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 » 22 May 2016

AIVV will fall itself down, and 'crumble',
Sure thing. One day. Everything is destined to collapse.
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?
What have I tried to hide. Nothing. I have always openly said what I believe. Krishna is about the Confluence Age. Name means the act. The role of attracting is in the Confluence Age. Krishna is a name for God and his part of playing the sweet melody of the flute of knowledge in the Confluence Age.

It is war of ideas. When the Sun of Knowledge shines darkness of ignorance is dispersed. Like they show in the scriptures that Vishnu or Krishna cuts heads with his chakra and they say that it is a blessing to die of Krishna's hands. It is about separating the soul from the body. He will take everyone even through beatings, he will not leave anyone. War is created by those who spread duality.
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?
Please quote the Murli point.
Even though it may appear as a lie, it is not a lie, but a technique employed for the benefit of the children.
What was the benefit? If it was about to inspire the children to make effort, what effort the children were supposed to make, what did they have to achieve, what aim, through this tactic, and did someone achieve it and who?
who all had witnessed the incident 1976 in AIVV and what was their experience
In 1976 few BKs who had got the advanced knowledge started spreading the word within the Brahmin family.
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).
Whomever I enter has to be named Brahma. Brahma is name of many.
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.
This is not always the case. For example if a soul enters into some Brahmin, or some evil spirit enters the name is not changed. BapDada also plays part by entering children secretly.

Another argument that the name is about the actions, about the role that the soul plays through the body is that the name of Krishna changes to Narayan. In this case we don't have change of body, nor soul entering, but we have change of acts.
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?
Shankar means mixed part, 3 souls play part in it. Another name indicating that entrance is Ardhanareshvar.
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?
The name changes to Jagadamba, but Jagadamba also plays a part of Mahakali.

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 » 23 May 2016

What have I tried to hide. Nothing. I have always openly said what I believe.
Already put.- Flaw No. 242- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51424&hilit=Narayan#p51424
You had written-
[quote="SITA""]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.[/quote]
Both the gullible assumptions are mutually contradictory and has no logic at all, which the corrupted & inverted intellects of the PBKs obviously cannot discern - hence no fault of theirs. One cannot condemn an individual who is 'blind'; (s)he has to be accepted as such; nevertheless, efforts should be made to examine the possibility of healing the 'blindness', or freeing the person from such 'blindness', if at all possible. I am making even more clear. To get birth, it means, the old name will change and new one will come. So, obviously, name of Mr Dixit should change from 1976. If he had name Prajapita or Brahma, it should change from 1976.

Anyone, even in the outer world, one (the child) would get name within 6 months after the birth. There can be two cases here.
Some parents would have determined the name of the baby at the instant of birth itself. Some parents may not be. They may take 2, 3 or 4 (or even six) months - to decide what name should be kept for the new child. Whatever it is- it will not be wrong, to say- that the name applies from the physical birth itself. It is the parents' inability or the state of confusion which makes them delay the name to be firm. BUT IN CASE OF GREAT PERSONALITIES LIKE- Krishna, Radha, ETC- THE NAMES WOULD HAVE BEEN ALREADY FIXED BY THE TIME OF BIRTH ITSELF.

Baba has said- in case of Krishna, the name before marriage would be Krishna, after marriage is Narayan. So, even if you like to argue using the Murli point saying- birth of LN took place in 1976- you will have to say- "name of Mr Dixit changed into Krishna in 1976. When he will sit on throne, his name will become Narayan"
But, unfortunately, PBKs cannot say this- as they believe- Direct - nar to Narayan without Krishna. So- PBKs have DOUBLE FAILURES here.
Krishna is about the Confluence Age. Name means the act. The role of attracting is in the Confluence Age. Krishna is a name for God and his part of playing the sweet melody of the flute of knowledge in the Confluence Age.
Just considering ONLY the tail, and believing the same to be the WHOLE, would not be correct.
Just attracting is not Krishna. Just playing melody is not Krishna. There are other qualifications too. He should be prince of Golden Age. Krishna is NUMBER ONE DEITY WITH PURE BODY AND SOUL. BABA HAS CLEARLY SAID THIS.
Baba HAS ALSO CLEARLY SAID-- "Krishna will not have knowledge. Where there is Brahma, Krishna cannot be there".
---You may argue by saying anything- it will just look like- "My cock has three legs". Left to you.
CARRY ON CLEO - like your bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, and your 'Jagadamba', KDD-S HAVE practically demonstrated, and are still practically demonstrating!
It is war of ideas. When the Sun of Knowledge shines darkness of ignorance is dispersed.
You yourself have understood Murli points VERY WRONGLY*, and Guru of PBKs also has committed blunders. Saying sun shining is just like day dreaming.
CONVERSELY, when the 'Sun of Darkness', Virendra Dev Dixit, 'shines' in the corrupted & inverted intellects of the PBKs, the Light of True Knowledge is DISPERSED, and can NEVER BE UNDERSTOOD in the PROPER or CORRECT perspective!

*- A clear example is- how eager you were to directly give your conclusion which was wrong-
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2611&p=49610&hilit=Lekhraj#p49610
Please quote the Murli point.
Already said to considerable extent there in the error No. 29 of that link. It is PBKs use this Murli point EXTENSIVELY TO GIVE NAME Krishna TO B BABA FROM 1936 ITSELF, AND THE OTHER TWO FEMALE PERSONALITIES AS- GITAMATA AND Radha BACHCHI.

The Murli point is like this (with almost correctness). "Bap ne pahley Gitamata ko adopt kiyaa. Gita se krishn bachchaa janm liyaa. Usmey Radha bachci aur sab aa jaate hain". = Father first adopted Mother Gita (= scripture = false knowledge). From the Mother Gita (True knowledge), Child Krishna takes birth. In that- child Radha and others too come (are included).

[= all the deities get birth(are created) by the adopted/corrected Gita or the true Gita or the true knowledge).]

Usually PBKs ignore the adjacent sentences in many Murli points. Even here it has happened, in the above Murli point, and they fail to explain it.
What was the benefit? If it was about to inspire the children to make effort, what effort the children were supposed to make, what did they have to achieve, what aim, through this tactic, and did someone achieve it and who?
You should be knowing all these things. MANY BKs HAVE SAID THEIR EXPERIENCES. many things are put here in the forum. Gulzar Dadi says- since I/we believed there is only one year now for the destruction, I put great effort in that year, and galloped in life. But 'MAHA-MURKH' Virendra Dev Dixit, and the equally 'MAHA-MURKH, BLIND PBKs, are TOTALLY in darkness about these occurrences or experiences of renowned souls within the Yagya.

Even my personal experience- I had already put in the forum- "it was believed in Yagya in 1986 that 1987 would be last Avyakt BapDada's milan, and destruction could be very near, or there would be no much/real time for the effort." So, I put honest effort of preetbuddhi and experienced SEED STAGE PRACTICALLY, which is the foundation for my spiritual life.

Not only that- I have heard from some BKs who even believed in destruction - some in 1999- had similar experiences. NO DOUBT- All these will decrease our value to some extent - when compared to the great souls who did honest effort without being influenced by the DATEs. But, as the children are number-wise, baba would be using various tools - AS PER DRAMA.
In 1976 few BKs who had got the advanced knowledge started spreading the word within the Brahmin family.
Who all? Name them and give their experience. Why not AIVV has put their names in their literature? Or even till now no PBK member has mentioned any name at all???

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 » 23 May 2016

Whomever I enter has to be named Brahma. Brahma is name of many.
Explanation is already put- Posts No. 40 and 93. - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... e35de0bf40

Baba has also said- "Brahma is only one".

See how ridiculous it is. You instead of trying to prove the point, "FULLY", just show some other things as proof , but they clearly look nothing more than- "EXCUSES".
Honest PBKs should/would definitely think- "Why the memorial is B so V? (if there are more number of Brahmas). Why Baba has said- Brahma is only one?
This is not always the case. For example if a soul enters into some Brahmin, or some evil spirit enters the name is not changed. BapDada also plays part by entering children secretly.
You being (or feigning to be) intelligent, should have understood properly. I had written the word "SPECIFIC/Official ROLE". Read it FULLY.
PBKs believe/IMPLY in their teaching- subtle Brahma OFFICIALLY plays role through body of Mr Dixit. They believe B baba and Dixit are ALWAYS COMBINED. They believe B baba plays role of Mother in ardnnaareshwar in Mr Dixit....

Even through Kamala Devi, PBKs believe B baba created eclipse to her- for so many years- from 1998 onwards . They believe B baba gets title Jagadamba due to his role, playing in THAT body (Kamala Devi).
Another argument that the name is about the actions, about the role that the soul plays through the body is that the name of Krishna changes to Narayan. In this case we don't have change of body, nor soul entering, but we have change of acts.
Name Krishna changes into Narayan when he gets married. A great incident takes plays there. PBKs had been ASKED SEVERAL TIMES-including you. But, still they have not explained how and from which year to which year- Mr Dixit plays role of Prajapita, Brahma, Ram, Krishna, Narayan, Shankar- since 1936 till 2036.
The name changes to Jagadamba, but Jagadamba also plays a part of Mahakali.

NAMED CHANGE FOR SEVERAL REASONS. Even in lowkik, when someone is adopted, or changes religion, his name changes. Here, PBKs believe Gitamata/Kamala Devi was adopted in 1936. So, there should be a change in name there. Then when soul of Brahma enters her (in 1969 or 1976 or 1983?????), there should be another change in name- IS IT NOT?

Of course, when one reaches perfection, name can change again- like, what Baba says- Kali, Durga, etc., are names of Jagadamba only*. But, yaadgaars may not be fully right, as they show 6 or 8 hands, etc. That- we should understand by Knowledge.

* - Baba has said- "Kali, Durga, are names of Jagadamba (Om Radhe) only. Many names are kept, but the right name is Jagadamba". - This Murli point may give slight relief for PBKs to argue- a huam soul can have many names, but I believe the other names are of yaadgaars ony. For the final stage. That is why Baba does not certify these names as official names like - Krishna, Narayan, B, V, S, etc.
Shankar means mixed part, 3 souls play part in it. Another name indicating that entrance is Ardhanareshvar.
--If we see- every personality in Trimurti is mixed (balanced part). Brahma (= Prajapita Brahma) means both Father and mother. But, Brahma gets title only Father(Jagatpita), the title mother goes to first/best daughter(Jagadamba - Om Radhe).
Vishnu - four hands- perfectly balanced. - self explanatory.
Shankar- ardhnaareeshwar. - again half male and half female.

Where is it said- Shankar means mixed part of three souls? Whatever it is- then PBKs inadvertently believe Brahma Baba also plays 50% role in Shankar and inadvertently give the same seat to B baba as Mr Dixit- as already put in flaw No. 112- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=50868&hilit ... war#p50868

In his juggling exercises, Mr Dixit sometimes says- Mother is Kamala Devi, Sometimes even to sister Vedanti, sometimes to DLR. Is it not silly that- PBKs believe DLR plays role of mother in two bodies- in Mr Dixit and Kamala Devi too?

And- PBKs believe DLR plays role of a student (officially) in body of Mr Dixit. Then there should be ANOTHER NAME TOO(for this role), IS IT NOT?

So-

# Flaw No. 251) In PBK view- Role of Shankar is a mixed "UNBALANCED PART"

Because PBKs believe B baba there misuses body of Mr Dixit, and is not equal to Mr Dixit, but still gets seat in ardhnaareeshwar. [Anyhow- all these have no logic, no support from Murli point, neither tally with lowkik scriptures or beliefs.]

The questions which still remain unanswered are- If the entrance of B Baba in Mr Dixit causes to give the name ardhnaareeshwar, do PBKs believe this entrance happened in 1976?

And- PBKs believe Om Radhe enters in sister Vedanti. What dual names does she too get? Or like the name of Siddarth changed to Buddha, does name of sister Vedanti (Conf. Aged Lakshmi) changes to something else?

When do PBKs believe Om radhe entered into sister Vedanti? In 1965 or 1976 or ...?


# Flaw No. 252) PBKs fail to explain how Mr. Dixit is Narayan "TOTALLY"

Many points about this are already put. But, a great valid point is- for the NAME of a person to CHANGE, it is NOT ENOUGH IF SOMEONE ACCEPTS Mr Dixit(in this case), as father or something special. A great change should happen in the SELF, as well.
For example- when it is Shiv Jayanti- incorporeal Shiv enters into a corporeal body.
When it is Brahma Jayanti, a great change occurred in Brahma.
So, WHAT GREAT CHANGE did happen in Mr Dixit and in sister Vedanti in 1976?
Mr Dixit had been studying Murlis since 1969 itself. What sudden change happened in his mind?- which should also happen almost in the SAME WAY in sister Vedanti, as well? - Because the Murli point says- Birth of LN took place, (not just Narayan)???

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 » 24 May 2016

Where is it said- Shankar means mixed part of three souls? Whatever it is- then PBKs inadvertently believe Brahma Baba also plays 50% role in Shankar and inadvertently give the same seat to B Baba as Mr Dixit- as already put in flaw No. 112- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=50868&hilit=Ardhnareshwar#p50868
Why 50 percent? If you go by calculation and if there are three souls playing part, it would have to be 33 percent. But we should not calculate like that, because in the Murli it is said you should always consider it is Shivaba speaking. We should always think that ShivBaba plays 100 percent role. It is because Brahma Baba has devoted himself, the same is with the present Chariot.
Is it not silly that- PBKs believe DLR plays role of mother in two bodies- in Mr Dixit and Kamala Devi too?
No. It is said that BapDada does service though the children. It means more than one.
Because PBKs believe B Baba there misuses body of Mr Dixit, and is not equal to Mr Dixit, but still gets seat in ardhnaareeshwar. [Anyhow- all these have no logic, no support from Murli point, neither tally with lowkik scriptures or beliefs.]

The questions which still remain unanswered are- If the entrance of B Baba in Mr Dixit causes to give the name ardhnaareeshwar, do PBKs believe this entrance happened in 1976?

And- PBKs believe Om Radhe enters in Sister Vedanti. What dual names does she too get? Or like the name of Siddarth changed to Buddha, does name of Sister Vedanti (Conf. Aged Lakshmi) changes to something else?

When do PBKs believe Om radhe entered into Sister Vedanti? In 1965 or 1976 or ...?
In any case it cannot be said when entrance has happened, it is counted from the time this entrance has been recognized.
For example- when it is Shiv Jayanti- incorporeal Shiv enters into a corporeal body.
No. Like we don't celebrate birthday of some child when the soul enters in the womb. We celebrate birthday when the body is revealed to the world. When the souls enters still it is not certain if the child will take birth or not. It may die in the womb. But when it goes out of the womb, when it becomes visible no one can deny the child has taken birth.
What sudden change happened in his mind?- which should also happen almost in the SAME WAY in Sister Vedanti, as well?
Realizing ones own role and leaving the old world.

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 » 24 May 2016

sita wrote:Why 50 percent? If you go by calculation and if there are three souls playing part it would have to be 33 percent.
I considered the human souls. I did not include ShivBaba.
But we should not calculate like that, because in the muri it is said you should always consider it is Shivaba speaking.
PBKs twist this point as they like. Many times- whenever they need credit for PBKs, they say- title goes to the body. And- when they cannot reply properly- they will say as- "We should always think that ShivBaba plays 100 percent role".
It is because Brahma Baba has devoted himself, the same is with the present Chariot
Plain lie. But can be considered as a deceiving technique to FOOL OTHERS. There is difference of day and night here. You take again only tail/part of the matter.
--BKs do not believe any human soul enters into the Chariot. PBKs believe so.
--BKs do not believe the Chariot can slap someone during Amrit Vela, but such incident took place in AIVV.
--PBKs believe that B baba creates even eclipse for their Jagadamba. NOTHING LIKE THIS in BKWSU.
--PBKs believe B baba reads the Murli and it is Shiv who gives clarifications, while Mr Dixit is doing nothing (or DOZING)?
--PBKs believe a 'ghost' can sit and study in their Chariot. But, BKs do not believe so.
THESE ALL are DECEPTIVE techniques of Mr Dixit, which PBKs are yet to know, understand, appreciate or accept.
No. It is said that BapDada does service though the children. It means more than one.
I had already said- specific/official role. So, I am counting only them.
n any case it cannot be said when entrance has happened, it is counted from the time this entrance has been recognized.
Where is it said - it is counted from when it is recognized?
If so, what is the actual date to be taken? Not 1976? Only 1983s, when AIVV practically started?
And- entrance in sister Vedanti- the date to be taken into account has not yet come? So, date of entrance in N and L of AIVV are different?
But- In PBK view "entrance of B baba" - they should be able to say FULLY. Because PBKs claim when Krishna enters, the instant is(should be) known. So, PBKs should be able to say- when all B baba enters and leavs Mr Dixit and Kamala Devi. (in their view)
No. Like we don't celebrate birthday of some child when the soul enters in the womb. We celebrate birthday when the body is revealed to the world. When the souls enters still it is not certain if the child will take birth or not. It may die in the womb. But when it goes out of the womb, when it becomes visible no one can deny the child has taken birth.
In lowkik, entering into womb- no one counts this as date of birth. Time of coming out of the womb is taken as date of birth. If PBKs believe Mr Dixit would be in womb till 2016- as he says- why should they say- 1976 as date of birth? See how much you twist the Murli points and take one way, and double standards.

BTW- Shiv does not enter into womb. So, that instant itself is jayanti of Shiv. And- in BK view- there is no womb concept in Conf. Age, because we get birth by knowledge- which is almost instantaneous. Of course, there can be levels- like Baba says- baby intellects.
Realizing ones own role and leaving the old world.
She had realized it in 1965 itself when she had come into gyaan. How 1976 incident was unique to this. Even Mr Dixit should have realized this in 1969. The point was- how 1976 incident was unique to this?

BTW- what would you like to take into account in your all these twisting and double standards? - Would you like to take the INNER REALIZATION/CHANGE that happens as DATE OF BIRTH or the REVELATION to the outside world as DATE OF BIRTH?

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 » 24 May 2016

Baba has said- in case of Krishna, the name before marriage would be Krishna, after marriage is Narayan. So, even if you like to argue using the Murli point saying- birth of LN took place in 1976- you will have to say- "name of Mr Dixit changed into Krishna in 1976. When he will sit on throne, his name will become Narayan"
But, unfortunately, PBKs cannot say this- as they believe- Direct - nar to Narayan without Krishna. So- PBKs have DOUBLE FAILURES here.
Baba has said in the Murli that we don't change directly, but first we become Krishna, but it is about Krishna in the Confluence Age. We become from beggars to prince in one life.
And- PBKs believe DLR plays role of a student (officially) in body of Mr Dixit.
Baba has said in the Murli many times that in this school the soul of Krishna himself studies.
BTW- Shiv does not enter into womb. So, that instant itself is jayanti of Shiv. And- in BK view- there is no womb concept in Conf. Age, because we get birth by knowledge- which is almost instantaneously. Of course, there can be levels- like Baba says- baby intellects.
Shiv also does not get revealed when he enters, because no one knows when he comes and when he goes, but his birth is celebrated when he is revealed through narrating knowledge, when the lotus mouth is revealed.

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 » 24 May 2016

sita wrote:Baba has said in the Murli that we don't change directly, but first we become Krishna, but it is about Krishna in the Confluence Age. We become from beggars to prince in one life.
There is no question of change here. It is the question of birth. Baba has said- Krishna takes birth and then it takes around 20 or 25 yrs to become Narayan(to grow physically, and not to purify or transform spiritually).
You did not reply to the question asked- Do you believe Mr Dixit is Krishna from 1976, and will become Narayan in 2018/2016?
Even in that case, it is still erroneous, as- does it take nearly 40 yrs to become Narayan? Also- the womb theory fails then- if you believe he has taken birth practically as Krishna. Because when Mr dixit says- till 2016, he would be in womb, then it is as good as implying even birth of Krishna did not take place even in 1976.
So- finally just confusions and contradictions.
Baba has said in the Murli many times that in this school the soul of Krishna himself studies.
Who has denied that? It is Sakar Murli point. BKs believe soul of Krishna studied till 1969 as Brahma. Avyakt Murlis clearly say- B Baba had become karmaateet.
You are again taking only half and arguing as if - "even after falling, the moustache did not get dirtied".
Where does Murli point say- Krishna enters some other human being and studies or creates eclipse, ...
Shiv also does not get revealed when he enters,
That is OK. But, the date of Shiv Jayanti stands for the first entrance itself. Birth of Shiv, means the role of Shiv has begun. Shiv had descended into the corporeal world. He started his work of creation, adopting children.

Even in lowkik, when the child takes birth, there would be just doctor and nurses. After few minutes, the Father may see the child. It may take some days for the neighbours to see it. Some may know the person/child only after several years. But, the instant of birth would be taken as the time when the child came out of the womb.
Or do you like to say- from point of view of mother, the DOB (of the child) is one, from the view of Father, the DOB is slightly later, from point of view of neighbour, the DOB (of the child) is different?
Moreover, THE BABY EVEN AFTER GETTING BIRTH, WOULD NOT HAVE UNDERSTOOD IT AT ALL. It may take some 5 to 6 yrs for the baby to understand how a human being takes birth. Do you like to say- from the point of view- the DOB would be 5 to 6 yrs latter?
In some cases, there could be just mother alone giving birth to baby, and none else. After few hours only others would had seen the child. WHICH INSTANT WOULD YOU LIKE TO CERTIFY AS DOB OF THE CHILD?
So- the whole theory or womb, revelation, birth, etc, etc of PBKs are just silly, childish, lies and illogical, nothing else.
because no one knows when he comes and when he goes, but his birth is celebrated when he is revealed through narrating knowledge, when the lotus mouth is revealed.
Already explained.
It is due to baby intellect of the initial children. But, later when it was understood, the date would be applicable for the initial time only.
Baba has clearly said in Murlis like- "Now you are celebrating 36th Shiv jayanti " - (Murli dated in your 1972). Baba did not say- "ShivBaba is still in womb".
baba did not say- "birth of Krishna took place in 1936 itself, and you are celebrating some Nth Krishna jayanti."

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 » 24 May 2016

# Flaw No. 253) About Rejuvenation of the old/present body:-

1) Meaning of rejuvenate in Baba's dictionary is CHANGING, not transforming- as PBKs believe or the lowkik dictionary says (if so). - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=34652&hilit ... ate#p34652

2) Some discussions had been done here- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51443#p51443 . PBKs as usual just boasted/claimed their views, but could neither explain nor prove anything practically.

3) SM 2-2-82(3):- Ab humko jaanaa hai. Yah khushi kee baath hai. Puraanaa cholaa chodkar nayaa cholaa lenaa hai. IS KAARAN NAAM HEE HAI SHYAAMSUNDAR. -42 [old body, sp]

4)SM 16-6-82(2):- Tum aatmaavon ko le jaanaa hai. SHARIR TO SABKEY KHATM HO JAAYENGE. ATMA KE NAATHAY SAB BHAAYI2 HAI. BROTHERS HAIN. PHIR SHARIR KE NAATHAY BHAAYI BAHAN HAIN. Bahut meethi2 baatein hain. -65- [old body, bhaayi- bahan]

5)SM 10-7-82(1):- Patitpavan Baap mukti jivanmukti denevaale hain. Unko toh apnaa sharir hai nahin. Yah loan liyaa hai. Humko bhi yah chodnaa hai. Aur jiskaa yah ghar hai, unko bhi chodnaa hai. Vaise tum bachchon kaa bhi yah puraanaa ghar hai rahne kaa. Unmey yah khidkiyaan aadi sab hain. Toh Baap kahte hain bachche YAH PURAANAA GHAR SABKO CHOD DENAA HAI. Mere saath chalnaa hai. Isliye jeete ji is ghar se mamatw mithaate jaavo. -100- [old body]

6)SM 10-7-82(1):- Yah sharir bhi puraanaa ghar hai. Baba ne kaha thaa YAH AKAAL KAA TAKHTH HAI JO CHOD PHIR DOOSRAA LENAA HAI. Takhth ke badley ghar kahnaa theek hai. -100- [old body]

7)SM 17-4-87(3):- Toh is knowledge may raman karnaa chaahiye. Rahnaa bhi apney ghar may hai. Sab yahaan toh nahin baith jaayenge. Haan pichaadi may phir aakar sabhi vah rahenge jo Baap ki service may tatpar rahte hain. Vah bahut wonderful part dekhenge. Vaikunth ke jhaad nazdeek aate jaayenge. Baithe2 saakshaatkaar karte rahenge. Tum poorey faristey yahaan heee bante ho. 500 KAROD JO BHI HAIN SAB SHARIR CHODENGE. Aatmaayen vaapis chali jaayengi. Baba panda bankar sabko vaapis le jaayenge. -59- [prediction, aadi]

8)SM 3/8/99(2):- sakshatkar to dher hote hain. Jaise shuru may bahut sakshatkar karte the. Pichaadee may bhee bahut sakshatkar karenge. Mirvaa mowth malukaa shikaar... Itney dher manushy hai. Vah sab shareer chod denge. SHAREER SAHIT KOYI BHEE Satyug MAY VAA SHANTIDHAM MAY NAHEEN JAAYENGE.

= Lots of visions happen. As in the beginning ther were lots of visions, even at the end also. ..... There are many human beings. They all will leave their bodies. No one can enter either Shantidham or Satyug with body.

9) SM 8-7-70(4):-Behad ke baap ko hee Yaad karte2 sharir chod denge to phir behad ka varsa milega. Bhojan pakaate rahe, khaate rahe, kaam karte rahe, buddhi may Yaad ho. Jitnaa ho sake yah practice daalo. Harek baat ki practice to ki jaati hai na. Sharaab peenaa bhi seekhte hain. Taste/Test kartey hain, phir badhaate jaate hain.

10) SM 9-7-82(2):- Garib nivaaz baba aakar kitnaa saahukaar banaate hain. Saare vishw ko paltaate hain. UNKO REJUVENATE KARTE HAIN. Kaayaa kalpataru bhi kahte hain. Tumhaari kaayaa kaise first class ban jaati hai. Tum samajhte ho barobar Satyug may humaari aayu badi thi. Ek khaal chod doosri lete thay. Yahaan dekho to kyaa haal ho gaya hai. Marne se darte rahte hain.

11) SM 3-3-82(2, 3):- Baap kahte hain srimath par chalnaa chaaho to chalo. Pahlee baath hai kaam par jeeth praapth karo. Unsey bhi pahlee bath hai ki mujhe Yaad karo. Yah puraanaa sharir to chodnaa hee hai. Ab vaapis jaanaa hai. IS SAMAY HUMKO KHYAAL HAI KI HUM 84 JANMON KI PURAANI KHAAL CHODTAA HUN. -67-, 68 [Yaad, dharna, wot]

= ...THIS TIME WE GET FEELING THAT WE ARE LEAVING THE BODY WHICH IS 84 BIRTHS OLD... [Can one body be 84 births old? = can a body's age be 84 births(5000 yrs)?- these all show the MOTIVATION what Baba gives in Murlis]

12) SM 9-9-83(3):- Yah sharir part bajaate2 ab puraanaa ho gayaa hai. Ab phir mere bano toh tumhaari atma aur sharir donon shuddh banenge. DONON IKATTE SAAF HOTE JAATE HAIN. Atma jo apavitr bani hai unko shuddh banaanaa hai. Mere saath Yoga lagaaney se he shuddh banenge. – 5 [Yaad, old body -imp] - PBKs can misuse this Murli point.

13) SM 13-5-82(1):- Tumhaari atma pure honey se sharir bhi pavitr ho jaayegaa. [PBKs can misuse this Murli point]

14) SM 4-4-78(2):- Humaari kaayaa kalp vruksh samaan REJUVENATE HO RAHI HAI. Aajkal rejuvenate karte hain. Jaanvaron ki glans(may be glands), haddi aadi nikaal manushyon may daal dete hain. -83

= Our body is going to get rejuvenated like kalp vruksh. The bones, glands of animals are put into human beings.

15) SM 12-11-82(3):- KRISHN TO Ravan KE DESH MAY AA NA SAKEY. Ab tum jaante ho Sri Krishn ki atma punarjanm lete2 ab is sharir may hai. Yah antim sharir hai to patit thah_raa na. NUMBER ONE PATIT SHARIR NUMBER ONE SO PHIR PAVAN SHARIR BANTAA HAI. Yah sab baatein aur koyi ki buddhi may nahin aa sakti hai. Ravan ka chitr banaate hain parantu samajhte nahin Ravan ki praveshtaa kab se huyi hai. Jalaate hi aate hain. -54 [rath, Krishn, old body]

= .. The number one impure body then becomes number one pure body....

There are two Murli points which PBKs can misuse as put above (No. 12 and 13). But, mu point No. 12 says- both the soul and body get purified together. But, they cannot - as "TOGETHER" - IN REAL SENSE- would be the body also should continuously get purified ALONG WITH THE SOUL.
But, PBKs can misuse mu point No. 13 far better, almost what they like. That Murli point says- when the soul becomes pure, body also becomes pure*.

But we can see here - that- Baba might have said so to motivate children, and give children some extra- nourishment- hey children- your body also gets purified. The point is- even that would make us forget this impure body (if we know the truth- which are clearly said in most of the Murli points that- all should leave the body, no one can go there with the body).

* But- PBKs take the snake leaving skin - 2 to 3 times as a concept to explain their claims, which Baba denies. Hence at present, they are caught in their own explanation.

16) SM 19-10-72(1 or 3):- Ab paarlowkik Baap kahte hain yah puraane sharir kaa bhaan chodo. Gyaan se, apney buddhi se is sharir may rahte bhaan chodnaa hai. Yah abhi samajhte hain jaise sarp khal chodtaa hai aur nayi letaa hai, TOH YAH BAATH ABHI SE NAHIN LAGTA. Satyug SE LAGTI HAI. Toh tum bhi Satyug se lekar pahley khal chodnaa shuru karenge. – 169, 169- [= SM 18-10-77 (above)]

= Now, Father says- leave the feelings of this old body. Through knowledge, through one's own intellect, even while being in this body, one should leave its feelings. Now, you understand the concept of snake leaving its old skin and taking new one. So, this matter does not apply from now. It applies from G Age. So, you begin to leave your body (so easily like a snake).

17) Murli given by a PBK. Yet to see the Hindi words.
“The Father sits and explains the meaning. Just like a snake sheds its old skin on its own and a new skin grows, it won’t be said for it that it leaves one body and enters another. No. The example of changing skin is only [mentioned] for snakes. It can see its skin. Just like the clothes are removed, the snake also sheds its skin. It gets another [skin], the snake remains alive. But it is not that it remains immortal forever. It will change two-three skins and then die.” (Mu.18.07.70, end of pg.2)

--PBKs could have just used the Murli point No. 13) to prove their claim. But, mostly, Mr Dixit tried to give a great lecture on this and is caught in his own explanation.
The the Murli point says- the snake dies after the 2 to 3 times of changing skin. Whereas according to PBKs, Mr Dixit and his followers live for 150 years. Not tallying with the Murli point.

--And- funny thing here is- PBKs compare the purification process as- that equal to a SICK PATIENT. I do not know why PBKs take that example. Because the snake leaving its skin would be healthy, not sick.
--Mostly- Mr. Dixit while delivering his so called extra- ordinary clarifications, went on speaking further and further- and forgot what he spoke before or should be spoken.

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 » 24 May 2016

It is the question of birth.
Spiritual birth.
Do you believe Mr Dixit is Krishna from 1976, and will become Narayan in 2018/2016?
No.
Also- the womb theory fails then- if you believe he has taken birth practically as Krishna. Because when Mr dixit says- till 2016, he would be in womb, then it is as good as implying even birth of Krishna did not take place even in 1976.
I don't understand well what you say here.
The womb is the 7 days course.
B Baba had become karmaateet.
It is a Murli point that the accounts of all the souls will finish together.
Who all? Name them and give their experience. Why not AIVV has put their names in their literature? Or even till now no PBK member has mentioned any name at all???
It is mentioned.
Even in lowkik, when the child takes birth, there would be just doctor and nurses. After few minutes, the Father may see the child. It may take some days for the neighbours to see it. Some may know the person/child only after several years. But, the instant of birth would be taken as the time when the child came out of the womb.
Or do you like to say- from point of view of mother, the DOB (of the child) is one, from the view of Father, the DOB is slightly later, from point of view of neighbour, the DOB (of the child) is different?
Moreover, THE BABY EVEN AFTER GETTING BIRTH, WOULD NOT HAD UNDERSTOOD IT AT ALL. It may take some 5 to 6 yrs for the baby to understand how a human being takes birth. Do you like to say- from the point of view- the DOB would be 5 to 6 yrs latter?
In some cases, there could be just mother alone giving birth to baby, and none else. After few hours only others would had seen the child. WHICH INSTANT WOULD YOU LIKE TO CERTIFY AS DOB OF THE CHILD?
Here it is about spiritual birth that in one life you detach from your past self, the past world, relatives and contacts and acquire some new sanskars, some new characteristics. Taking birth and dying is developing faith and losing faith. Certainly developing faith in ones own self and part is a special moment. When one came to know about the knowledge of the soul he gets birth as a soul and dies to body consciousness. Still it does not mean he never becomes body-conscious again. And to know only that you are a point of light is not enough, because we have to know our part. Baba has said these are stupid actors who don't know their part.

Although we have come into knowledge, Baba has adopted us, we are Baba's children, he is the intellect of the intellects, the ocean of knowledge and everything and we are his knowledgeful children still are we stupid, do we know our part of many births that where have I played part with whom, what kind of a part. Are we always happy, if we are children of the giver of happiness, are we always peaceful children of the ocean of peace, are we immortal in our faith. No. But it does not mean we don't have anything. There are stages in our progress.

You ask about the point of view. In the woods a peacock danced, who saw it. The knowledge about the soul was there before I took the knowledge, does it mean I had it also at that time. God is said to be omnipresent on the path of Bhakti not because he occupied every space, but he occupies a special space in the mind of people. He will be omnipresent when he occupies their mind.

About a revelation of some part or personality Baba has said that will not tell or write on a board who plays which part, but everyone will himself reveal himself with his acts, words, thoughts, vibrations. God also reveals himself with his acts and with his knowledge and we come to know about him only through him. When others tell us about it it is not the same, no human can give his introduction. Only when we listen to the Father directly of him giving his own introduction can we know him and become his children.

If it is a matter of a certain role like Krishna, Narayan, Ram, we can know who plays that part and when if we see in the Brahamin family who plays the role that reveals the name and the acts the meaning of the name. It is not about putting a title and calling. Everyone gets revealed through his own acts. ShivBaba means there will be benefit in what he does.

About the stages of one taking a new spiritual birth, in that there are always some personalities involved. We receive the message of knowledge through someone - he is like a father. Someone else gives sustenance like a mother. At the beginning we don't understand much, our thoughts about the world are more and thoughts about the knowledge are less. But through study and effort we grow. Baba has said that we become our own teachers. We create ourselves. As long as we keep an aim we develop the qualities. If we think of ourselves as brahmins we act like brahmins. If we develop faith we are someone and act like that one, we become that one. In the process of knowing ourselves we come to know which group we belong to, which is our family, who is my example.

We can say something through our mouth, or we can think we are someone, but our thoughts are hidden and our acts are visible to others and reveal our self. It is not enough to think about it, because we can have delusion. There has to be proof, like a cross check and verification. Brahma Baba was Brahma and a big mother not because Baba has said so, but because he demonstrated by acting and children were able to find this out for themselves. So it does not work if we say this one is that and he is like that and someone else believes us. We have to check ourselves.

BKs forbid communicating with PBKs, so how will one check. OK if PBKs are Maya we don't have to become knowledgeful about Maya by coming in contact with Maya, but if they are not? Can we call someone Maya just because someone has said so. What act of Maya is there? They say we speak opposite knowledge. Let it be so. Ravan was also knowledgeful, he was a scholar, he spoke a lot of knowledge, but what acts against the Murlis do we do, what act that brings sorrow. Knowledge is seen in practice.
1) Meaning of rejuvenate in Baba's dictionary is CHANGING, not transforming- as PBKs believe or the lowkik dictionary says (if so). - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=34652&hilit=rejuvenate#p34652
Badalna that is change can also mean transform.
Puraanaa cholaa chodkar nayaa cholaa lenaa hai. IS KAARAN NAAM HEE HAI SHYAAMSUNDAR.
We can argue if name is of the role, the soul or the body, but can name refer to two bodies. Shyamsundar means he is shyam and sundar in one body, leaving of the old body is through knowledge.
Yah sharir bhi puraanaa ghar hai. Baba ne kaha thaa YAH AKAAL KAA TAKHTH HAI JO CHOD PHIR DOOSRAA LENAA HAI. Takhth ke badley ghar kahnaa theek hai.
This is said about the body of Brahma that will be left and another will be taken.
IS SAMAY HUMKO KHYAAL HAI KI HUM 84 JANMON KI PURAANI KHAAL CHODTAA HUN.
This is a great point, because it demonstrates that is is not about leaving a specific body, but the sanskar of body-consciousness. Is there 84 birth old body?

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 » 24 May 2016

sita wrote:Spiritual birth.
Spiritual birth of Mr Dixit- did it happen in 1969 when he came to Gyan again, or in 1976, when he realized something special? This is what had been asked- 100 times - what was the special experience in 1976??? Further, what is the significance of the 'spiritual birth' of the soul of Mr Dixit, as 'Sevak Ram', in his previous birth? If PBKs can buy the theory of 'spiritual birth' so READILY, why do they find it difficult to accept that the 'spiritual birth' of Brahma Baba, as Krishna & Narayan, took place in 1936/37, when he received visions of himself in these forms, (as well as others also received visions of him in these forms), and he was in the 'womb' stage until he REAL-EYEsed that Shiva was actually responsible for these visions, when he took 'actual spiritual birth', after complete Re-Cognition of the role of Shiva, LATER ON, in his spiritual journey; and further, he along with his soul-mate, Om Radhe, FULLY REAL-EYEsed their role as Confluenced Aged Lakshmi and Narayan, in 1976, which is the ACTUAL reference for the relevant point in question, rather than the application of same to another pair of souls, viz., Ram & Sita or Shankar & Parvati???
Although, it may still be argued that the point in question, regarding 1976, can ALSO apply to Shankar & Parvati (allegorically), or Sita & Ram (practically in S A) (since God establishes TWO FUTURE dynasties - Lakshmi and Narayan as well as S&R - based on the ONE Brahmin dynasty in Confluence Age), this would ONLY be SECONDARY - the PRIMARY application STILL referring MORE APPROPRIATELY to Brahma & Saraswati or REAL Confluence Age Lakshmi and Narayan, when they are the TRUE representative Emperor & Empress of Confluence Age, having ALREADY achieved their 'karmateet avastha'! And such TRUE representative Emperor & Empress of Confluence Age, CANNOT TOUCH their 'feet' on impure 'dharti' or impure 'land' by taking corporeal birth composed of impure elements, (after 1976), which is much more RELEVANT to that PRIMARY pair, rather than to the SECONDARY pair who are still trapped in impure corporeal bodies, to date???
No.
I believe PBKs give title Conf. Aged Krishna as well as Narayan at the same time. Is Mr. Dixit Conf. Aged Krishna too - from 1976? or 1969?
I don't understand well what you say here.
The womb is the 7 days course.
See womb theory of Mr Dixit, where he says- 10 years = One month- already put in this topic. Search for "WOMB" in this topic.
It is a Murli point that the accounts of all the souls will finish together.
I have not heard so. Of course, I have heard that- Brahma and Mama too would become complete only in the end. But, that is a Sakar Murli point. Even in Sakar Murlis, it is said- karmic account of Mama had been completed. - I have put my views- about karmaateet stage here- Post No. 200 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... &start=270
Furthermore, when it is mentioned that accounts of all souls will finish together, there can always be EXCEPTIONS, and need not mean that soul of Brahma Baba has also to necessarily wait till the end, like all others, because for this particular soul, 1969 WAS THE END, and that is the reason why he is ABSOLUTELY EXCLUSIVE to any other embodied human soul, (along with his soul-mate, Om Radhe), having been AHEAD of ALL the others, who are STILL struggling to achieve their individual 'karmateet avastha'!
It is mentioned.
If you like, you may mention here.
You ask about the point of view. In the woods a peacock danced, who saw it. The Knowledge about the soul was there before I took The Knowledge, does it mean I had it also at that time.
You are saying something else like total ignorance, IMHO. You do not understand what you are saying, (IMHO - according to my understanding - obviously it cannot be according to your understanding, since you FEEL you are SURE of what you are saying)!
But LOGICALLY, in the above- whether someone saw or not, peacock was there, right? Can you deny that? Question of your presence COMES ONLY NEXT. It can be said- YOUR personal Jayanti took place later, only when YOU yourself saw it - is that the fault of the PEACOCK, as to when YOU saw it???
Similarly, Shiv had come in 1936, so Shiv Jayanti took place in 1936 itself. Even Brahma jayanti took place in 1936 itself. (And in terms of 'spiritual birth', same should be considered to have taken place in the intellect of Brahma Baba, as Confluence Age Krishna and Confluence Age Narayan, in 1936 itself). So are there TWO Confluence Age Krishnas and TWO Confluence Age Narayans???
And- Mr Dixit when he came to BKWSU in 1969, his jayanti took place in 1969 itself. How can that be 1976?
EVEN IF YOU SAY- THERE HAD BEEN SOME SPECIAL TOUCHING TO MR DIXIT IN 1976 WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN 1969, STILL IT WILL NOT HAVE WEIGHT. BECAUSE THAT NEW TOUCHING OR EXPERIENCE IS ALSO DUE TO THE RESULT OF THE COLLECTIVE EFFORT WHICH MR DIXIT HAD PUT FROM 1969 ITSELF.
SO, IN ANY WAY- TO GIVE DOB OF MR DIXIT AS (AS Narayan) 1976 WOULD BE SILLY.
Secondly, DOB of Confluence Age Narayan as 1976, would actually imply DOB of Confluence Age Krishna is 1976, since Confluence Age Narayan has to be born as Confluence Age Krishna FIRST, is it not? This would mean that the soul of Mr Dixit, alias 'Sevak Ram', was in the 'womb' from 1936/37 to 1976, when he took birth as Confluence Age Krishna, and has YET to FULLY REAL-EYEs his role as Confluence Age Narayan (actually Confluence Age Ram - which is CONSIDERED by them to be Confluence Age Narayan), hence the point in question regarding 1976 CANNOT apply to him, but CAN APPLY ONLY to REAL Confluence Age Brahma & Saraswati, alias REAL Confluence Age Lakshmi and Narayan, (or souls of Brahma Baba and Om Radhe), who become REAL, VERY FIRST Lakshmi and Narayan in pure bodies in the beginning of G A!!!

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 » 24 May 2016

# Flaw No. 254) Are PBKs preparing themselves for the pure world or impure world or just NOWHERE?
sita wrote: 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. - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51453&hilit=leave#p51453
Are PBKs (inadvertently) attached to their impure body?
PBKs believe the snake concept of leaving skin is applicable to Conf Age only.
"In their own view", even PBKs will leave their bodies just like BKs for the 2500 yrs in heaven.
So- what is that they have gained? Is the FRUIT of their practice/effort limited just to ONE BIRTH?

BTW- what BKs practice- they get fruit for 2500 yrs. [Mu point clearly says- the concept of snake leaving its skin applies from Golden Age, "NOT now*"- refer to flaw No. 253]

PBKs yet to know why had Mr Dixit said so (that their present body would get transformed)?:- The reason is to maintain his satsang by claiming to his followers that PBKs are superior to BKs.
[But in the end, we can see PBKs falling into their own trap, as usual.]

* - Now, a question arises- how come snake concept applies in G Age? Baba has said in the Murli point- (refer to flaw No. 253) the snake leaves its skin 2 to 3 times and dies. But, if we see the information, a snake leaves its skin many times in its life time. Younger snakes leave their skin more frequently than older ones].

Baba gives many examples in Murlis. No example can fit 100% in LITERAL sense. For example- Baba says- soul is like 'driver' and body is like 'car'. But, the physical body grows from infant to adult. But, that does not happen in a 'car'. And- a driver can come out of the car at any time. But, here, the driver/soul remains in the car/body throughout its life- even in Golden Age.

Similarly, I believe Baba spoke the concept of snake leaving the skin to make children realize better. And, ShivBaba is Ocean of Knowledge, so will explain Gyan in various ways.

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 » 27 May 2016

# Flaw No. 255) Mis-interpretation of word "BapDada" by PBKs, FULLY FAILS:-

--Actually, it is very simple and clear in thousands of Murli points- that "BapDada" means Shiv plus Brahma Baba; and BOTH ShivBaba and Brahma Baba are Fathers - ONE 'Parlokik' and the other 'Alokik'!
--BUT, the so called 'Gyani-tu-atmas'(PBKs) who claim they are the real children of the TRUE Father and who claim they establish 'Sachkand'- do not even have the slightest hesitation to speak OPEN LIES by mis-interpreting the meaning of the highest Name "BapDada", and ARROGANTLY include the name of Mr Dixit in the word "Bap", which again shows that- they are CLEARLY playing the role of HiranyaKashyap-hood.
--According to PBKs, Bap means Shiv plus Mr Dixit, and Dada means B baba. So, THREE personalities. But, the following Murli point disproves it FULLY.

AM 12-10-81(Pg 58 of Hindi Book):- Kayi bachche BapDada, arthaath donon Baap ke bajaaye, ek hee Baap dwara khajaaney ke maalik ban_ney ke vidhi apnaathay haain. Is_say bhee praapti se vanchith ho jaate hain. Humaaraa niraakaar se direct connection hai. Sakar bhee niraakaar se paayaa, isliye hum bhee niraakaar se hee sab paa lenge. Sakar ki kyaa avashyakathaa hai? Lekin aisee chaabi khandith chaabee ban jaati hai. Isliye safalathaa naheen mil paathi hai. Hansee kee baath toh yah hai, naam apnaa BKK (BrahmaKumar- Kumari) kahlaayenge, aur connection Shiv baap se rakhenge. Toh apney ko Shivkumar, Shivkumaari kahlaavo na. BKK (BrahmaKumar- Kumari) kyon kahthay? SURNAME HEE HAI SHIV-VAMSHI BKK (BrahmaKumar- Kumari), TOH DONON HEE BAAP KAA SAMBANDH HUVAA NA.

= Some children instead of BAP_Dada means -BOTH THE FATHERS, try to become owners of the wealth/treasure just through ONE Father. ...

--The Murli point clearly says- "BapDada means BOTH the fathers, means the TWO fathers".
--It does not say- BapDada means "Two fathers and a Mother" or " Two fathers and a child" - what PBKs claim, or BLINDLY imply.

The following FLAWS and TRUTH become EVIDENT from the CORRECT UNDERSTANDING of the above SIGNIFICANT point of Knowledge:

FLAW 1: Sometimes the PBKs imply that 'Bap' refers to only their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, and 'Dada' refers to Brahma Baba or the soul of DLR. This would mean that Virendra Dev Dixit delivers the Avyakt Vanis, along with Brahma Baba, through the body of DG.
In this case they have 'SHOT' ShivBaba to OBLIVION, and placed a bodily being, Virendra Dev Dixit, in the place of ShivBaba or God, thus carrying out the 'shooting' of HiranyaKashyap & Ravan Rajya, in the latter part of the Conf Age, in the Yagya!
Secondly, there have been times when their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, was having 'vartalap' sessions with his BLIND followers, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, BapDada were having an Avyakt Meeting with the Righteous Children at Mt Abu. Hence their FALSE claim or assumption that 'Bap' refers to only their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, FALLS COMPLETELY APART!!! When Virendra Dev Dixit was questioned about this anomaly by his more intelligent BLIND followers, he simply DODGED the issue, by giving further vague reasons, which were TOTALLY ILLOGICAL & LUDICROUS!

FLAW 2: In order to DODGE the above 'EVIDENT TRUTH', which goes against them, SOMETIMES, SOME of them, SUDDENLY bring in, or take the support of ShivBaba - saying that 'Bap' refers to BOTH ShivBaba as well as their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit, and 'Dada' refers to Brahma Baba (without THINKING what they are saying).
But, in this case, this would STILL go against their CORE philosophy, which implies that Shiv CANNOT come in the body of Dadi Gulzar, who, according to their interpretation, is a 'pavitra kanya' or pure kumari, and Shiv cannot ride a 'pavitra kanya'. Then how can the word 'Bap' refer to ShivBaba, in this case - "in PBK view"???

Thus the PBKs get CONTINUOUSLY CAUGHT in their OWN WEB or their OWN TRAP to a greater and greater extent, the more they keep on MISINTERPRETING, MISREPRESENTING & MISAPPROPRIATING the various points of Pure Knowledge from God!

TRUTH 1: When the word 'Sakar' is used in the above point it refers to REAL Prajapita Brahma, Brahma Baba or soul of DLR, who is the ONE & ONLY 'mukrar-rath' of REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God, and who played the role in 'Sakar' until 1969, and is CONTINUING to play the role in 'Akar' to date, ON THIS CORPOREAL SPHERE of ACTIVITY - ALONG WITH ShivBaba or God - and the two of them CANNOT BE SEPARATED from one another EVEN FOR ONE MOMENT - particularly after 1969, to date!

TRUTH 2: BOTH ShivBaba and Brahma Baba are PRIMARILY Fathers (besides Brahma Baba ALSO playing the role of the Mother, in 'Akar', in order to give Spiritual re-birth to the CONCERNED Children) - ShivBaba being the 'Parlokik' PARENT (Mother AS WELL AS Father) of ALL SOULS, and Brahma Baba being the 'Alokik' Parent (Mother AS WELL AS Father) of ALL embodied souls - hence the question of considering ANOTHER embodied soul as the 'Alokik' Father DOES NOT ARISE for the Righteous Children (although the Unrighteous children can claim so, since they OBVIOUSLY DO NOT BELONG DIRECTLY to the REAL Brahmin CLAN, through REAL Prajapita Brahma, Brahma Baba or soul of DLR)!

TRUTH 3: The Righteous Children remember ONLY ShivBaba (as the 'Parlokik' Father - who gives them the Spiritual inheritance), while SIMULTANEOUSLY having the PROPER understanding & awareness of the CORRECT role of Brahma Baba (as the 'Alokik' Father - THROUGH WHOM, such Spiritual inheritance is received by them)!
Therefore, by considering that ANOTHER embodied soul is the 'Alokik' Father, the BLIND PBKs, DIVORCE themselves from receiving the TRUE Spiritual inheritance from REAL ShivBaba or God, (through the REAL Prajapita), and receive, INSTEAD, the FALSE Spiritual inheritance from APPARENT 'ShivBaba' or Ravan, (through the APPARENT or FALSE 'Prajapita') - COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS of the ACTUAL SITUATION!!!

TRUTH 4: Those Righteous Children who have a CORRECT RELATIONSHIP with BOTH the Fathers, viz., ShivBaba AS WELL AS Brahma Baba, have the SURNAME as 'BK', and there is NO NEED for them to indicate same as 'PBK', simply because such Righteous Children CLEARLY KNOW, UNDERSTAND & EXPERIENCE Brahma Baba or soul of DLR to be the REAL Prajapita, hence their SURNAME is ONLY 'BK' - as is indicated by REAL ShivBaba or God Himself, in several SMs AS WELL!

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 » 29 May 2016

Flaw No. 256) Regarding SURNAME:-

So, note that the surname what baba has said is- just "Shiv-Vanshi Brahma Kumar/i" [ "SV-BK" ].
It DOES NOT say- the surname is "Shiv-Vanshi Prajapita Brahma Kumar/i" [ "SV-PBK" ].
This clearly proves the following:

1)There is just ONE Brahma. So, the PBK concept of more Brahmas is a DECEPTIVE propaganda of Mr. Dixit.
2) The Chariot has only one name "Brahma", in Conf Age. B baba cannot be called as Krishna in Conf Age - as PBKs imply. Because then the BKs would have another surname, as "Shiv-Vanshi Krishna Kumar/i" too.
3) Mr. Dixit or anyone cannot have many names.
If PBKs believe - Mr Dixit can have many names in Conf Age, then - at least PBKs should have SEVERAL SURNAMES like- VishnuKumar/i, NarayanKumar/i, LakshmiKumar/i. ShankarKumar/i, RamKumar/i, etc., etc., etc., is it not?

The bodily guru of the PBKs, Virendra Dev Dixit, is EXTREMELY CLEVER at MANIPULATING the Pure Versions of God, to his advantage (since he is instrumental to carry out the 'shooting' of HiranyaKashyap and Ravan Rajya in the latter part of the Conf Age)! The following Version has been MISREPRESENTED and MISAPPROPRIATED by him, to create a new designation for this BLIND followers, the PBKs. However, the point DOES NOT relate to the designation of INDIVIDUAL BRAHMINS, but to the University as a whole; and BKWSU has a CLEAR designation as 'PBKIVV', where the word 'Prajapita' is INCLUDED.
But the MAIN ASPECT to be noted is that this Version is MEANT ONLY for the 'agyani' humans, who STILL DO NOT have the Knowledge, who can MISUNDERSTAND, and therefore the term 'PBKIVV' is required for the sake of THOSE AGYANI humans ONLY, (in order to facilitate a CLEAR DIFFERENTIATION between just 'Brahma' - which can be confusing TO THEM - and 'Prajapita Brahma' - which would make things more CLEARER TO THEM).
Hence this is NOT AT ALL for the benefit of the TRUE, Righteous Brahmins or BKs, who ALREADY have the correct understanding and experience of Brahma Baba as the REAL 'Prajapita', and they have ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT, about this aspect, WHATSOEVER. Thus, Ravan or Maya, whose MAIN function is to create DUPLICITY, BIFURCATION, DIVISION, SEPARATION, CONFUSION & CHAOS, etc., uses such points to advantage, through the 'mukrar-rath' of Ravan, Virendra Dev Dixit, in order to create DISCORD & DISHARMONY among the Brahmins, who come in contact with the Pure Knowledge of REAL ShivBaba or God.
Viewers may CLOSELY STUDY the Version, below, which has been thus MISAPPROPRIATED by the 'mukrar-rath' of Ravan or Maya, Virendra Dev Dixit, and the PBKs -
BKWSU SM, Revised 09.09.2015 wrote: शिव के आगे त्रिमूर्ति जरूर चाहिए। यह भी लिखना है डीटी सावरन्टी आपका जन्म सिद्ध अधिकार है। सो भी अभी कल्प के संगम युगे। क्लीयर लिखने बिगर मनुष्य कुछ समझ नहीं सकते। और दूसरी बात सिर्फ बी.के. नाम जो पड़ता है, उसमें प्रजापिता अक्षर जरूरी है क्योंकि ब्रह्मा नाम भी बहुतों के हैं। प्रजापिता ब्रह्माकुमारी ईश्वरीय विश्व-विद्यालय लिखना है।

Shiva definitely has to be above the Trimurti. You also have to write: The Deity Sovereignty is your birth-right. That too happens now, at the Confluence Age. Unless it is written clearly, people (agyani souls) cannot understand anything; and the other thing is that when they read the name “Brahma Kumaris”, the word “Prajapita” is also definitely needed with it, because many people have the name 'Brahma'. You have to write: Prajapita Brahma Kumaris Ishwariya Vishwa Vidhyalaya.
-------------

# Flaw No. 257) Baba says- "Just in ENTRANCE, nothing is there", but PBKs believe OTHERWISE:-
From SM 09-05-81- flaw No. 45- Sirf praveshta se kuch hota nahin = Just by entrance, nothing happens. viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=49709&hilit=sirf#p49709
1)PBKs boast/claim - ShivBaba used to enter in some children and used to teach even Mama-Baba.
--But, in the same Murli point, Baba has clearly said- those VERY SAME children had gone into stomach of python. So, there is NOTHING SENSIBLE in the RIDICULOUS claims of PBKs.
2) Now, above is another Murli point which further dilutes their claims.
Baba says- just by ENTRANCE- NOTHING HAPPENS!

3) In Avyakt Murlis it is clearly said - "BapDada has come to meet you, BapDada sees you, etc, etc- which CLEARLY IMPLY- Both Bap and Dada are in the body of Dadi Gulzar. .
--To tackle this situation- PBKs simply give statement, without any logic, by just saying- "BapDada refers to all the THREE personalities, ShivBaba emerges even Mr Dixit during that time*",
---BUT, RIDICULOUS THINGS IS- THEY ALSO CLAIM-
that just B Baba only enters in Dadi Gulzar [even when Murli clearly says- says- BapDada have come to meet you].
The REASON is- to depict/show that AIVV is higher than BKWSU- (a similar claim mentioned in flaws Nos 253 and 254)- but this ultimately again made PBKs fall into their own trap, even here.

--Mostly PBKs (to protect their claims) say- In body of Dadi Gulzar, B Baba just speaks (words like BapDada, or anything) what he had been trained by Bap of AIVV" [PBKs may correct me if I am wrong].

4) So, PBKs inadvertently imply - "THEY ARE MAINLY BOTHERED ONLY ABOUT PHYSICAL (AND TEMPORARY) ENTRANCE"**.

--For, PBKs there is no problem to include Dada (B Baba) in the HIGHEST WORD - BapDada (even though they believe seat of Dada is lower!). [How illogical it is, by default itself- any kindergarten child can understand this error].
--They have no objection to give HIGH VALUE even to Avyakt Murlis (what they believe are just words of Krishna).
--they even have no objection to call Sakar Murlis as false Gita, but still use them as main tool in their study and service.
--Sevakram failed, left Yagya- This is not at all an issue to PBKs.
--Even Mr Dixit committed blunders and blunders, and CONTINUES to do so.
--Mr. Dixit is controlled by a 'ghost' till date!- STILL, HE IS FULLY ELIGIBLE TO BE CALLED AS 'STRICT' Father!
--Their own 'Jagadamba' had left their Yagya in 1998.
--Their own earlier/previous 'Jagadamba' - Premkanta failed and has since left her corporeal body.
--Their Sita/Parvati has not yet 'recognized' her husband or children.
--Each group of 2.25 lakh souls would be like spiritually handicapped, till end of Kalpa, and dependent on the other to become complete in the end.
--All of their female roles are cowardice (having ONLY SUPERFICIAL PURITY, i.e. Purity through STRICT ABSTINENCE from the actual act of physical copulation - regarded as 'Hath Yoga', or Purity through ABSTINENCE - being AFRAID of the 'Paper Tiger' - meant ONLY for 'Queen' quality souls; while Real, Bold or Courageous Purity is considered to be, to remain completely detached and unaffected even during INDULGENCE in the actual act of physical copulation - regarded as 'Raj Yoga', or Purity through INDULGENCE - being UNAFRAID of the 'Paper Tiger' - meant ONLY for 'King' quality souls; but this DISTORTED & PERVERTED CONCEPT actually pertains to the 'shooting' of APPARENT RamRajya or Ravan Rajya, and NOT REAL RamRajya).
ALL THESE ARE PERFECTLY OK TO PBKs. THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM TO CERTIFY THESE PERSONALITIES AS 'Gyani-TU-ATMAS'.

But- the only concern of PBKs is about ENTRANCE*.


--For them, ShivBaba first entered into Sevakram in 1936 and after 1976- in Mr. Dixit.
Even though they FULLY depend on words spoken through mouth of B Baba, they believe B baba is temporary Chariot. - ANY LOGIC?
PBKs have absolutely no problem to say- B Baba would be (combined) with ShivBaba in body of Mr Dixit.
--But, PBKs CANNOT AGREE that ShivBaba enters in Dadi Gulzar, just because she is a virgin. But, at the same time, they have no hesitation to say- ShivBaba enters in their kanyaas (virgins) - Post No. 87- viewtopic.phpf=39&t=2099&p=50752&hilit=virgin#p50752
So, ShivBaba can be combined with B Baba in body of Mr. dixit, but not in Dadi Gulzar? - even when Murli point clearly says- Bap and Dada are ALWAYS COMBINED???

5) So- are PBKs bothered about real combination or just physical incidents/combination?

6) BKs believe ShivBaba TOO enters in Dadi Gulzar, but DO NOT include her name either in Brahma or BapDada. Because that is the highest seat. BKs do not dilute title of ShivBaba(Bap) or Brahma (Dada).
But, PBK theory has neither head, nor tail, nor foundation, nor logic. It is just but - twisting, double standards, and at ALL TIMES going against THE VERY SAME Murli POINTS.

* - A funny thing is- many times Mr Dixit might have gone to sleep during Avyakt BapDada's milan through Dadi Gulzar. So how can Mr Dixit be in the title BapDada during that time?
OK, let us agree with them.

** - PBKs may say- their Chariot is permanent, but it is purely temporary, as they themselves believe- Sevakram was out of Yagya. It is also fictitious, as Mr. Dixit is fully dependent on BKWSU and the Murlis spoken there.

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 » 29 May 2016

# Flaw No. 258) Regarding the song- "Alaf ko Allah milaa...."

1)SM 22-4-77(2):- Manushy dhan ke liye kitna maathaa maarte hain. Dhan to inkay paas bhi bahut thaa. Jab dekhaa ki alaf se baadshahi miltee hai to phir yah dhan kyaa karenge. Kyon na sabkuch alaf ke haavle kar Baadashaahi leve. Baba ne is par ek geeth bhi banaya thaa. Bhaageedhar ko Be banaya. Alaf ko allaah milaa, Be ko yah Rajayi de diyaa. Us samay buddhi may aayaa yah vinaashi dhan to kuch nahin hai. Humko to Vishnu chaturbhuj ban_na hai. Hum inko kyaa karenge. Buddhi kaa taalaa jab Baba phiraave, tab toh aisaa ho. Buddhi kaa taalaa kholnevaalaa hai Baap. Baba to paisa kamaane may ekdam bijlee thaa. Parantu dekhaa baadshaahi miltee hai to gadaayi kaa kaam karey hee kyon? Jabki Baba Baadshaahi de rahe hain, ab bhookhaa toh nahin marte hain. ShivBaba paas jo koyi aate hain bhookh nahin marte. Apne ghar may bhookh marte honge. Yahaan khaanaa bahut achchaa miltaa hai. Sabko ek jaisaa. Srimath par chalnevaale ko madad miltee hai. 163-

= How much head-ache people take to earn money. This one had lot of money. When he saw (realized) I get Kingodm from ALAF, what should I do with this money. Why not give everything to Father and get Kingdom. B Baba even made a song from this. He made the partner/Bhaageedhaar as "Bey".
"Alaf (I = B baba) got Allah, I gave the Kingdom (lowkik business) to him".
At that time, it came to mind that this perishable wealth is nothing. I have to become Chaturbhuj Vishnu. What have I to do with this (lowkik wealth). When Baba opens the lock of intellect, this will happen, right. The one who opens the lock of intellect is the Father. B Baba was like electricity in earning money. But, when he saw/felt I am going to get Kingdom, why should I do work of a donkey?
When ShivBaba is going to give Kingdom, one will not die of hunger. Anyone who comes to ShivBaba will not die of hunger. In one's own home, one may die of hunger. ...

Different meanings of Alaf and Bey are put here- Post No.68 AND 69 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... Fbey#p9515

2)The above Murli point clearly indicates the Chariot (B Baba) realized- "I am going to become Vishnu, and got dis-interest in lowkik diamond business (a Kingdom in lowkik way- but just a 'DONKEY' in spiritual perspective) and retired from it, by which the partner became whole and sole owner of the diamond business".

3)Now, this Murli point clearly indicates the partner of B Baba had no knowledge AT ALL. This Murli point was a hindrance to Mr. Dixit.
So, Mr. Dixit HAD TO MISINTERPRET even this Murli point to justify his claims.
So- Mr. Dixit (mis)interpreted the above Murli point as follows.

--Mr Dixit FIRST INTERCHANGED the position of B Baba (Alaf) and Sevakram (Bey). So, as per PBKs, the new Alaf is Sevakram and Bey is B Baba.

--As PBKs claim Sevakram left Yagya after 5 years due to clash between him and B Baba.
--PBKs say- Sevakram was happy to leave Yagya in 1942 as he had faith/feeling- (Allah) ShivBaba is with him.
---According to PBKs, B Baba will now play the role of the donkey(from 1942) by taking the Yagya incharge position.

----According to Mr. Dixit, taking care of God's Yagya is like a 'DONKEY' business. See- Mr Dixit did not hesitate to make even Yagya as SCAPEGOAT.

[When I had questioned the PBK (during my discussion with him) regarding the underlined sentence above, the PBK had replied- "Sevakram had faith that ShivBaba is with him while leaving Yagya *" ].

4)But, the OTHER Murli point which PBKs quote - CLEARLY SAYS- such children (whom PBKs point, as they refer to Sevakram and the other two of them), went to STOMACH OF PYTHON.
So, OBVIOUSLY, Sevakram had LOST FAITH. So, it TOTALLY CONTRADICTS the Murli point saying- "Alaf Got Allah".

* - 5) Mostly in AIVV it is taught to PBKs that Sevakram had faith even while leaving Yagya - that- "ShivBaba would be with him". Mr Dixit wanted to put all the mistakes on B Baba and BKWSU- even he had to mention something as his failures.

6) OK- if that is the case (if Sevakram had not lost faith), why do PBKs then point "Ram failed?" how does it fit?
Just because a Murli point says- "Ram failed". See how silly PBK logic is!
PBK theory has neither head nor tail. It is just trying to fit something BY HOOK or BY CROOK -
CLEAR 'shooting' of HiranyaKashyap and Ravan Rajya in the latter part of the Conf Age.

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

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 30 May 2016

AM 12-10-81(Pg 58 of Hindi Book):- Kayi bachche BapDada, arthaath donon Baap ke bajaaye, ek hee Baap dwara khajaaney ke maalik ban_ney ke vidhi apnaathay haain. Is_say bhee praapti se vanchith ho jaate hain. Humaaraa niraakaar se direct connection hai. Sakar bhee niraakaar se paayaa, isliye hum bhee niraakaar se hee sab paa lenge. Sakar ki kyaa avashyakathaa hai? Lekin aisee chaabi khandith chaabee ban jaati hai. Isliye safalathaa naheen mil paathi hai. Hansee kee baath toh yah hai, naam apnaa BKK (BrahmaKumar- Kumari) kahlaayenge, aur connection Shiv baap se rakhenge. Toh apney ko Shivkumar, Shivkumaari kahlaavo na. BKK (BrahmaKumar- Kumari) kyon kahthay? SURNAME HEE HAI SHIV-VAMSHI BKK (BrahmaKumar- Kumari), TOH DONON HEE BAAP KAA SAMBANDH HUVAA NA.

= Some children instead of BAP_Dada means -BOTH THE FATHERS, try to become owners of the wealth/treasure just through ONE Father. ...
This point is from Avyakt Vani and speaks about the importance of the Sakar, after 69. So there is a Sakar father through whom only we can have connection, after 69.

It is said that Bap and Dada are always combined. They can be always combined only in some corporeal body, because the Supreme Father does not come in the Subtle Region and Brahma Baba has not gone to Paramdham. It is not about the entrance in Gulzar Dadi either, that is only from time to time.

If in BapDada there are two fathers included, which one is the corporeal Father, because Dada means elder brother and not father. In Bap itself two fathers are included, because the Supreme Father and the human father are recognized only when they combine.

Among themselves souls are brothers, but there is one brother who does the most effort, so he becomes eldest – Dada. Greatest effort is to become Narayan in the same life.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests