Flaws in PBK Philosophy

[sita]

6) Refer to your post just before flaw No. 187. You have written "TWICE". Many times you have done this and do not even know what you write. But, that is perfectly right because that is the real thinking of PBKs. They take Murli point only for others, not for self. So, naturally, they will get surprised when the mirror is turned towards them. For them the mirror is one sided and facing only one side. The Murli points which they use to point to others does not apply to them in the same way.

Don't make me a fool, brother, you are wasting my time by referring to things that are not there. Where in the post you have pointed (before flaw 187) have I said that Shiv needs a message for to come? And where have I said it even twice? You are even unable to accept you have misunderstood.

Probably you expect that readers will not follow your links, because you indeed share so many points and links that one is discouraged to follow. What you probably try to achieve is that to leave the impression you support your claims with arguments, but I would encourage any viewer to strictly follow and read all the points you post and all the links you post so that they see by themselves how far you have proved anything.

4)It is implied-
----a)Baba says- follow Father, mother.
----b) Both jagadamba and Jagapita are creators. Both have right to say- become my children -see from mu point No. 04 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 7b5d#p4075

Does this mean that he has taken responsibility for Mama, like for Brahma Baba, that whatever comes from his mouth it is ShivBaba speaking, even if he speaks wrong I will put it right. In the Murli, praise is sung to many children. It is true, Baba has taken responsibility to uplift all children, and he does to the extent they follow Shrimat, they automatically get uplifted by following Shrimat, Baba is responsible for giving Shrimat. And Mama has strictly followed the Shrimat through Brahma Baba.

1)Now- according to Sita soul, Shiv was present in Mr. Dixit from 1969 itself. Not sure how many PBKs certify this.
----Their own Chariot had said- Shiv entered in Mr. Dixit ONLY in 1976 AFTER the maturity period of the womb - refer to flaw No. 170- or here- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=203&p=49083&hilit=womb#p49083.
---So, again contradiction here. But, that is 'perfect', according to 'sita' soul, and perhaps that too comes in extra-ordinary clarification.

You pretend to know what the advance knowledge says, then why do you need to ask questions. Please, allow me to know what I say, and to tell you that what you think the advance knowledge says, is wrong. The 1976 is the year of the revelation of the corporeal Father.

2a) Now- they are breaking their own other rules more and more. According to PBKs, the proof* for coming of Shiv is to speak Murli. Did Mr. Dixit speak any Murli in 1969?

Is it according to the PBKs? Is it not the certification given in the Murli that we can know when the Supreme Soul has entered by the knowledge only. It seems you don't hold any value for the Murli either. Maybe because you cannot resolve the conflicting points, you have lost faith in the Murli.

No, in 1969 no Murli was spoken, so there is no proof, it is only a suggestion. When the Supreme Soul comes he comes and purifies the world and then goes. When, where and what type of service he does, through whom, we may never be able to know, but once he comes his task goes on.

It is said that the jungle never remains empty. One or another lion is there like a king. As soon as one important personality leaves, another one comes. It is said that we can know afterwards that the Shiv has come. If the soul of the Father has entered the family in 1969, where else the Supreme Soul could be, Bap and Dada are always combined.

Yes, I think the Supreme Soul can reside in some body without narrating knowledge.

2c)Or as now, sita soul has pre-poned the date of entrance in Dixit, could God have been entering into all of their Brahmas from 1947 till 1969 as well? (whenever Shiv was not in body of DLR- as Shiv does not ride Chariot whole day)?

Yes, it is possible. Please, not that I have edited the reply to your question 5a, that shiv is there present 24/7/365 still from 1936.

[mbbhat]

Don't make me a fool, Brother, you are wasting my time by referring to things that are not there. Where in the post you have pointed (before flaw 187) I have said that Shiv needs a message for to come. And where have I said it even twice. You are even unable to accept you have misunderstood.

1) You have written here- viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1860&start=105 - just before Post No. 01 dated 23rd march 2016 . [Sorry, the place was different. But, you had written as below. ]
[quote=""sita"]Another question is there, that how does Shiv come to know about the program of his coming. The trance messengers reach only as far as the Subtle Region, they do not reach to Paramdham, but even if they do reach, how would they communicate there, where there is no thought, no sound, no movement, and souls are like non-living. If Shiv does not come there in the Subtle Region dweller, how does Shiv come to know about the program that is fixed for his coming, how is he communicated that program.[/quote]
I have made bold at BOTH the places in flaw No. 187). Since your reply in the post just earlier to flaw No. 187) contained about invoking matter, and in the other topic too- you had written about the same matter, I did copy and paste there.

Probably you expect that readers will not follow your links, ...

2)Personal comments which are neither true, nor of any use.

Does this mean that he has taken responsibility for Mama like for Brahma Baba that whatever comes from his mouth it is ShivBaba speaking, even if he speaks wrong I will put it right.

3)Definitely- it is implied there. You need not agree.

Please, allow me to know what I say and to tell you that what you think the Advanced Knowledge says is wrong. The 1976 is the year of the revelation of the corporeal Father.

4)Where have I stopped you? You may continue. There is a separate sub forum for PBKs. From there I have taken the comments and pointing the errors here in this topic. You have all the rights to defend yourself.

Is it according to the PBKs? Is it not the certification given in the Murli that we can know when the Supreme Soul has entered by The Knowledge only. It seems you don't hold any value for the Murli either. Maybe because you cannot resolve the conflicting points you have lost faith in the Murli.

5)From our side, it is already replied. We believe two souls are coming after 1969.
---Now, it is up to PBKs to prove from their side. Of course, you have all the right to say- you do not agree with my reply. That is perfectly alright. But,
----Are PBKs able to prove their claims and defend them? THIS IS THE POINT IN THIS TOPIC.. Is this not again an LLU?

No, in 1969 no Murli was spoken, so there is no proof, it is only a suggestion. When the Supreme Soul comes he comes and purifies the world and then goes. When, where and what type of service he does, through whom, we may never be able to know, but once he comes his task goes on.

6)Thank you for clear INNOCENT REPLY.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 194) Ridiculous "King Concept" of PBKs:-

It is said that the jungle never remains empty. One or another lion is there like a king. As soon as one important personality leaves, another one comes. It is said that we can know afterwards that the Shiv has come. If the soul of the Father has entered the family in 1969, where else the Supreme Soul could be, Bap and Dada are always combined.

6)Ridiculous and double standards. PBKs use the point to point fingers on BKs to say- One Guru leaves and another one cannot sit on the throne, But, here it is U turn. OK, let us still agree.

7)Now, as per PBKs, who all are Kings in Jungle (braahmin family) ? (you may correct me if I am wrong.)
---From 1937 till 1942- Mostly Sevakram was King.
----From 1942 till 1947, only female Kings = the two PBK sisters? [Because God entered Lekhraj Kirpalani only in 1947, and the Yagya was on control of females- (in PBK view)
---From 1947 till 1969 Jan - DLR could be the King.
----From 1969 jan till 1969 Nov. - 'ghost' could be the King - as Murlis were spoken only in Mount Abu.
---- From 1969 Nov. till 1976 (not sure)- who was King? Murlis did not start in AIVV, till 1976/1980s, and the entrance in Dixit is too confusing. Dixit himself says- God entered in him only in 1976, but a follower here says in 1969 itself. God only knows.
----From 1976/(or 1980s till AIVV practically started) onward- are there two Kings? DLR speaking Avyakt Murlis and Mr Dixit giving clarification? And- the tug of war between the two Kings regarding Bull controlling Shankar and vice versa. ...

8)But, as per "WOMB THEORY", (flaw Nos 170 to 172) of Mr Dixit, all the PBK personalities including true Gita as well as Shiv are not yet revealed in the jungle (braahmin family). All of them are going through THEIR WOMB PERIOD. Just Krishna bachchaa only is revealed. So can those who are in womb- be called as KINGS?

# Flaw No. 195) PBKs now make God as human, or even lower:-

Yes, I think the Supreme Soul can reside in some body without narrating knowledge.

9)OK, for few minutes or seconds to give drushti, etc., ShivBaba may be inside the body without speaking. But,

Yes, it is possible. Please, not that I have edited the reply to your question 5a, that Shiv is there present 24/7/365 still from 1936.

10)I do not think for 24/7/365 days Shiv could be in a corporeal body/bodies. Anyhow, thank you for your response.

[sita]

King is said for the lion, and if it is a lioness, it will be said a queen. Like in 1965 one lioness leaves and another one enters. When this soul enters the Yagya, it becames the cause of making the 10 year declaration, because this same soul will be revealed as Lakshmi in 10 years from that time.

Gurus are many, but sadguru is one. Guru Brahma left. Sadguru will not leave.

10)I do not think for 24/7/365 days Shiv could be in a corporeal body/bodies. Anyhow, thank you for your response.

Why not?

1) You have written here- viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1860&start=105 - just before Post No. 01 dated 23rd march 2016 . [Sorry, the place was different. But, you had written as below.]

Have i said that Shiv needs message for his coming. It is you who think that Shiv comes by program, so i was asking you how does it work. How does the message about the program reach him, how he gives his agreement, but I realize you might not be aware of these internal matters.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 196) PBKs inadvertently imply - their Guru leaves, and some one else takes charge:-

King is said for the lion, and if it is a lioness, it will be said a queen. Like in 1965 one lioness leaves and another one enters. When this soul enters the Yagya, it becomes the cause of making the 10 year declaration, because this same soul will be revealed as Lakshmi in 10 years from that time.

1) You did not reply to all the points of the list. You replied as if - you were able to 'see' ONLY the tail of the elephant, leaving the rest. It is left up to you. Even then, it does not fit. Because there was a gap of nearly 8 months, in between, before Dixit arrived. (1969 jan to 1969 Nov). Again calling sister Vedanti as lioness, - "in PBK, or even BK view" - does not fit. Because Om Radhe was head of BKWSU till 1965. But, sister Vedanti had NO SUCH STATUS or STANDING, after Mama left; neither was she designated or addressed as 'Mama'. Even after 1969, it was Dadi Prakashmani and Didi on the throne, not sister Vedanti. And was Sr Vedanti revealed as Lakshmi in 1976 in Subtle Region or this corporeal sphere? And where is your LN ruling now, in Subtle Region or this corporeal sphere?

Anyhow, it is entirely left to you and the PBKs to continue CHEWING the 'garbage' fed to you by your bodily guru, -Virendra Dev Dixit. It is your PERSONAL CHOICE, which NO ONE should question, since YOU ALONE are liable for same.

Gurus are many, but Sadguru is one. Guru Brahma left. Sadguru will not leave.

2)B baba has never left- he has ALWAYS BEEN in the Yagya- either in Sakar or akar form. Even PBKs agree here. PBKs may say- B baba has left his corporeal body. That is all. But to say or think that Brahma Baba HAS LEFT, is the 'maha-murkhta' or EXTREME STUPIDITY of the PBKs and their bodily guru, -Virendra Dev Dixit! Moreover, for BKs, the incorporeal is the one who is real Sadguru, not corporeal. So- in both the aspects- you failed to understand BK view, is it not?
HOWEVER, IT IS TRUE THAT HE CANNOT BE SEEN or FELT or EXPERIENCED by the BLIND PBKs, and their EQUALLY BLIND bodily guru, -Virendra Dev Dixit - SO IT IS NOT THEIR FAULT AT ALL!

---- Further- BKs EXPERIENCE that even Shiv comes in DG.

----PBKs themselves believe their Guru Sevakram left in 1942, someone took charge at least later- in 1947. In their own view, their bodily Guru LEFT FULLY and went into stomach of python.

3) In PBK view, there are at least two Gurus. They believe God speaks through someone, and gives clarification through another. In their view, DLR took the in-charge position of their Guru Sevakram.
---For PBKs, AT LEAST 4 to 5 Brahmas, so OBVIOUSLY, they are implying 4 to 5 Gurus in AIVV.
---- PBKs themselves believe TRUE Gita (as well as False Gita)- are LIVING ones. Then obviously, living Gita should be Guru, is it not?
---For BKs, it is only one Guru- in incorporeal, it is Shiv, in corporeal, it is Brahma. There is only ONE ShivBaba and only ONE Brahma in BKWSU.

Have i said that Shiv needs message for his coming.

4)It is already implied there. OK, if you had said it in Bk view- please better mention it. *But, in BK view, it does not affect at all. Because - already said- we believe TWO souls are coming there.
--- MOREOVER, Murli CLEARLY SAYS- OLD POINTS WILL NOT COME IN USE. So- even that can change.
Why NOT? What is wrong, if coming of Shiv is known. Any problem?

So, PBK allegations DO NOT have any significant value from "Murli POINT OF VIEW"

It is you who think that Shiv comes by program, so i was asking you how does it work. How does the message about the program reach him, how he gives his agreement, but I realize you might not be aware of these internal matters.

*5) Already replied above. You say- trance messengers can reach only Subtle Region. In whose view? BK view is not so. Bk view is thoughts can reach anywhere. In most of the cases, you neither understand Murli view, Bk view, NOR EVEN PBk view (what PBKs INADVERTENTLY IMPLY - hence PARTIALLY BLIND).


# Flaw No. 197) PBKs inadvertently imply they have more number of Gurus:-

See point No. 3) above.


# Flaw No. 198) Guru of PBKs gives incharge to a FALSE GURU?

6)PBKs relate THE leaving of the so called Sevakram IN 1942 as- a principal placing someone as incharge. But, it has no logic. Because the Murli point clearly says- such a personality LOST faith and entered into python. Moreover, there was gap of 5 years (1947- 1942). Anyhow, still let us agree with them.

Usually, when a person leaves and goes on leave, he gives the incharge seat to someone ELIGIBLE. But, according to Mr. Dixit, Brahma Baba is "No. one false Guru, child intellect, etc". So, in PBK view, their own Guru gives charge to false Guru? What would be the level of intellect of such a Guru? Is not even here- Mr Dixit inadvertently implying that his own intellect is worse than a baby intellect?

Extent of spiritual suicide of Mr Dixit by defaming B Baba and creating more number of Brahmas/Gurus is once again visible here.

[sita]

Two different malas are indicated in the Murlis. When I find time I will represent quotes.

In the Murli it is said that at the end half pure, half impure souls will remain.

[mbbhat]

In the Murli it is said that at the end half pure, half impure souls will remain.

Better put points on rosary - like here - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2103&hilit=rosary


= RESPONSE =

From - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2103&hilit=rosary#p31657
9-9-77(2):- ... JO RUDR KI MALA BANTI HAI, VAHI PHIR Vishnu KI MALA BAN JATI HAI. ... YAH 550 KAROD AATMAAVON KI MALA HAI. ... Vaastav may TUM jaante ho RUDRMALA HEE Vishnu KI MALA BANTI HAI. ... Paramatma ko bhi Bhaktimarg may kitni mehnat karni padti hai. Dwaapar se Kaliyug anth tak athavaa Sangam ke anth tak kahe unka part chalta hai. Yah TUM jaante ho.

= "... THE RUDRMALA ITSELF LATER BECOMES VISHNUMALA. ... IT IS MALA OF 550 CRORES. ... ACTUALLY YOU KNOW THAT RUDRMALA ITSELF BECOMES MALA OF Vishnu. ... Even Supreme Soul has to put in so much effort in Bhaktimarg. From Copper Age till end of Iron Age or say, Confluence Age, His part goes on. YOU know this."

From the above, it should become DISTINCTLY CLEAR, ONLY TO CONCERNED SOULS, that the so-called clarifications of the advanced knowledge, propagated by Ravan, through the 'mukrar-rath' of Ravan, -Virendra Dev Dixit, are TOTALLY CORRUPTED & ADULTERATED to be in consonance with the DISTORTED & PERVERTED CONCEPTS of 'Tampradhan Bhakti' or DEGRADED DEVOTION. The BLIND FOLLOWERS of -Virendra Dev Dixit, the PBKs, are made to believe that such CORRUPTED & ADULTERATED clarifications are actually the subtle, UNLIMITED clarifications which can only be appreciated by a subtle intellect. All this is RELATIVELY TRUE, but the only DELUSIVE DECEPTION lies in the FACT that such UNLIMITED clarifications have an inclination towards NEGATIVITY or the NIGHT of the Cycle, which also require a subtle intellect to comprehend appropriately, in the NEGATIVE sense. Whereas, the UNLIMITED clarifications provided by REAL ShivBaba or God, through His 'mukrar-rath', DLR, have an inclination towards POSITIVITY or the DAY of the Cycle, which require a SUBTLEST & PUREST intellect to comprehend appropriately, in the POSITIVE sense.

However, it must be appreciated that this EWD is ESSENTIALLY comprised of BOTH the POSITIVE as well as the NEGATIVE elements, intended to interact with each other, like the two hands of a human body - involving BOTH, the DAY, as well as the NIGHT of the Cycle. Hence our aim should not be to CONDEMN the LEFT HAND, but to APPRECIATE the RELATIVE positions of BOTH hands, so that they may function TOGETHER in the greatest possible HARMONY, EVEN in the NIGHT of the Cycle.

We would like to take this opportunity to THANK Divine Spiritual Brother 'mbbhat' for the CONCERTED EFFORTS, and for DEVOTING so much of TIME and ENERGY, in spite of many obstacles and severe derogatory criticisms faced, in providing so many selected points of Knowledge on this forum for the benefit of concerned souls. We wish 'mbbhat' all the very best.

We would ALSO like to THANK Divine Spiritual Brother 'sita' for the CONSISTENCY in projecting viewpoints of the Knowledge, as per own comprehension, in spite of many obstacles and severe derogatory criticisms faced, without which this interaction would NOT BE POSSIBLE. We wish 'sita' all the very best.

SAT

[mbbhat]

Thanks for the very best interactions from all.

# Flaw No. 199) A similarity between Malas and Brahmas:-

---Baba usually says about two malas- Rudrmala and Vishnumala. But, the souls in both the malas are one and the same (refer to the previous post).
---Similarly baba says about two Brahmas - Corporeal and Subtle. He has also said- both the Brahmas are one and the same.
---But, by taking isolated Murli points, and having no ability to think properly on their own, to such people they will appear as two different aspects.
---Baba says- braahmins then become deities. But, again the souls are the same.
---But, to explain the CONTRAST between the two, Baba explains in various ways.

That is why Baba says- "listen/think with Godly intellect, not with asuree/Ravan (demoniac) intellect". - Refer to Murli points No. 7 and 8 in Post No. 44 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... uree#p4111
---------------

# Flaw No. 200) Does the clarification given by -Virendra Dev Dixit on Destruction have any sense?

The discussion on 1976 prediction is already discussed to a great extent. This is regarding the beginning period of Yagya.

World Mother means mother who serves souls of all faiths... Brahma Baba invited souls into the Yagya who were of other religions and persuasions, and it was Ram's soul aka Prajapita who opposed this in the beginning, and this caused friction within the Yagya...

---Difficult to believe/agree, as no soul can stay either in BKWSU or AIVV without any faith. Just by inviting someone, will they stay? Will they have willingness to undergo such a long - say- 14 years bhatti, etc? In initial days, there were lots of obstacles, so it would be even more difficult.
---During the beginning period, many were inspired by trance, visions, and of course, few - example - Mama had got firm intellect without any of these.

When was the flame of destruction ignited? From the beginning of Yagya itself the flame of destruction was ignited from the Yagya Khund along with the flame of establishment. Who were instrumental for this? Brahma (Baba), Father (of Humanity-Prajapita-Ram) and Brahmin children (leftist opposing Vidharmis) also became instrumental in igniting this flame of destruction.” [Av 03.02.74]

"People of other religions came (i.e. Vidharmis or opposing souls, were allowed into the Yagya, by the soft accommodating mother, Dada Lekhraj). So look, the partition of India took place before the eyes of the Father(Prajapita-Ram, who saw this happening, and confronted Dada Lekhraj about it, but the practise continued. This process was mirrored in the broad drama, by the partition that took place in India)." [Mu 30.09.71] - from here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51113&hilit ... ion#p51113

The words in bracket have no support from any Murli point. Mostly Mr. Dixit just tried to fit something best to prove his claims. But, by DEFAULT itself, they become invalid - because
1)the Murli point clearly says- Such children, those who had been in gyaan 5 to 10 years (whom PBKs refer to be themselves) went into stomach of python.
2)Mr Dixit says- the entire Yagya was in control of PBk sisters from 1942 till 1947. So, how come there could be clashes or confrontations?
3)A BIG 'HOWLER' here is- Why the PBK head, so-called Sevakram, left Yagya in 1942 itself and the other two PBK sisters left only in 1947? Why the 5 year gap? How can then that be called as partition? And- as Mr Dixit says- till 1947, the Yagya was under control of those PBk sisters, they used to control even Mama, Baba. , their arguments have ABSOLUTELY no logic.

I am yet to read the above Avyakt Murlis. Of course, Baba might have related to lowkik events, as all know with the establishment, the button for destruction also has got triggered, and there could be rehearsals of these.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 201) Mr Dixit's selfish and dangerous concept of "Bharat":-

This is an addition to flaw No. 173. - here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51149#p51149
---Usually Murli point says- "by inserting name of Krishna, Bharat got degraded". The PBK with whom I did discussion, told me- the above Murli point has a great meaning, and he gave me the so called extra ordinary clarification as- "Bharat = Dixit/SEvakram. He said due to name of B baba in Sakar Murlis, name of Dixit had gone fully down"..

So- from his words, I guessed (correct me if I am wrong) his meaning as- "since in the Sakar Murlis, name of Dixit is not present, he has not been recognized in BKWSU. Hence his value is not understood, in other words, his status in braahmin family is poor".

See how selfish and dangerous Mr Dixit is. He wishes to take all the titles on himself. Not sure what name should be put in the place of PITASHREE - in PBK view. Even if it had been put as "Prajapita", BKs would still recognize that to be B Baba only. So- how come that could be reason for degradation of Mr Dixit? Or does Mr Dixit expects his lowkik name itself to be put in the Sakar Murlis?


# Flaw No. 202) Can memorial of a LIVING one be a NON-LIVING one?-

1)This is an addition to flaw No. 181 (172 and 156 are also connected - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51088#p51088) . PBKs believe sister Vedanti is TG, and Kamala Devi is FG(False Gita). But, in the end, when Kamala Devi realizes the truth, do they give title TG even for her? If yes, then there would be two True Living Gitas in the end. If not it will look bad, as even after realization, she will have the same title.

2)And- yaadgaar/memorial of a living one would be a living one, non living one would be a non living one, is it not? But, in PBK view, memory of LIVING personality (human being) can be a NON LIVING (scripture/book).
------------

# Flaw No. 203) PBKs inadvertently imply Mr Dixit gives birth to FOOLS: -

1)There are Murli points which say- "Lakshmi and Narayan are paarsabuddhi (pure, golden intellects)"". But, there are also Murli points which say- "L& N are royal buddhus (royal fools)". Baba has said in two contexts.
---Their intellect is pure in the sense, they are not affected by Maya even to a little, and they do not need any ministers to rule.
---The latter point which says them as royal fools is to indicate that- even though Lakshmi and Narayan are world emperors, they do not have any knowledge of time cycle.

2)Mr. Dixit took advantage of the above two Murli points, and as he had introduced Conf. Aged Lakshmi and Narayan, according to him, he and sister Vedanti are the paaras/pure intellects, and the Golden Aged LN (B baba and Mama) are fools.

3)But, in "their own view", their so called Conf. Aged Narayan (Mr Dixit) is controlled by Bull (Lekhraj Kirpalani), and, even sister Vedanti is YET TO RECOGNIZE the role of their Chariot and God. So, how can they say both of them are paaras buddhis?

4) Also- in PBK view, all the mothers/females are cowardice. So, how can they say Lakshmi as paaras buddhi? By DEFAULT itself, their Lakshmi goes out of the track, is it not?

5) Another flaw is- according to PBKs, the Golden Aged L & N are the children of the Conf. Aged L& N. So, PBKs are inadvertently implying that- their paaras buddhi Lakshmi and Narayan give birth to royal fools, is it not?

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 204) Misinterpretation of "Ram" by Mr. Dixit:-

1a) PBKs quote this Murli point- "ShivBaba is called Ram. But they have thought the Supreme Soul to be Ram. 14.4.76. P1".
--- Mostly there is some translation error. And, the word "But" is added by Mr Dixit. I believe it mostly says like this -

ShivBaba ko Ram kahaa jaataa hai. Unhoney Ram paramatma ko samajh liyaa hai. = ShivBaba is called as Ram. They (also) think Ram to be Supreme Soul.

1b))Now, here a question arises. Who thinks Ram as SS(Supreme Soul)? In lowkik, devotees consider Ram to be a human deity, not to SS, is it not? So, Mr Dixit got a wonderful opportunity to use this Murli point as a ploy against BKs, as BKs consider Ram (in incorporeal sense) to be SS.

1c)The above Murli point can be twisted easily, and Mr Dixit interprets it as- " ShivBaba is called Ram. (But) they have thought the Supreme Soul to be Ram". When the word "but" is added, the latter people would look inferior/wrong. So, Mr. Dixit interprets this as-

"ShivBaba (the Chariot or Shiv in Chariot) is called Ram. But they(BKs) have thought the Supreme Soul to be Ram". In this way, Dixit again killed two birds with one stone. He succeeded in proving ShivBaba as for the Chariot, as well as putting BKs down.

It is difficult to understand the above Murli point- even without being twisted by Mr. Dixit. Later, when I found the following Murli points, it became clear.

2) SM 21-9-73(1):- Tum jaante ho Ram kisko kaha jata hai. Ram2 kah maalaa pherte hain. Toh Paramatma ko hee Yaad karte hain. Naam hee hai Rudr_mala. Rudr Shiv ke gale ki maalaa. Sab dharmvaale Yaad zaroor karte hain. [WOT, mala] –imp -95

= You know who is Ram. When they(devotees) chant Ram while rotating the beads of the rosary, they think of SS only. The name itself is rudramala. Mala of Rudr Shiv. People of all the religions definitely remember.

What Baba saying here is- even when people utter word Ram, (from heart, or when their concentration is good), they think of SS only, not human deity. In the next Murli point, it becomes even more clear.


3)SM 10-3-82(1):- Atma jab sharir may pravesh karti hai to andar churpur hoti hai. Maaloom padtaa hai andar atma ne pravesh kiyaa hai, bachche ke organs chalney lage. Yah baatein achchi reeti samajhni hai aur jo bhi manushy vah koyi aisey nahin kahte hain ki hum atma tumko samjhaate hain. VAH PRASIDDH HAIN SHARIR SE. YAH ShivBaba BIGAR SHARIR PRASIDDH HAI. Vichitr hai na.Unko apnaa sharir nahin hai. SHARIRDHAARI KO KAB BHAGAVAAN NAHIN KAHNAA CHAAHIYE. STHOOL VA SOOKSHM KOYI BHI HO. Atma in organs se Yaad karti hai Parampita Parmatma ko. Vah to baithkar manushyon ke banaaye shaastr sunaate hain. Yahaan yah nayi baath Bhagavaanuvaach. Bhagavaan koun hain jisko sabhi bhakt hee Bhagavaan2 kah Yaad karte hain. BVS ke to naam jaante hain. HEY BRAHMA, HEY Vishnu KAH PUKAARTE HAIN. VAH HAIN DEVTAAYEIN. UNKO Yaad KARNE SE NIRAAKAAR HEE Yaad AATE HAIN. NIRAAKAAR PARMAATMAA KAA HEE BANDAGI KARTE HAIN. Vah kahte hain main bhi atma, parantu Supreme hun. Meraa bhi chitr banaate hain, Tum aatmavon kaa bhi chitr banaate hain. MANDIRON MAY BADAA SHIVLING BHI RAKHTE HAIN AUR CHOTE2 SAALIGRAAM BHI JINSEY HEE SIDDH HOTAA HAI KI HUM AATMAAYEIN HAIN, EK PARMAATMAA HAI. Baap hameshaa bachchon se badaa hotaa hai. Isliye badaa ling banaate hain. Vaastav may main koyi size may badaa nahin hun. -76- [ShivBaba, BVS, Yaad, WOT]

= ....People/devotees know names of BVS. They call hey Brahma, hey Vishnu, etc. They are (actually) deities. (But), even when they are remembered, the incorporeal only comes into mind. People (n fact), offer their real prayer (do bandagi) only to the incorporeal only."...

Just by taking isolated Murli points, Mr Dixit and his followers committed blunders, spiritual suicides, and are perfectly playing the role of HK hood, as per drama.

[sita]

2)And- yaadgaar/memorial of a living one would be a living one, non living one would be a non living one, is it not? But, in PBK view, memory of LIVING personality (human being) can be a NON LIVING (scripture/book).

The memorial of the living is always nonliving. Nonliving statues are memorials of the living beings. Various nonliving objects can be memorial of the living souls, like for eg. the beads of the rosary.

1)There are Murli points which say- "Lakshmi and Narayan are paarsabuddhi (pure, golden intellects)"". But, there are also Murli points which say- "L& N are royal buddhus (royal fools)". Baba has said in two contexts.
---Their intellect is pure in the sense, they are not affected by Maya even to a little, and they do not need any ministers to rule.
---The latter point which says them as royal fools is to indicate that- even though Lakshmi and Narayan are world emperors, they do not have any knowledge of time cycle.

Murli point says "ïntelligent"". LN are intelligent, that's why they become masters of the world. It is different than parasbuddhi.

4) Also- in PBK view, all the mothers/females are cowardice. So, how can they say Lakshmi as paaras buddhi? By DEFAULT itself, their Lakshmi goes out of the track, is it not?

I think you have misunderstood something. There is no such PBK conception that mothers/females are cowards. Mothers are Shiv - Shaktis, they are durga and Kali, they destroy the demons, how can they be cowards.

5) Another flaw is- according to PBKs, the Golden Aged L & N are the children of the Conf. Aged L& N. So, PBKs are inadvertently implying that- their paaras buddhi Lakshmi and Narayan give birth to royal fools, is it not?

The souls who give birth to the Golden Aged deities will also forget the knowledge.

Regarding the matter of Ram, it is said that the scriptures are memorial of the Confluence Age Ram, Krishna in the scriptures refer to the Supreme Father. The role that he plays is enacted by a human. In the scriptures God himself is there in human form and himself fights war with Ravan and defeats him. This is what we witness now. This part was not there visible through Brahma Baba, nor is the role through Dadi Gulzar role of God, nor of confronting Ravan.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 205) Are PBKs going to argue "a scripture = God" ? -

The memorial of the living is always nonliving. Nonliving statues are memorials of the living beings. Various nonliving objects can be memorial of the living souls, like for eg. the beads of the rosary.

1)Bead represents a soul/eternal entity, not a book. Even ling or saligram represents a soul, not an object like a book. All the non-living statues of human forms represent living bodies. But, a book represents neither a soul, nor a body. This was the point.

Regarding the matter of Ram, it is said that the scriptures are memorial of the Confluence Age. Ram, Krishna in the scriptures refer to the Supreme Father. The role that he plays is enacted by a human. In the scriptures God himself is there in human form and himself fights war with Ravan and defeats him.

2) Ram, Krishna in a scripture, may refer to God, but a scripture cannot be said to be God. A scripture can be written in many languages, can be written in few words or too many words. But, the personality of God does not become elevated or degraded with the words put in the scriptures.
So- I believe the above is not a logical explanation. Because in scriptures, there are LOTs of personalities. There is a God, even to a scripture. So, scripture comes NEXT to God, so definitely not God, so cannot be memorial of God in true sense.

Or do PBKs say- Scriptures are also God? If PBKs imply a scripture is a memorial of God, then is not Gita Jayanti enough? WHAT is the need of Shiv Jayanti or Krishna Jayanti? Why need of temples for them? Place scriptures in the place of statues.

3)Why Baba says- Yaad is more important than scripture/knowledge? Because in Yaad, we remember God, we become God-conscious, not just knowledge/scripture conscious, is it not?

4)Now, by justifying the above fault, PBKs commit even a higher fault. By giving title Gita to some human being, and saying the scriptures are also memorial of God, PBKs inadvertently imply it is enough if we remember human personalities, no need to remember either God nor even the knowledge.
Because (in PBK view) sister Vedanti herself is a TRUE Gita, so obviously, becomes inclusive of all the personalities, and God himself- as per above claims.
So, are not PBKs inadvertently implying - It is enough to remember just sister Vedanti, no need of either the Chariot, God and Knowledge?

What a great tragedy of PBKs? The extent of foolishness of PBKs is once again clearly visible.
-----------------

# Flaw No. 206) PBKs again speaking open lies and trying to eat their own words:-

I think you have misunderstood something. There is no such PBK conception that mothers/females are cowards. Mothers are Shiv - Shaktis, they are durga and Kali, they destroy the demons, how can they be cowards.

In the other topic, you had written-

When Brahma Baba* enters the Father he gets purified, but when he enters the children he gets dirtied. ...-

--* Obviously, a mother, is it not? - (in PBK view.)
---PBKs believe eclipse can occur on mother/earth Kamala Devi.
---Is not this enough? If you need more-
---PBKs even criticize all females by saying- Mothers have attachment, Father is strict. They also quote the point in one sided way- - as- "it is said story of Satya Narayan, not Satya Lakshmi".
---They even say- God did not play role of Teacher, and Sadguru in mother, but only in Father he can play role of teacher and Guru. They even believe what all role God played through a Mother was almost futile.
---Again PBKs believe VijayaMala to be inferior to Rudrmala, the former consisting of female ones and latter male ones.

Even another PBk has put the respect of mother to the ground once and for all- by saying-

I have yet to see the word unlimited used in reference to a mother... Could you kindly check to make sure your information is correct, and that you haven't mistakenly inferred this to be the case! Mothers are of the earth, attached... i don't think the word unlimited applies in their case! Brahma Baba Krishna is still attached to the Brahmin children, which is why he continues to visit Mt Abu to teach them dharna, until he becomes complete(unattached) that is, then things will change! - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51113&hilit=mothers#p51113

Are PBKs aware of what they write or imply?
------------

The souls who give birth to the Golden Aged deities will also forget The Knowledge.

I had asked the same to a PBK in this forum before. Then how can and in what sense PBKs say- Mr Dixit is intelligent? Seems that your reply is hollow.

This is what we witness now. This part was not there visible through Brahma Baba, nor is the role through Dadi Gulzar role of God, nor of confronting Ravan.

Is Mr Dixit confronting Ravan? or playing role of Ravan by misguiding others and playing role of HK hood? All the so-called 'extra-ordinary' clarifications are FULL of ERRORS, DOUBLE STANDARDS, TWISTING, AND like just juggling exercises or KANRAS, already explained here.
But, as per your perception, they may be of great ones. Let readers decide for themselves.

[sita]

The book Gita refers to a human being in the same way as a bead refers to a human being, in the same way as a river refers to a human being, or as a cow refers to a human, that chews the grass of knowledge, or a nonliving star that shines the light of knowledge, or a flower with its fragrance or a bird with its song, these comparisons refer to living beings.

A scripture means the rule on which the life is organized. There are various scriptures and people who follow them. Among the scriptures the highest is Gita, following the Gita, a person becomes highest on high.

On the path of knowledge we have God who speaks the Murli and Murli is our rule and our Gita and by following that, one becomes highest on high. Our aim is to become from man to Narayan and woman to Lakhsmi, highest post is that of Vishnu. Lakshsmi would embody the knowledge of the Gita.

True and false Gita refers to the name of God in that Gita. If in the mind the name and form of Brahma Baba is there, that through Brahma Baba the Gita is spoken it is false Gita. Through Brahma it was the vedas that emerged. Nowadays no one reads the vedas. By following the rituals of the vedas, by following the path of Bhakti, by believing the vedas/Murli to come from God, no one has attained nor will attain salvation, because the form of God is wrong, Brahma becomes the form of God. But the form of God is Shankar and there is only one God and Brahma is not the form of God. He, the form of God was there even before Brahma and created Brahma.

Through Brahma, the knowledge of the Gita was spoken, and ShivBaba has spoken that, but it will still not be said to be the nectar of the knowledge of the Gita, that that nectar emerges after churning. Through Brahma the knowledge was just narrated, spoken, but not explained, so there is no benefit caused, benefit is there caused, when it is understood and put into practice. Brahma is not the form of the Father, teacher or Satguru, but of mother. The part of the teacher is played through some other personality, through Shankar. The river of knowledge flows to his hair (mind) and then from his hairs it flows to the world.

The proof that through Brahma the knowledge was only spoken and not explained and that there is no benefit in that is that now you quote so many Murli points but are unable to explain them, it means you are unable to understand them.

...

It is only one form we have to remember and it is said that the easiest effort is to remember Narayan. Narayan means one who lives in the light of knowledge. Whatever we remember, we become the same.

saying the scriptures are also memorial of God

Where have we said this, no, God is the one who speaks the Gita. The scripture is not memorial of God, it is memorial of his words, of his knowledge God is a soul and in the scripture there is knowledge or rather Bhakti, the memorial of the knowledge God speaks is the flute in the hand of Krishna or the arrows in the hand of Ram.

Fist it is Shyvjayanti, then Gitajayanti, then Krishna jayanti. Shiv is God in human form. He is in the form of Father. Father creates the mother - Gita and the child Krishna is born.

...

Where has any PBK said, or where it is said in the literature or the vcds that women are cowards? About the attachment, yes. But when I have said that the soul of Krishna becomes dirty by coming in contact, by entering children I mean Brahma Baba entering souls like you and me. It is BapDada who does service through us. I do not mean the soul of Jagadamba. I think her purity is much higher than that of me and you.

---Again PBKs believe VijayaMala to be inferior to Rudrmala, the former consisting of female ones and latter male ones.

No, Rudramala is the mala of souls, it is the mala where the souls are in the stage of brothers, it is the mala in which the whole world is included. Vijaymala is mala of couples. We cannot say that the man or the woman are high or low in a couple, they are equal, but even it is the females, who are always put ahead. Baba also puts them ahead, urn of knowledge is put on the mothers.

It is said that Radha and Krishna belonged to different kingdoms. Females are said to be like the moon because of their cool nature and Krishna was from the clan of the Sun. So when they marry she also becomes of the clan of the Sun.

I had asked the same to a PBK in this forum before. Then how can and in what sense PBKs say- Mr Dixit is intelligent? Seems that your reply is follow.

It is a matter of the Confluence Age, when the child Krishna will be born it will be the Golden Age.

Is Mr confronting Ravan? or playing role of Ravan by misguiding others and playing role of HK hood? All the so called extra ordinary clarifications are FULL OF ERRORS, DOUBLE STANDARDS, TWISTING, AND like just juggling exercises OR KANRAS, already explained here.

It is Shankar who confronts the Ravan of the vices inside and burns it with his third eye of knowledge. It will be a mistake to think Ravan outside.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 207) PBKs Speaking lies and trying to eat their own words - continues:-

The book Gita refers to a human being in the same way as a bead refers to a human being, in the same way as a river refers to a human being, or as a cow refers to a human, that chews the grass of knowledge, or a nonliving star that shines the light of knowledge, or a flower with its fragrance or a bird with its song, these comparisons refer to living beings.

1)It does LOOK as if you have made some relevant points, ON THE SURFACE OF IT. But they are ACTUALLY NOT relevant AT ALL. Because there are lots of rivers, lots of stars, lots of beads, EACH ONE representing DIFFERENT or UNIQUE PERSONALITIES. EVERY RIVER, EVERY STAR is GYAAN GANGAA or GYAAN SITAARAA. But, in PBK view, the title of 'True Gita' (being the JEWEL of ALL scriptures) goes just to sister Vedanti, and the 'False Gita' goes just to Kamala Devi. No one else is fit for that, including Mr Dixit. So- your comparison has no REAL SIGNIFICANCE, and you do not understand the point of argument.

All other things in your post are just like playing your own music with NO logic- of EITHER Bhakti or gyaan-

A scripture means the rule on which the life is organized. There are various scriptures and people who follow them. Among the scriptures the highest is Gita; following the Gita, a person becomes highest on high.

2)This is the simple logic, which you should understand. Scripture means Srimath/words, and can neither REPRESENT God, NOR a human being. Even sister Vedanti needs Gita(Srimath), is it not? Are PBKs going to say- (Shrimati Bhagwad)Gita is the mother or goddess of (Shrimat Bhagwad)Gita? What are PBKs actually trying to imply? See how illogical it then becomes.

Mr Dixit in his juggling exercises, tries to fit a hair of a horse or elephant to a dog or cat, and then gives his so-called 'extra-ordinary' clarifications, and PBKs do not hesitate to equate "Dog to a Horse"!

...vedas...

3) If you try to relate words of Vedas to Sakar Murlis, PBKs only fall into a DEEPER pit. Because in vedas, there is no word 'Bhagavaanuvaach'. But, in Sakar Murlis, there are.
-Again- there are four vedas, not just one.
-Also- there are Upanishads, which have very high importance, some place it even higher than Gita.
-There are also puranas.
-By the above argument, are PBKs inadvertently implying- God himself spoke all these words by entering into DIFFERENT CHARIOTS?!
Anyhow- they have openly accepted- words of God through DLR are the cause for downfall of 'Bharat'. In this way- they defame God HIMSELF. (Bharat 'Mata' ki Jai)!

First it is Shyvjayanti, then Gitajayanti, then Krishna jayanti. Shiv is God in human form. He is in the form of Father. Father creates the mother - Gita and then child Krishna is born.

4)But, a per Mr Dixit, first is Krishna Jayanti, then Shiv Jayanti, then Gita jayanti- already put.

Where has any PBK said, or where it is said in the literature or the VCD* that women are cowards? ...

PBKs have already said- "purity of sister Vedanti too is cowardice (means of INFERIOR or SUPERFICIAL QUALITY)"- Arjun soul himself has written on the forum. Refer here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=42267#p42267

BTW, I will give you another proof. In PBK view itself, there can be more Brahmas(mothers), and just one Prajapita/Father. And, the Father controls all these mothers, is it not? That is why they show all these mothers as hands, and the head as Father, in Vishnu. (Thus mothers are depicted as INFERIOR).

No, Rudramala is the mala of souls, ...

I was talking about the 2.25 lakh souls of Vijayamala(Vedanti is head) who then join to 2.25 lakh Rudrmala(Dixit is head) of PBK concept. Do not PPBks consider the former to be inferior to the latter? In this topic only- another PBk tried to reply deviating from the point of argument. You are also doing the same- again and again, WITHOUT EVEN REAL-EYEsing same.

It is said that Radha and Krishna belonged to different kingdoms. Females are said to be like the moon because of their cool nature and Krishna was from the clan of the Sun. So when they marry she also becomes of the clan of the Sun.

Absolutely no logic. Heard and ANALYSED lots of such CORRUPTED & TOTALLY ILLOGICAL clarifications of Mr Dixit. More PBKs give such statements, more it points to their own faults and PROVES, beyond doubt, that their INTELLECTS are INVERTED & PERVERTED. By saying company of Mr Dixit makes a moon to be sun, PBKs are inadvertently saying that Moons/mothers/FEMALES are really weak (in their own original sanskaars)", and the fathers/MALES are greatest people, as just their company can transform a weak to stronger (or moon to sun). So, in PBK logic- " A Human Sun transform a human moon to sun". But, the funny logic pf PBKs is- a moon too can ride on sun.

It is Shankar who confronts the Ravan of the vices inside and burns it with his third eye of knowledge. It will be a mistake to think Ravan outside.

Who is Ravan - according to PBKs? Mostly they refer it to B Baba- right? (you may correct my words) .
OK, in that case- PBKs inadvertently imply

# Flaw No. 208)Ravan too rides on Shankar or Moon rides on Sun!-
So, does this mean that -Virendra Dev Dixit (Shankar) confronts DLR (Ravan) when INSIDE his own corporeal body, and BURNS HIM with his third eye (of CORUPTED & ADULTERATED knowledge), and that is the reason why -Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs (DELUSIVELY) think or believe that soul of DLR is DEAD or has LEFT the Yagya, (and is now a ghost) ???

[sita]

No, brother, Ravan means our own vices inside. It is Shankar who conquers his own vice.

Gita is said to be mother. Mother of all the scriptures. It is the same as Brahma. Brahma's is also a unique part.

No, it is not the Murli through Brahma Baba that causes downfall. It is the way we read it. We can see truth in it, we can churn on it and elevate ourselves, but we can also follow it blindly, like Bhakti. It is about how we follow.

Cowardice purity is that of the sanyasis. If we follow that purity even on the path of knowledge, we are cowards, no matter if we are male or female. Mostly it has been the males who had followed like this. It is about the understanding we have. The concept of Shivling as something pure does not sit in the intellect.

The head of the Vijaymala, as we understand it, is not the moon. It is not the moon who becomes the sun. But someone following the moon become like the moon and when the same one follows the sun he becomes like the sun.

Mothers are inferiors in the Iron age. In the laws of Manu, it is said that woman has to be protected by her Father, husband or child.This is the situation now. But then they become Shivshakti, when given protection by ShivBaba.

There is also Anusuya, who make even BVS their children.

Vedas are later clarified as Brahmanas, later as Upanishads. In the same way the knowledge from the Murli is clarified. But we have the understanding that the Gita is there even before the vedas. Like in our path of knowledge in the beginning there used to be clarification of the Gita and later the Murlis came. It is the Gita that is our religious scripture and not the vedas.