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
mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 16 Sep 2016

sita wrote:I don't think your translation is correct. I think the meaning is rather....Although one Daksh Prajapita is also mentioned...I think what Baba likes to say is that it is right to say Prajapita Brahma and it is wrong to say Daksh Prajapita.
Again just weak argument. In that case (as per your argument), Baba would have said- just name is wrong. But, Baba is referring to the scriptures- where the word 'Prajapita' is also given to many Brahmas, not just to one.

Regarding even the name, Baba has corrected that the right name is Lakhiraj, the lowkik name itself! (see the Murli point in the same post- flaw No. 335, neither Mr. Dixit, nor Sevakram. - :laugh: Where do PBKs have any room to argue?- except saying my cock has three legs?
It is said that we are all Parvatis, Sitas*, we have one husband and we are wives. Shiva is ever pure, but he is ever pure even when he is in a corporeal body. It is the sanyasis who call women impure, and if you come in contact with them one becomes impure. Baba praises mothers and their ability to follow purity and has put the responsibility on them, and not on sanyasis. Sanyasis do great service, but they cannot create heaven, because in heaven there is the happiness of the family path. Ganga is patron of the sanyasis, who do the great service of purity of the sanyasy type. Parvati follows the true Godly path of the family path. We don’t become pure by knowledge being narrated to us, but by Yoga. Yoga is union, love. Shiv and Shakti are one. Shiv and Ganga are not one.
Just juggling exercises from PBKs, with CORRUPTED & INVERTED INTELLECTS, like their bodily guru, Mr. Dixit.

Ganga is shown ALWAYS merged with Shiv/Shankar (placed in the head- the highest place of person). Parvati is shown sitting by the side of Shankar (except in pictures of ardhnaareeshwar/i, she is shown as half of Shankar). Even in that picture, Ganga would be always shown as being seated on head of Shiv/Shankar/Parvati. GANGA IS INSEPARABLE, but Parvati is separable.

The very fact that Ganga is given the Supreme place in the body of Shankar, implies that the status of Ganga is SUPERIOR to the status of Parvati! Souls who are body-conscious would only see the physical body of Parvati, ALWAYS by the side of Shankar! ONLY souls who are soul-conscious would understand that Shankar is FULLY & CONSTANTLY ABSORBED in Ganga, who is CONSTANTLY FLOWING from his TRESSES - re-vitalizing and re-energizing him - and responsible for the ULTIMATE, PRACTICAL PURIFICATION of SOULS, as well as MATTER! Therefore, body conscious souls would consider Parvati as the corporeal consort of Shankar, since they can see ONLY with their physical eyes, and CANNOT PERCEIVE with their THIRD EYE; WHEREAS, the ACTUAL Spiritual consort of Shankar is Ganga - the SUBTLEST ASPECT of whom TRANSFORMS into Saraswati - ONLY SEEN with the THIRD EYE!!!

IMPURE Parvati TRANSFORMS into PURE Ganga, and then works on a SUBTLE level as Saraswati, before FINALLY manifesting as Laskshmi!
They are NOT DIFFERENT SOULS, they REPRESENT the functions of the SAME ONE SOUL at DIFFERENT LEVELS of SPIRITUAL EVOLUTION!

'Parvat-i' (from the mountain) (IMPURE soul in an IMPURE corporeal body) originates from the JAGGED & RUGGED mountains of BODY-CONSCIOUSNESS, on this corporeal sphere, and after drinking the NECTAR ('Amrit') in the form of the 'Story of Immortality' ('amarkatha'), DEVELOPS into 'Par Vritti' (ATTITUDE of DETACHMENT from body-consciousness), and transforms into PURE Ganga, (after absorbing the Life-giving-Herbs - 'Sanjivini Bhutti' - in the form of Pure Versions of Knowledge), (RELATIVELY Pure soul in a RELATIVELY Pure corporeal body), and then manifests as the ELUSIVE, MYSTIC, SUBTLE Saraswati (to execute the purifying functions - operating through a subtle body), (RELATIVELY Pure soul in a subtle, ANGELIC body), EVENTUALLY manifesting as Lasksmi on this corporeal sphere (COMPLETELY PURE soul in a COMPLETELY PURE corporeal body).
Similar processes are followed by all other CONCERNED souls, although number-wise.

BTW- PBKs believe it is DLR who plays role of female in Ardh-Naareeshwar(AN). In Bhakti acriptures, Parvati itself is shown as the female. So, in PBK view, it should imply that DLR is Parvati! (if they use scriptures to prove their stance).
But, PBKs say- Parvati is sister Vedanti! - who is never combined with their Shankar either intellectually (yet to realize their knowledge), or practically!

What are PBKs saying???

If PBKs like to call even Ganga as cowardice/weak, they bring their level even lower! Baba says- you all are gyaan-gangas! Do PBKs believe they are not gyaan gangas? - :laugh:
Ganga is not patron of just sanyaasis. She is respected and worshipped by all even house-hold path people.

BTW- How many temples are there of Parvati? Most of the temples of Shiv/Shankar are just single, WITHOUT PARVATI! Where is household path memorials of Parvati IN PRACTICAL?

* - Does not Baba say you all are 'gyaan gangas'? Why do you leave it and take only half? It is PBKs who like to take just half, use in twisted way, and then claim something like so called extra-ordinary clarification, and then fall into their own pit - WITHOUT EVEN REAL-EYEsing that they have ACTUALLY FALLEN into the DEEPEST PIT!!!

Anyhow- it is Drama, nothing wrong even from their side.

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 » 16 Sep 2016

In the scriptures it is not said that there are many Brahmas, Brahma is one, but there are many Prajapitas, it is like a title, a position.

We are Gyan gangas as long as we have connection with the ocean. When the river does not have connection with the ocean it is like a dirty canal.

All souls are Parvatis numberwise.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 16 Sep 2016

sita wrote:In the scriptures it is not said that there are many Brahmas, Brahma is one, but there are many Prajapitas, it is like a title, a position.
Thank you for corecting the error. Yes, in scriptures, it is said one Brahma, but many Prajapitas! PBKs lose even further in their arguments! - :laugh: They believe otherwise! So -Virendra Dev Dixit & PBKs are NOT ONLY GOING AGAINST the Pure Versions of REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God; but ALSO GOING AGAINST the Scriptures, which they claim corroborates with the Knowledge, in most instances!
We are Gyan gangas as long as we have connection with the ocean. When the river does not have connection with the ocean it is like a dirty canal.
Irrelevant argument. This applies either to Ganga or Parvati or Sita with any child, in the same way. The point of argument was "whether number One Ganga is cowardice when compared to number One Parvati". This is what you had claimed just before.

Review upgraded earlier post above - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51853#p51851

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 » 16 Sep 2016

In the scriptures it is Prajapati. Pati means protector. Protectors can be many, but Father can be only one.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 17 Sep 2016

# Flaw No. 341) PBKs happily willing to lose title "PrajaPATI" ???
sita wrote:In the scriptures it is Prajapati. Pati means protector. Protectors can be many, but Father can be only one.
1) Due to inability to handle the situation, now the above PBK is willing to sacrifice the title PrajaPATI. So, now- it seems that the above pbk argument has come to lower level that- "Prajapati can be many, but Prajapita can be only one".
But, I have not seen the word Prajapita in scriptures, I have seen words "Prajapati, as well as Pitamaha (= GGGF) Brahma. If any PBK has valid reference, and are interested, can support their statement with valid proof.

2) In our Yagya itself - the initial name for the corporeal leader of the Yagya was "Divine Father God PrajaPATI Brahma". The word PATI was also used for Father! What do PBKs say here?

3) Moreover, if PBKs believe Prajapati can be many (not sure how many PBKs will agree with the above PBK member), why not Baba has said it in Murlis?
---Also- PBKs can state how many and who all are Prajapatis in the Yagya?

4) Simple logic:- In scriptures it is written as SUdarshan chakra, not SWAdarshan chakra. But, Baba has corrected it as SWAdarshan chakra/disc, because that is the right/better word.
Similarly, I believe the right or better word is Prajapita, rather than Prajapati. But, both are one and the same personality, and both words have the same connotation.

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

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 17 Sep 2016

Certainly fathers are also many. Christ is said like Prajapita to Christians. Similarly husbands are also many. But there is one supreme husband and one supreme Father and I also believe these two titles refer to one personality. Father is Father when he acts like fathеr, when he sоws seed, when he gives inheritance. About Prajapati it is said that about the wedding procession at the end.


= RESPONSE =

Souls who are body-conscious would ALWAYS DESIRE, and would ALWAYS ATTEMPT, to CORRUPT the PURE INCORPOREAL relationships with IMPURE CORPOREAL relationships!

ONLY the ONE, UNLIMITED, UN-CORRUPTED & UNADULTERATED INCORPOREAL SUPREME Father & SUPREME Husband is REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God, HIMSELF - and NONE OTHER - in the PURE & UNADULTERATED ETERNAL SPIRITUAL relationships with PURE, INCORPOREAL souls.
These TITLES of God would OBVIOUSLY go to the embodied soul of BRAHMA BABA - EXCLUSIVELY & PRIMARILY - because God HIMSELF is the Father, when He ACTS like a Father, when He SOWS the SEEDS of Pure, Knowledge, through the LOTUS Mouth of Brahma Baba, who ACTS like a Mother to the TRUE, Righteous Brahmin Children! And SINCE God ACTS like a Father, in ACTUALLY, PRACTICALLY SOWING those SPIRITUAL SEEDS through the embodied soul of Brahma Baba, the TITLE of the Father would OBVIOUSLY ALSO go to the VERY SAME embodied soul, through whom God PRACTICALLY ACTS as the Father, WHILE SOWING the SPIRITUAL SEEDS of Pure, UNADULTERATED Knowledge. Thus, by the VERY SAME ARGUMENT of -Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs, IT IS PROVED that the embodied soul of Brahma Baba, is the 'Alokik' Mother AS WELL AS 'Father', or REAL PrajaPita, of HUMANITY!
As far a SPIRITUAL INHERITANCE and 'Wedding Procession' are concerned -
Spiritual inheritance is NOT a physical object, which requires a corporeal body, to be handed over to embodied souls; NEITHER does the 'Wedding Procession', at the end, involve ANY corporeal bodies, since it is a 'Procession' of bodiless souls. Therefore, just as the soul of Brahma Baba ACTED as the Husband or REAL 'PrajaPati' in the beginning, through his corporeal body, so also at the end, the VERY SAME SOUL ACTS as the Husband or REAL 'PrajaPati' to escort ALL embodied souls to the Soul World ALONG WITH REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God! ('Adi soh Anth' - as in the BEGINNING, so at the END)! SIMULTANEOUSLY the VERY SAME SOUL of Brahma Baba ALSO ACTS as the Father or REAL 'PrajaPita', at the END, when God gives the SPIRITUAL INHERITANCE to embodied souls (including the souls of -Virendra Dev Dixit & the PBKs) through the soul of Brahma Baba ONLY! Thus, by the VERY SAME ARGUMENT of -Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs, it is CLEARLY PROVED that ONLY the embodied soul of Brahma Baba or DLR is EXCLUSIVELY & PRIMARILY ENTITLED to receive the TITLES of BOTH 'PrajaPati' AS WELL AS 'PrajaPita'!

Also, view = RESPONSE = in post below -
viewtopic.php?f=3&p=51861#p51861

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 » 18 Sep 2016

Flaw No. 342) PBKs now say- "Prajapita too can be MANY!
sita wrote:In the scriptures it is Prajapati. Pati means protector. Protectors can be many, but Father can be only one.
sita wrote:Certainly fathers are also many. ...
Flaw No. 343) PBKs fail to explain an important Murli point- "No one has name Prajapita"

1) We can see how PBKs contradict with themselves now and then, without them REAL-EYEsing same. PBKs have so far not even explained even the bit of the Murli point saying- "No one can have name Prajapita".*
Christ is said like Prajapita to Christians....
Arguments out of track. The point of discussion was about Father/Pita, who has title Brahma, (or Prajapita/pati, pitaamaha, etc.) - so pertained to Hindu scriptures.
----There is no word Prajapita or Prajapati in other religions. Of course, they use the word Adam, AAdam, Mahaaveer, etc. That is different matter.

*2) So- what do PBKs say on the Murli point - "Many/some have name Brahma. No one will have name Prajapita"?
The PBKs so far have argued - "Many have name Brahma, but only one will have name Prajapita".
But- the Murli point DOES NOT say- "Only one will have name Prajapita".- what PBKs usually argue. But- the Murli point says- "No one will have name Prajapita" - To WHOM and WHY Baba says so?

3) In fact, it is PBKs who have introduced the theory- "Brahma is many, and Prajapita can be only one".

But- they are caught in their own trap. They keep on changing their statements now and then and have no place to stand at one point. They are just wandering here and there, just ONLY BEATING AROUND THE BUSH!

Also, view = RESPONSE = in preceding post, in link below -
viewtopic.php?f=39&p=51863#p51862

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 » 18 Sep 2016

But- the Murli point says- "No one will have name Prajapita"
I don't think there is such a point.

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 » 18 Sep 2016

# Flaw No. 344) The FINAL NAIL into the Coffin of PBK Prajapita:-
sita wrote:I don't think there is such a point.
1) To what extent the so-called advance knowledge souls are able to even physically read Murlis?
- This is also a great issue now.
This is NOT just regarding sita soul here. Even the senior PBKs, like arjun, etc., have made the SAME MISTAKE- (may be lesser than Sita soul) - neglecting to pay proper attention to the Murli points which they themselves use!*
It is like PBKs need a mirror (someone's help) to see the wound on their own palm. - :sad:

2) The link to the Murli point had already been shown to you -Post No. 40 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 4097#p4097

Reproducing here once again-

SM 7-9-77(2):- Baba samjhaate rahte hain. Correction bhi karte jaavo. Brahmakumaariyon ke aage Prajapita akshar zaroor likhnaa hai. Prajapita kahne se Baap siddh ho jata hai. Hum prashn hee poochte hain prajapita se kyaa sambandh hai. Kyonki Brahma naam toh bahuton ke hain. Koyi females kaa bhi naam Brahma hai. PRAJAPITA NAAM TOH KISKAA HOTA NAHIN. ISLIYE PRAJAPITA AKSHAR BAHUT ZAROORI HAI. Prajapita AdiDev kahte hain. Parantu AdiDev ka arth nahin samajhte. Prajapita to zaroor yahaan hoga. Adidev phir vah(sookshmvatanvasi- see following sentences) Brahma ho jata hai. Adi arthaath shuruvaath ka. PRAJAPITA BRAHMA ko to phir beti hai Saraswati. Sookshmvatan may toh beti ho na sake. Rachnaa yahaan hai na. In guhy baaton ko vishaal buddhivaale hee dhaaran kar sakte hain. Dhaarnaa ke saath manners bhi chahiye. Jo koyi bhi dekh khush hove. -9 [prajapita, corrections, Adi Dev] -vimp

= Baba keeps on explaining. Keep on correcting. In front of Brahmakumaris, the word Prajapita should definitely be added. By saying Prajapita (the relation) Father is proved. We ask question what is (your) relation with Prajapita? Because many have name Brahma. Even some females have name Brahma. Nobody has name Prajapita. HENCE PRAJAPITA WORD IS VERY MUCH NECESSARY. (They) say PRAJAPITA ADIDEV. But (they) do not understand meaning of Adi Dev. Prajapita would be definitely here. SO ADI DEV IS THE OTHER/THAT (=SUBTLE) BRAHMA. ADI MEANS BEGINNING. Prajapita Brahma has daughter Saraswati. There cannot be daughter in Subtle Region. Creation is here, is it not? Broad intellect only will imbibe these deep points. ......

3) It becomes very clear that- Baba is saying above, keeping lowkik people in the mind. In lowkik world, the word 'Prajapita' is not used.

4) All these clearly prove that- the PBKs are totally blind from all points of views. The above sentence puts all the claims of PBKs regarding Prajapita to the bottom-most position. PBKs believe all the Murli points pertain to BK/PBK World!
Now- who in BK/PBK World does not use the name/title Prajapita
?

5) Since PBKs believe - all the Murli points apply to BK/PBK world, "in PBK view"- No one can have name Prajapita in BK/PBK world] In other words-

# Flaw No. 345) PBKs inadvertently imply- Prajapita DOES NOT exist at all! - :laugh:

6) A point to be noted here is - PBKs have NO ROOM to argue. Because- in the Murli point-
a)Because many have name Brahma. b)Even some females have name Brahma. c)Nobody has name Prajapita[/size]
---PBKs believe a) and b) apply for BK/PBK world. So, they will have to agree that- even c) applies to BK/PBK world.
---If they NOW say- this Murli point is said to lowkik people, then they CANNOT CLAIM Brahma is NAMES OF MANY, and even some FEMALES have name BRAHMA"
----So- PBKs are endlessly caught in their own trap.

* 7) - Dear Sita soul,
PBKs usually keep on saying like parrot- "Brahma is name of many, even some females have name Brahma". Even you also have written this on this forum, MANY TIMES.
--Is not the Murli point which you have been using, so far, the SAME as ABOVE?

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

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 18 Sep 2016

So what meaning do you derive from that? In this point, it is said that the word 'Prajapita' has to be put in front of Brahma Kumaris. When it is said 'Brahma Kumaris', is this Brahma name of some lokik person? No. Will people from the outside world think that Brahma Kumaris are daughters of some man (or woman) called Brahma, or are these words put so that people from the outside world believe that we are children of the deity Brahma, the famous deity in the outside world, the Brahma from the Trimurti. We like that people think that it is about the deity Brahma from the Trimurti, because we claim that this deity Brahma from the Trimurti is playing a practical role now in the Confluence Age.

In this point it said that the Father is proved by the word 'Prajapita'. Why? Is the Father not proved by the word Brahma? Does Brahma not mean Adidev? Is Brahma not the Adidev? What is the difference between Brahma and Prajapita Brahma? I think that what Baba likes to say here is that Brahma is name of many, but Prajapita is not name of many.

In the scriptures Adidev is considered to be Shankar. When Brahma comes from the navel of Vishnu, when they quarrel with Vishnu about who has come first they find out that Shankar has been there before them.

We don't believe that everything has unlimited meaning in the Murli and can be applied only to the BK/PBK family. We do believe some matters are in limited meaning.

Here also it may apply to the outside world. We don't have problem in accepting that. We don't take this point as solid proof, rather like a hint, like the hint with the old shoe. Baba does not say directly that he will leave the body of Brahma and take another one, but he hints about that. Baba speaks in hints. He says this is an old shoe. When old shoes are shed others are taken.

In the Murli there are both limited and unlimited matters and it depends on the intellect as to which matters will it catch. We take this point as a hint, because there are other points that hint to the same thing – that there are more than one Brahmas, like the fact that ShivBaba has entered other people before Brahma Baba, who have to be named Brahma, according to the Murli. It is the same point that says...what will happen if this Brahma leaves....then whoever I enter has to be named Brahma. So they become more than one, is it not? Baba does not say directly that he will leave this Brahma and take another one who has to be named Brahma. But we can take that as a hint.

There are also points that speak about Brahma and Prajapita like different entities – you know that. I know you did not accept these points and were arguing about some mistake, I don't remember well what was your argument, but these are perfectly valid points, and they are, I believe, more than one.


= RESPONSE =

"In this point it said that the Father is proved by the word 'Prajapita'."
By the word, 'Prajapita', it is CLEARLY PROVED that REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God, the Father of ALL embodied souls, ENACTS the PRACTICAL ROLE of Father, towards ALL embodied souls, through the corporeal body of Brahma Baba, who acts as the Mother of the Righteous Brahmins; SIMULTANEOUSLY, it is ALSO CLEARLY PROVED that Brahma Baba or soul of DLR is NOT ONLY the 'Alokik' Mother, but ALSO the 'Alokik' Father, or REAL PrajaPita of Humanity! This is the PURE INTENTION of God, in this Version!

"Baba speaks in hints. He says this is an old shoe."
This means that the body of Brahma Baba is an OLD body, which ALSO has to be given up. The Pure intention of God was that the Children should not develop any attachment to the corporeal body of Brahma Baba, and DELUSIVELY believe that IT CAN NEVER BE GIVEN UP, TILL THE END - (as the PBKs are CURRENTLY made to believe, with regard to the corporeal body of -Virendra Dev Dixit) - which was the DELUSIVE belief of some children AT THAT TIME ALSO, in spite of the fact that God had already declared in one SM that even Brahma Baba would have to leave his corporeal body!

"(Baba speaks in hints). When old shoes are shed others are taken."
This is CLEARLY an OCCURRENCE of Ravan Rajya, and NEVER OCCURS in RamRajya. This, again, is a CLEAR PROOF that -Virendra Dev Dixit's CORRUPTED, body-conscious intellect has deciphered the intention of God from the DEGRADED VIEWPOINT of the code of conduct, prevailing in Ravan Rajya - since he is instrumental to carry out the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya!
Thus, what is CONSIDERED TO BE A HINT or WHAT IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE AN UNLIMITED MEANING, for EXACTLY the VERY SAME Version of God, will DEFINITELY DIFFER, DEPENDING on the PARTICULAR VIEWPOINT adopted by the INTERPRETER, in INTERPRETING that PARTICULAR Version of God - whether DIVINE or DEMONIAC - whether from the point of view of Ravan Rajya, or the point of view of RamRajya!

"In the Murli there are both limited and unlimited matters and it depends on the intellect as to which matters will it catch."
For EXACTLY the VERY SAME Pure Version of God, the Righteous Children will 'catch' the UNLIMITED meaning, in accordance with the ORIGINAL PURE INTENTION of God, owing to their Divine intellects; while the Unrighteous children will 'catch', what they CONSIDER to be the UNLIMITED meaning, in accordance with the CORRUPTED IMPURE INTENTION of Ravan, owing to their Demoniac intellects!
While the Versions of God remain EXACTLY THE SAME, the INTERPRETATIONS WILL BE DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSITE, to cater to EITHER the 'Day of the Cycle' or the 'Night of the Cycle' - LEADING TO THE DIFFERENCE IN INTERPRETATIONS - EACH of which can be considered to have UNLIMITED meaning or which contain SUBTLE hints!

"Baba does not say directly that he will leave this Brahma and take another one who has to be named Brahma. But we can take that as a hint. "
All such points have ALREADY BEEN CLARIFIED on this forum EARLIER. God's declaration in the concerned Versions was in response to the queries made by souls who were NOT in the Knowledge, who asked as to why DLR was given the name Brahma. God's response was that since He had to take the support of a corporeal body of an existing embodied impure soul, THEN, in whichever body He would have to come, as per Drama Plan, that PARTICULAR body would have to be named as Brahma - whether X, Y or Z! But God also clarifies as to why He has to come ONLY in the corporeal body of the soul of DLR, by giving the correct introduction of that soul ALSO, besides giving the correct introduction of His OWN SELF! Hence the question of God coming in another corporeal body, after Brahma Baba leaves his corporeal body, DOES NOT ARISE! All these MISINTERPRETATIONS of such various points of the Pure Versions of God have been initiated by Ravan or Maya, through the 'mukrar-rath' of Ravan, -Virendra Dev Dixit, in order to carry out the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya, in Confluence Age, for the establishment of Ravan Rajya, or 'Night of the Cycle', in the outer 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 » 19 Sep 2016

sita wrote:So what meaning do you derive from that?
Better read and TRY TO UNDERSTAND the previous post CORRECTLY, once again, what PBKs inadvertently imply by their own claims.
In this point, it is said that the word 'Prajapita' has to be put in front of Brahma Kumaris. When it is said 'Brahma Kumaris', is this Brahma name of some lokik person? No. ...
Sorry, it is Yes, because In lowkik many people have name Brahma. So, people will think even BKWSU as something similar to such organization. Already shown a proof to you that lowkik people have name Brahma - in Post No. 40 in the last link.
Will people from the outside world think that Brahma Kumaris are daughters of some man (or woman) called Brahma, or are these words put so that people from the outside world believe that we are children of the deity Brahma,
Baseless argument. They may think whatever they can, it is ENTIRELY up to them, but the point is- the word 'Prajapita' will help them to think that- this institution is a UNIQUE one, whereas ONLY the word 'Brahma' will confuse them, and give the impression that this institution is one among many others.
In this point it said that the Father is proved by the word 'Prajapita'. Why? Is the Father not proved by the word Brahma?
Because many lowkik people have kept their name as Brahma. So- better have name Prajapita Brahma instead of just Brahma, which will convey a different meaning by virtue of the name ITSELF!

Baba says- you should put board as sachchee Gita pathshala - as there are many satsangs having name Gitapathshala.
Does Brahma not mean Adidev? Is Brahma not the Adidev?
Already put here- Post No. 61- http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... ight#p9096

Adi Dev means complete/subtle Brahma. Prajapita means effort-maker Brahma. SOUL is same in both the cases.
We don't believe that everything has unlimited meaning in the Murli and can be applied only to the BK/PBK family. We do believe some matters are in limited meaning.
See- however PBKs may take, they are caught in their own trap. Read point No. 6) in the previous post too.
Baba does not say directly that he will leave the body of Brahma and take another one, but he hints about that. Baba speaks in hints. He says this is an old shoe. When old shoes are shed others are taken.
Who has denied this? Murli points clearly say- Brahma will leave body in advance. And- we believe Baba has then taken shoe of Gulzar Dadi. Where is room to claim that shoe is Mr Dixit? - :laugh:

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 19 Sep 2016

# Flaw No. 346) PBKs OPENLY say- "Shiv enters in subtle word resident Brahma":-

Just forgot to add a comment in Flaw No. 326) or 73, hence this post.

In flaw No. 73-, PBKs have inadvertently said/implied God enters in subtle Brahma. - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=50630&hilit=subtle#p50630.

But- from flaw No. 326) - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&start=810 - PBKs imply the same even DIRECTLY/OPENLY/EXPLICITLY!.

A note:- This post may be deleted by inserting the above comment in flaw No. 73 or 326.

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

Re: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 19 Sep 2016

# Flaw No. 346) PBKs OPENLY say- "Shiv enters in subtle word resident Brahma":-
It has already been clarified, that it is our belief, that the soul of Brahma Baba, due to the color of the company, achieves a seed form like stage when with the Father.

I believe the whole knowledge is an introduction of the Father and we need that, so that we change through merging our mind in one. Our mind could not possibly concentrate on an abstract soul in an abstract realm. The requirement of a corporeal one is for the sake of the color of the company, Shrimat and concentration. Dadi Gulzar will not certify as a shoe or a Chariot if remembrance is not practiced through her. There is no joy in remembrance if we cannot remember the Supreme Soul as being present in our daily life.

Here it is another point that can be taken as hint. It is the unlimited house of the the world that has become old, but also the body is called a house for the soul.

28.03.76: “Perishable things are not to be remembered. When a new house is built, the heart turns away from the old one. And here, it is in the unlimited.”

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 » 20 Sep 2016

sita wrote:It has already been clarified that it is our belief that the soul of Brahma Baba, due to the color of the company achieve a seed form like stage when with the Father.

I believe the whole knowledge is an introduction....
Only BLIND beliefs - to carry out the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya. Carry on. - :laugh:

Brahma Baba achieved the 'sampurna karmateet avastha' of an 'Avyakt farishta', or the COMPLETE ANGELIC stage, in 1969, owing to ACCURATE & UNADULTERATED Remembrance of God, or due to the COLOUR of the COMPANY of REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God, who is the 'Parlokik', UNLIMITED, Spiritual Father of ALL embodied souls. After this, the soul of Brahma Baba CANNOT be separated from REAL ShivBaba, Shiva or God EVEN FOR ONE MOMENT, and by virtue of this 'Alokik' COMPANY of God, the soul of Brahma Baba gets FURTHER COLOURED by the COMPANY of the 'Parlokik', UNLIMITED, Spiritual Father to DEVELOP his SEED stage of COMPLETE soul-consciousness.
The ASCENDING stage of an IMPURE embodied soul is from GROSS to SUBTLE to SEED. Brahma Baba becomes SUBTLE from GROSS in 1969, en route to become the SEED form. IF Brahma Baba is considered to be inside the corporeal body of -Virendra Dev Dixit, then Brahma Baba would be the 'Alokik' Father, and -Virendra Dev Dixit would be the IMPURE 'Lokik' son, within an IMPURE corporeal body, who would be coloured by the COMPANY of his SUBTLE Father, Brahma Baba, so that his stage would be able to ASCEND from GROSS to SUBTLE!
By considering -Virendra Dev Dixit as the Father, instead of God, as the Father, the PBKs are DESCENDING towards body-consciousness, instead of ASCENDING towards SOUL-CONSCIOUSNESS!

28.03.76: “Perishable things are not to be remembered. When a new house is built, the heart turns away from the old one. And here, it is in the unlimited.
The NEW HOUSE refers to a PURE, Golden Aged corporeal body, and NOT to ANY IMPURE, Iron Aged corporeal body. If the PBKs consider the corporeal body of Brahma Baba to be PERISHABLE, just because he left the corporeal body, in 1969, then they must ALSO be Trikaldarshi, and understand that the Iron Aged, impure corporeal body of -Virendra Dev Dixit is ALSO PERISHABLE, and THEREFORE, is NOT TO BE REMEMBERED - which means that IMPERISHABLE God SHOULD NOT BE REMEMBERED inside the PERISHABLE corporeal body of -Virendra Dev Dixit, which ALSO has to be EVENTUALLY given up or DISCARDED - whether by ACTUALLY LEAVING same TOTALLY, or by TRANSFORMING the same from IMPURE to PURE - the CONNOTATION is the VERY SAME! But, OBVIOUSLY, -Virendra Dev Dixit & the PBKs DO NOT HAVE the subtle and divine intellects to comprehend these aspects at these DEEPER SUBTLER LEVELS!

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 Sep 2016

# Flaw No. 347) PBKs have no option other than stepping down from their level - but futile:-
We don't believe that everything has unlimited meaning in the Murli and can be applied only to the BK/PBK family. We do believe some matters are in limited meaning.
Usually - the FIRST STEP OF PBKs, while arguing, is- to claim/declare - "All the Murli points are applicable to BK/PBK world". .

Now, a PBk says- "some are applicable to lowkik world". :laugh:

If we take the above Murli points, it says-
SM 7-9-77(2):- 1) Hum prashn hee poochte hain prajapita se kyaa sambandh hai. 2) Kyonki Brahma naam toh bahuton ke hain. 3)Koyi females kaa bhi naam Brahma hai. 4)PRAJAPITA NAAM TOH KISKAA HOTA NAHIN. ISLIYE PRAJAPITA AKSHAR BAHUT ZAROORI HAI. Prajapita AdiDev kahte hain. Parantu AdiDev ka arth nahin samajhte. Prajapita to zaroor yahaan hoga. Adidev phir vah (sookshmvatanvasi- see following sentences) Brahma ho jata hai. Adi arthaath shuruvaath ka. PRAJAPITA Brahma ko to phir beti hai Saraswati. 5)Sookshmvatan may toh beti ho na sake. Rachnaa yahaan hai na. In guhy baaton ko vishaal buddhivaale hee dhaaran kar sakte hain. Dhaarnaa ke saath manners bhi chahiye. Jo koyi bhi dekh khush hove. -9 [prajapita, corrections, Adi Dev] -vimp

= 1)We ask the question: what is (your) relation with Prajapita?
2) Because many have name Brahma.
3) Even some females have name Brahma.
4) Nobody has name Prajapita. HENCE PRAJAPITA WORD IS VERY MUCH NECESSARY
.
(They) say PRAJAPITA ADIDEV. But (they) do not understand meaning of Adi Dev. Prajapita would be definitely here. SO ADI DEV IS THE OTHER/THAT (=SUBTLE) Brahma. ADI MEANS BEGINNING. Prajapita Brahma has daughter Saraswati.
5)There cannot be daughter in Subtle Region. Creation is here, is it not? Broad intellect only will imbibe these deep points. ...

Of all the above, marked from 1 to 5, PBKs may kindly express their views- as to, which are meant for lowkik world, and which are meant for BK/PBK world, and how?

Funny thing is:-- To claim 4/5 Brahmas, PBKs NEED/(mis)USE the Murli point said above. But, to claim many other things, they do not NEED any Murli points. They claim there are two Krishnas, two subtle Brahmas, two Prajapitas (one title holder).

When PBKs take it for granted, that they can claim ANY THING, which does not need EVEN the simplest support of Murlis, then -

# Flaw No. 348) Why do PBKs need/use Murli points to claim their stances, in the FIRST PLACE?

JUST TO MAKE COMPLETE IDIOTS OF UNWARY BRAHMIN SOULS!!!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests