- if he had already realized that he was Ram* on or before 1942, then he would have also realized I am Narayan, Chariot, etc., too, at that time itself. How can one leave Yagya if he had really felt that he would attain those positions in future?

7)*- If Sevakram has realized himself as Conf. Aged Ram (or God's Chariot) by 1942 itself, then he CANNOT fail, as that is the highest position. Then the Srimath which says- "follow Father " cannot be applicable to PBK Ram.
Or- if you believe SR had realized ONLY TO THE EXTENT- he is going to become Silver Aged deity Ram, automatically he loses the first position. Because PBKs believe Dixit/SR becomes the highest Narayan (World Emperor). So, it implies- Mr SR realized only his Silver Aged role in 1936, but not the Golden Aged one, whereas DLR had realized his G Aged (highest) role itself, in 1936 itself![/color][/b]

** 8)You have written -
"So first the title of Prajapita is there, because he sows the seeds of Knowledge. When he fails he becomes Ram. When he claims his birthright, he is Narayan and when the part of destruction is played he is Shankar. Confluence aged Krishna is when there is a sudden light in the Brahmin family when in one year 9 Sisters surrender in the Advance Party and it creates some wave of amusement in the Brahmin family. Krishna means the one who attracts. Then later when through him inheritance will be obtained, he will be again Prajapita. He will also be Prajapati - the husband of the world. Meanwhile he could adopt many forms according to the situation. According to the role that is played the title will be there".
9) Ridiculous thing is- according to PBKs, Sister Vedanti gets title Radha in 1936 itself, but the soul-pair Mr. Dixit becomes eligible for the title 'Krishna', only in 1983 somewhere! :laugh:

Now- if PBKs say- No. Mr Dixit was really aware of all his roles in 1936 itself, then they lose their claims- as, such a soul can never fail.

10) So, do PBKs finally agree- none of the PBKs souls were able to attract anyone in the beginning of Yagya?
But- still they say- the PBKs siters had entire control over Yagya! Great logic, indeed!

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 » 03 Aug 2016

# Flaw No. 286) Murli says- two (Ram and Sita) have failed, but in AIVV- it is three. But, again- they cunningly stick just to two!

1)The Murli point says- "Ram and Sita failed". It does not say- "Jagadamba too failed". But, in PBK view- all the three PBKs souls had failed in the beginning. So- they do not tally.
sita wrote:This was not the final paper. The final paper is at the end. They failed in some exam in between. It is said they failed, but it is not said that they will fail in future and in the final exam. One who fails in the beginning becomes experienced.
2)As already put here- PBK Ram failed for second time as well. And- their Jagadamba too would be getting more experiences - for nearly two decades during her second failure - since 1998. - Post No- 85, 86 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=50738&hilit=second#p50738

And- your argument saying - less knowledge was cause for failure is too ridiculous and illogical- as your own Jagadamba again failed after taking the so called advance knowledge (already put), and even many PBKs have left and have started splinter groups.
So- from any point of view, none of the arguments hold any value. Kindly TRY to realize at least this before arguing the same way - again and again.

3)Cunningly- PBKs never address failure of Jagadamba in any of their blogs or literature in the same way as they address/explain the failure of Dixit and so called Radha bachchi. :laugh:

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 » 03 Aug 2016

1976 is said to be the birth of Lakshmi and Narayan in the Murlis. That is why this date is given. We cannot have any proof about whatever happens in the mind of someone, so we can only rely to some external facts. I think the idea about Ram comes only later in the Murli. In the beginning there wes not much knowledge, there were not even Murlis, they start from Karachi. 76 is the year of the revelation of the Father, because in the brahmin family the new knowledge about the new role spreads at that time.
as your own Jagadamba again failed after taking the so called Advanced Knowledge (already put) and even many PBKs have left and have started splinter groups.
There is no such thing as failure. Everyone claims exactly the same status. It is said that Ram fails, because when there is no knowledge about ourselves, we struggle, we stumble, we fight like a warrior. When we achieve complete faith in our role it is as if we reach Paramdham. There are no warriors, nor deities there, just souls.

Ram means an effort maker, one who makes effort to claim his status. A deity is a complete stage. there is no matter of making effort. Achieving the status of Ram is like taking shelter on our way up to the top. We stop for some time, we may even get down from our climbing the peak, we take shelter and take a rest, but this is for a temporary period and then the effort continues and the result will be there visible only at the end.

The role of Shankar will be said to be there when the shaktis will do the task of destruction.

In the Murli it is said that the Father has become akari from sakari, from akari - nirakara and he will become sakari again. So I think that, changing of roles may not always follow strict order, like we can play a role of Brahma within our mind, then of Shankar, then Brahma again. It is not that once some role is played it cannot be played again. Otherwise why would there be the title that he is the one who takes many forms. He changes forms and he changes it according to the situation. Like it is said that we have to discriminate where to create and where to destroy, these go hand in hand since in the beginning, both task go hand in hand.

Like with our shooting. We may think we have achieved a very high stage, but suddenly we suffer some loss. This loss will go into the account of shooting of the second half of the Kalpa. Then we can do the shooting of the first half again. It depends on our stage.

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 » 03 Aug 2016

# Flaw No. 287) Another example of making ShivBaba as 'scapegoat':-
sita wrote:1976 is said to be the birth of Lakshmi and Narayan in the Murlis. That is why this date is given.
We cannot have any proof about whatever happens in the mind of someone, so we can only rely to some external facts.
So, where is the so called extra- ordinary clarifications?
Murli says many things. PBKs do not hesitate to go against them, justifying their claims by all means of lies, as well as double-standards. But, when they fail, they just say- "it is said (in Murlis) ".

I HAD NOT ASKED ANY PROOF FOR WHAT HAD HAPPENED IN THEIR MIND. I had argued against the claim of PBKs. It is PBKs who say- birth has taken in mind, NOT THE Murlis! Has any Murli said- birth has taken place in the mind?

With reference to the PBK claims, I had given different possibilities- both external and within the mind. You failed to address from all points of view, and then just put allegations on Murlis or ShivBaba, and still like to continue - my cock has three legs.
Thank you very much for your kind arguments. Will write more later.

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 » 03 Aug 2016

It is PBKs who say- birth has taken in mind
Whatever is there in the mind will certainly express itself in some form. We claim it is on the level of the mind, because it is always this way that it starts. Everything starts in the mind first. First the soul is purified. And Baba is speaking unlimited meanings, when it is said about birth of Lakshmi and Narayan in 76, it is about revelation like birth. We are not giving account of mind, but the role of the Father got revealed to the minds of some Brahmins souls within the Yagya in 76. This is an external fact.

I am waiting for your further comments, but please go through the above post once more as I have added some points.

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 » 03 Aug 2016

# Flaw No. 288) Few more examples for Wonderful kanras of PBKs:-

Few more examples - how Mr. Dixit gives his so called extra-ordinary clarifications, and the PBKs assume them to be nectar.
sita wrote: There is an interesting point from the Murli, that on the path of Bhakti they have copied the concept that Brahma emerges from the navel of Vishnu and have shown Nehru to emerge from the navel of Gandhi.
The Murli point is below.

SM 15-3-79(3):- Ram Raajy hota hi Satyug may. Gandhi phir Ramrajy kaise kar sake. Vah koyi kahthay thay kyaa ki aisaa atmaabhimaani bano. Baap hi sangam par kahthay hain. Yah hai uttam se uttam purush ban_ne kaa yug. VAH PHIR SAMAJHTE HAIN GANDHI NE RAAMRAAJY STHAAPAN KIYAA. UNSEY BACHCHAA NEHRU NIKLAA. Ab Vishnu ki naabhi se Brahma kaise niklaa yah bhi samajhte thode hi hai. Yah to aur hi Ravan rajy ko pukkaa karke gaye. Kitna patit ban gaye hain. Khoob aag lagaate, paththar thokte rahte. Characters bade kharaab hain. -13- [Ram]

= Kingdom of Ram would be in G Age. How can Gandhi establish Ram Raaj(Kindgom of Ram)? Do they used to say- become soul conscious? Only Father says so in Conf. Age. ...They believe GANDHI ESTABLISHED RAAM RAAJ, AND NEHRU CAME FROM IT. They even do not know how through navel of Vishnu, Brahma came. They have made the country even more Kingdom of Ravan. How much impure they have become. They put fire, throw stones. Characters are very bad.
This is a good point, because it demonstrates that it does not refer to one and the same soul in different times in The Cycle. Gandhi is not the perfect form in the Golden Age of Nehru in the Confluence Age. No, both are separate souls who even coexist, interact, know each other and even act together. But here the matter is that Nehru emerges from the navel of Gandhi, that is Prajapita emerges from the navel of Brahma Baba in the beginning. This is regarding your claim that why it was Brahma Baba who had visions first. But in the Murli also the matter is said that then Vishnu emerges from the navel of Brahma, that is regarding the clarifications of the visions.
There are many Murli points like this. Baba sometimes does not compare 100%. Just a part is compared. In the above Murli point- Baba is just saying- creation/establishment and the sustenance. During creation (freedom fight), Gandhi was leader there, and during sustenance, Nehru was the leader.
What Baba means to say is- people are in deep sleep. They think independence has given our goal. But, Baba says- the real goal (of true Ram raaj) has not come. People have become more vicious.
So- your underlined words are just your own assumptions. You have not even read the whole Murli point. Baba has said there- can Gandhi establish Ram Raajy? But, you have assumed Gandhi to be a soul in G Age.

If you like to compare 100%, even here you fail. because Gandhi did not live even for an year after Independence. But, in PBK view- both Narayans would be living fully in G Age.

Even here, PBKs may interpret this Murli as it is fully applicable to BK Yagya and give their interpretations like- my cock has three legs.
No. In 36 it is not that Brahma Baba gets the title Krishna.
Already discussed. You somtimes agree, sometimes do not. Your double standards and arguing aganist Murlis is clearly seen here- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51628#p51628
And- still Mr Dixit loses the argument. Flaw No. 172 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51147&hilit=honour#p51147.
So in 76 we can say that the title of Narayan is only in a subtle form, on the level of the mind.
Who all have felt that Mr. Dixit and sister Vedanti will become L and N ? So, far you have not replied.
sita wrote:In the Murli it is said that the Father has become akari from sakari, from akari - nirakara and he will become sakari again.
This is simple logic, nothing surprising. Conf. Age to Subtle Region is Sakar to aakar, then to incorporeal world is- akar to niraakaar, then to heaven is Sakar. If you have concrete proof for your claims, then it would be good enough. Else, each one can interpret in their own way. But, OK, they are good 'kanras'.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests