This is regarding the 'title-holder' theory of the BLIND PBKs, who have been treacherously indoctrinated by their bodily guru, Virendra Dev Dixit! Part of this has been already discussed earlier. Now going into a little more depth of same.
1)The PBk student has put a VERY GOOD logical question here. He is asking how Om Radhe can be title-holder Jagdamba, just because she left her body much earlier, before the entry of Kamala Devi into the Yagya again, in her current corporeal body. But, Mr. Dixit is not at all replying to the query, in a LOGICAL and SENSIBLE MANNER! INSTEAD he just gives a vague, TOTALLY STUPID & ILLOGICAL reply, and just TREACHEROUSLY deviates from the REAL point of the question, DIVERTING the attention of the sincere student - which is equivalent to craftily 'GAGGING' the intellect of the concerned student, so as to SUPPRESS his further inquiries in the matter, and CLOSE the issue THERE and THEN!Mr Dixit c/o arjun wrote: From - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=632&p=45304&hilit=principal#p45304 - Disc.CD No.591, dated 26.06.08 at Baroda (Gujarat)
Extracts-Part-8 Time: 01.00.01-01.00.59
Student: Baba, Om Radhey Mama came in-between and left in-between. But why did she get the title of Jagdamba?
Baba: Getting a title is a different thing. For example, in a school, in a college, there is a principal. The principal goes on leave FOR a YEAR or TWO. Someone else is posted as a principal in his place. So, will he be called a title-holder or original [principal]?
Baba: Similarly, Om Radhey Jagdamba was title-holder. She wasn’t the original Jagdamba. The original Jagdamba was in the beginning of the Yagya as well. She used to give directions to Mama Baba as well. She used to make them perform the drill; she used to sit as a teacher. The same one who was in the beginning will be revealed in the end.
2) Funny thing is- Mr. Dixit gives the example of- a principal going on leave for "a YEAR or TWO".
But as per AIVV, Sevakram had been on leave from the Yagya for nearly 3 decades! - [from 1942 till 1969/1976)].
First of all, would there be any instance, AT ALL, in ANY School or College, in the ENTIRE outer World, where there would be such an occurrence, where a Principal would require to proceed on LEAVE for as long as TWO years??? If he has to proceed on such a LONG leave, due to dire personal reasons, he would be required to put in his resignation, and in such a case a NEW Principal would have to be appointed in his place, for such a LONG period - DEFINITELY NOT a tittle-holder Principal!
Secondly, in the RAREST case where a worthy Principal is given the RAREST SPECIAL PRIVILEGE of proceeding on such a LONG leave of up to TWO years, (WITHOUT requiring him to put in his resignation), and the Vice-Principal is TEMPORARILY promoted to the position of Principal, during this period - to permit the Principal proceeding on leave, to join back and continue as the original Principal - would such a Principal be allowed to join back in ANOTHER corporeal body??? How old would he be after TWO years? How would a TWO year old child be the Principal of the School or College? And how would he be RECOGNIZED as the original Principal, even if he came back in ANOTHER corporeal body, say after 30 Years, having obtained his new degree and qualification for such a post in his new birth???
This EXAMPLE CLEARLY PROVES that the so-called 'unlimited' clarifications of the advanced knowledge are NOTHING but UTTER Spiritual GARBAGE of a demented intellect, READILY accepted and absorbed by the equally demented intellects of the BLIND PBKs!!!
IT IS NO WONDER, THEREFORE, THAT THE ORIGINAL 'PRINCIPAL' OF THE PBKs, Virendra Dev Dixit, WAS NOT RECOGNIZED, AND WAS THROWN OUT OF THE Yagya, WHEN HE TRIED TO BARGE-IN AGAIN IN HIS NEXT CORPOREAL BODY, CLAIMING THAT HE WAS THE ORIGINAL 'PRINCIPAL'!!! HOW SILLY CAN THE PBKs GET???
3) Usually, the highest post holder will NOT BE PERMITTED such a long period of leave. For example- a PM or President of a Nation, cannot take leave for a year or two. Maximum can be a couple of weeks, or at best, and in the rarest of rare cases, a couple of months. Otherwise he would be considered UNFIT for such a post, and would be required to put in his resignation!
---But, according to PBKs, the top-most personality in the EWD can take leave, and be ABSENT from the Yagya, for up to three decades, and YET claim that he is the 'mukrar-rath' of God, and the STUPID, BLIND PBKs just ACCEPT that, without even 'BATTING AN EYELID'!!! WHAT A SORRY STATE OF AFFAIRS, INDEED!!!
4) But, the Murli point which PBKs quote clearly says- they went into stomach of python! So, were is the question of taking leave, IN THIS CASE? So, by default itself- claim of PBKs fail. :laugh:
5) Practically, we observe that- Mr Dixit had taken leave for about six months when he had been to jail. So, at that time, IT WAS HIS DUTY TO APPOINT SOME IN-CHARGE or TITLE-HOLDER PRAJAPITA, IS IT NOT?
--- Similarly, their Jagadamba went out of Yagya from 1998. PBKs believe she will return. So, that can be considered to be a VERY LONG LEAVE - "in PBK view".
PBKs say- She has given some letter to AIVV before leaving. Has she appointed anyone as title-holder Jagadamba, in her place? Or, is the current SCAPEGOAT, Sr M alias Yogini, who has been thereafter appointed to be in-charge of the Kanyas by Virendra Dev Dixit, be considered to be the title-holder, according to the PBKs?
6) So, PBKs inadvertently imply- in PBK view- a 'LEAVE' means losing faith in ShivBaba/Yagya/knowledge (as in the case of their Sevakram and the so called two PBK sisters, whom they believe lost faith, left Yagya, and returned in another corporeal body)! See how funny, ILLOGICAL and STUPID PBK logic is!
7) More interestingly, ' PBK Sita soul' had said one thing- "When a lion leaves, some other lion comes, jungle never becomes empty"- with reference to the 'Prajapita' post/role. But, the jungle/Yagya was empty from 1969 till 1976, and for about six months when Mr Dixit was in jail.*
8) PBK 'Sita soul' had also written- "when a lioness leaves, another lioness enters (into Yagya)" - and meant this for the departure of Om Radhe (1965), and entering of sister Vedanti to gyaan (1965).
--- So- to whom Om Radhe had been title holder - to Kamala Devi or sister Vedanti? As per the above reply in the quote- Mr Dixit is saying Om radhe is title holder Jagadamba (in lieu of KDD). But, in 8), PBK 'Sita soul' relates Om Radhe to sister Vedanti*??
* - This is the result of trying to mis-interpret the Murli points. Baba had meant jungle here for lowkik, but PBKs Mr. Dixit tried to equate everything to Yagya or BK/PBK souls. In this attempt/exercise, he fell into his own trap.
9) Further, usually when a principal goes on leave, he will appoint the very next person, of his OWN LINEAGE, to his post, as in-charge. But, in PBK logic, it is totally the other way. The very next person from PBK side is not the title-holder, but the title-holder is from kourava/BK side, as per PBKs! So-
# Flaw No. 294) In PBK logic, the title-holder would always be from kourava side, can never be from pandava side.
# Flaw No. 295) Mr. Dixit murdered even the seat "in-charge" or "title-holder position":-
--Mr. Dixit fully murdered spirituality as already explained earlier. WE can see how he has distorted FACTS and instigated scorn towards the seat of title-holder or in-charge position.
------It finally shows his own arrogance as well as ignorance of- why would a pandava appoint some kourava to his seat while he is on leave! :laugh:
---By defaming others, Mr. Dixit inadvertently falls into his own trap. But, it is nothing new, as all are accurate roles within this EWD!