Theists and atheists

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.
ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 10 Nov 2010

Laymen and scientists commonly use the terms “theist” and “atheist”. They mean respectively “those who believe in the existence of God” and “those who do not believe in the existence of God”.

The Sakar Murlis (SM) introduced a new understanding of the words “theist” (astik) and “atheist” (nastik). It is a new understanding for the members of all religions in the world, also for the Hinduism. The Narrator of the SM says that in the cycle since the beginning of the Dvapar Yuga the entire world is nastik, because no one in the human world knows God the Father. According to the Authority of the SM the religious fathers are ignorant about this to the same extent as ordinary public.

Points:
Abhi sari duniya nastik pad gayi.
Sab nastik hain, bap ko nahiin jaante.

The Clarifications to the SM (CSM) present the topic of astik and nastik in a broader perspective. In CSM we can find the following definitions:

A) Nastik ve hain jo bap / bhagvan ko nahiin mante. Astik ve jo bap /bhagvan ko mante hain.
B) Nastik ve hain jo kisi par astha (regard, care for)) nahin rakhte. Astik ve hain jo astha rakhte hain.
C) Kalpa vriksha men aur Rudra mala men pahle 8 dharm astik hain, 9van dharm ardhnastik hai aur 10van dharm pura nastik hai.
D) Bhagvan ko Sakar rup men mannevale 8 dharm astik dharm hain ; ve bhagvan se prapti kar lete hain. Ve hain: sanatan dharm (suryavansh aur candravansh), Islam (Abraham se sthapan hua dharm), baudh dharm, Christian dharm, sanyas dharm, Muslim dharm, sikh dharm.
E) Ardha nastik dharm – arya samaj. Yah dharm isiliye ardha nastik kaha gayaa hai ki arya samaj ke anuyayi bhagvaan ke Sakar rup ko aur devtaon ko nahiin mante.
F) Jo bhagvaan ko kisi rup men nahiin mante, atma, paramaptama, svark, nark ko nahiin mante, ve nastik hue.

After a thorough analysis of the points above we can find few issues that are still remaining unclear and need further clarification. According to point B, only one soul is full nastik - Prajapita’s soul in his last birth is 100% nastik. In the CSM Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, Sanyasi, Muslim, Sikh and Arya Samaj were also called ‘sirf nirakar ko mannevale’ (those who accept only the incorporeal form of God). This definition is in contradiction with points C and D, where those religions have been called “those which accept the corporeal form of God”. Apart from this Buddhism, which in practice rejects the existence of God and soul, cannot fall in the category described in points C and D. Buddhism falls into the category of nastik according to the definition in point F.

The next thing is the meaning of point A and its correlation with other explanations contained in the CSM. We have to check two things:
1. Who knows the Father /God according to CSM?
2. What does ‘Father’ (bap) mean?

According to CSM there are two groups which know God – the Pandavas and the Kauravas. The difference between the Pandavas and the Kauravas is defined as:

The Pandavas (various definitions)
• those who know the corporeal form of God, listen to him and obey him
• 5 souls representing respectively: the Suryavanshis, the Chandravanshis, the Buddhists, the Sannyasis, the Sikhs in the Rudra Mala
• those who do not have three feet of land (with an explicit indication at Brahma Baba and Prajapita)
• 8 deities

The Kauravas (various definitions)
• those who know the corporeal form of God, but do not listen to him
• Arya Samaji
• the Brahma Kumaris
• those who make a lot of noise and eat dirt
• the Congress; those who rule

So, we can see that the Buddhists, the Sannyasis and the Sikhs are:
1. called astik, because they accept the corporeal form of God
2. called Pandavas, who know the corporeal form of God
3. called nirakarvadi, those who accept only the incorporeal form of God

How can someone accept at the same time two mutually contradictory issues (accept the corporeal form of God and accept only the incorporeal form of God)? How can Buddhism, which denies the existence of God, fall into the category of religions accepting God in any form? How can Buddhism fall in the category of astik, if it is nastik at its very foundation?

Further, if we try to answer the simple question, “who according to the CSM knows God?”, it becomes clear that they are not only the Pandavas, but also the Kauravas. So, looking at things from this perspective, we can find out that Arya Samaj who were called nirakarvadi and ardhanastik, know the corporeal form of God. The question arise: “How does it happen that someone who knows the corporeal form, doesn’t believe in it?” It is the same as if we said: “I know you personally, but I don’t believe that you exist.”

Going further into the analysis, we can’t forget about the group of the Yadavas.

The Yadavas (various definitions)
• those who do not know God and do not listen or obey him
• those who are on the left side of The Tree: Islam, Christianity, Muslim, Atheists
• those who live in high buildings, drink a lot and are rich
• those whose give birth to missiles (missiles emerge from their wombs)
• those who invent atom bombs
• Europeans

If we compare this perspective with the definitions of who are astik (see points C and D), we come to the conclusion that the Yadavas (Islam, Christianity, Muslim, Atheists ) must not only know God, but also they have to accept the corporeal form of God, however they are also “those who accept only the incorporeal one” (nirakarvadi) . A nice riddle, isn’t it? How can they turn to be those who according to the definition of the Yadavas, do not know and do not listen to God? After all, they are religions which receive rewards from God.

Let’s go to the issue ‘who is called bap; what does ‘Father’ (bap) mean’? In the basic knowledge, it is the incorporeal Shiva point of light, the Father of the souls. In the CSM, this is the combination of the incorporeal one (Shiva point) and the corporeal one (the Chariot, Baba). This explanation contains also an explicit indication that Shankar is the corporeal form of God. The question arise: What is the task of the children? Do the children have to recognize Shankar as the corporeal form of God, or do they have to recognize the three murti Shiva – three corporeal manifestations of Shiva? The children have to recognize the Trimurti Shiva, meaning Shiva who reveals himself in the human world through three corporeal forms (murti). This is probably what the meaning of “bap” is.

In the SM it was stated that

• Na samajhne ke karan Trimurti men Shiv ko rakhte hi nahiin. Brahma ko rakhte hain jisko Prajapita Brahma kahte hain. (1.11.2000)
• Shiv ke age Trimurti zarur cahie. (4.09.85)
• Tum bacce jante ho – bap jab ate hain to Brahma, Vishnu, Shankar bhi zarur cahie. Kahte hi hain Trimurti Shiv Bhagvanuvac. (5.02.95)

It seems that the Narrator of SM wants to stress on the necessity of recognizing the Father Shiva working through three independent corporeal forms in the Confluence Age. This is how the Father (bap) can be recognized fully. When the part of Shankar started, those who recognized God working though him left the BK family. Will AK have to pass through the same process to recognize the new part of God through Vishnu that allegedly started in 2008 (according to CSM)? The first of the above mentioned points may be directed at the AK students. They call two chariots: Brahma and Prajapita Brahma. Is it possible that they may have fallen into the trap of the Prajapita and Brahma, recognized two corporeal forms and think that they achieved the top? It may be a warning for the children. The last point seems to suggests strongly that something has remained to be recognized – Trimurti Shiv Bhagvanuvac, not Ekmurti, not Domurti. In AK, students have recognized two forms so far, so can someone say that someone has recognized the Father (bap) who is Trimurti, accepted him and listen to him? Are they astik?

Finally who are theists and who are atheists among all those various groups? ;-) You are most invited to take part in making out this riddle. >

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11587
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups.
Location: India

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by arjun » 11 Nov 2010

anu wrote:Trimurti Shiv Bhagvanuvac, not Ekmurti, not Domurti. In AK, students have recognized two forms so far, so can someone say that someone has recognized the Father (bap) who is Trimurti, accepted him and listen to him? Are they astik?
Trimurti Shiv Bhagwaanuvaach does not mean that Shiv enters in three persons in the Confluence Age simultaneously. In the advance knowledge ShivBaba has given us the knowledge of the Three personalities which play the role of Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar. But Shiv enters in an appointed form (mukarrar roop se) only in one personality. The three personalities exist simultaneously but Shiv does not enter in all three of them. He enters only in one.

ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 11 Nov 2010

Dear Arjun

I don't understand what you mean by saying 'entering personality'. How can someone enter personality? Personality it is a complex of of all the attributes - behavioral, temperamental, emotional and mental. It is something non material, while in the case of Shiva's entrance, we mean entering a body, a corporeal form.

Apart from it, I am not talking about entering three corporeal forms, but about Shiva's revealing himself through three corporeal forms - this is the meaning of the Trimurti Shiva.

I did not say at all that the Trimurti Shiva Bhagvanuvac means entering in three persons in the Confluence Age, as you concluded. The Trimurti Shiva Bhagvanuvac means "The act of speaking [uvac] 'delivered' by God [bhagvan] Shiva who reveales himself through three coproreal form [trimuri]. I did not say that it happens simultaneously. It happens in order: Brahma, Shankar and Vishnu. He revealed himself through two of them and the time for the second one was finished in 2007. The students of AK haven't recognised the revelation through the third corporeal form. This is a hard fact, is not it? So, the conclusion is that the Trimurti Shiva, who is the real God the Father, has not been recognized yet. Is it right? God, who is the Heavenly Father, is the Trimurti Shiva. Is it right? The Trimurti Shiva has not been recognized in the world of the Brahmins yet. What for was the knowledge of the three murti given in the AK? For the mere theory or for using it in practice to recognize the Trimurti Shiva in reality? I think that for using it. What do you think ? :D

User avatar
nivi
Posts: 244
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Share Murli points.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by nivi » 11 Nov 2010

Dear Anu,

I have hear in one Murli that Bhagwan means "Bhagayashali Raath" meaning the 'lucky Chariot' in whom Shiv enters..So is it safe to conclude that God= 'Sakar mein nirakar' (Incoporeal in Corporeal)?? I have also heard many times bindi Shiv alone cannot do anything without taking aadhaar. He needs a body to play his part..It is 'ever pure' (Shiv) who enters number one 'impure' (prajapita) and transforms him into aap/baap saman. Number one thorn trasforms into number one flower.

Nivi

User avatar
shivsena
ex-PBK
Posts: 4338
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To find out the absolute Truth.
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by shivsena » 12 Nov 2010

nivi wrote:I have hear in one Murli that Bhagwan means "Bhagayashali Raath" meaning the 'lucky Chariot' in whom Shiv enters..So is it safe to conclude that God= 'Sakar mein nirakar' (Incoporeal in Corporeal)?? I have also heard many times bindi Shiv alone cannot do anything without taking aadhaar. He needs a body to play his part..It is 'ever pure' (Shiv) who enters number one 'impure' (prajapita) and transforms him into aap/baap saman. Number one thorn trasforms into number one flower.
Nivi
Dear nivi.

I have heard the term "Bhagayashali Rath" and its importance in many Murlis, but i have never heard these words in any Av. Vani for last 40 years.....so we are faced with two contra-dictory things.....Vanis very frequently mention about avaykt milan while Murlis mention about entrance of Shiva in Rath.....this is what is causing confusion in my mind as to what are we supposed to follow!!!!!!!....if we remember Shiva in rath, then what is ''avaykt milan'' and if we follow Vanis and try to have milan with avaykt BapDada, then the Chariot becomes redundant.
Can you or any pbk throw some more light on the above.

shivsena.

pbkindiana
PBK
Posts: 616
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by pbkindiana » 12 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
Apart from it, I am not talking about entering three corporeal forms, but about Shiva's revealing himself through three corporeal forms - this is the meaning of the Trimurti Shiva.
Dear Anu Bhai,

Shiva doesn't reveal himself through three corporeal forms but He is revealed as heavenly Godfathr in one permanent Chariot. If Shiva is going to be revealed in three corporeal forms, then it will be said that God is omnipresence and everyone will start saying that God is in me (Shivohum). It is said Trimurti Shiva as it is based on the Murli sentence that "When I come, I don't come alone. I come with the three personalities."
"The act of speaking [uvac] 'delivered' by God [bhagvan] Shiva who reveales himself through three coproreal form [trimuri]. I did not say that it happens simultaneously. It happens in order: Brahma, Shankar and Vishnu.
Sach Gita is spoken through one permanent Chariot and never three as it is said in MU. 5/11/08 -- "I teach RajYoga through this Prajapita Brahma and then he becomes the kings of king."
He revealed himself through two of them and the time for the second one was finished in 2007.


If Shiva is revealed through Brahma Dada Lekraj, then Brahma DL would not had passed away. The corporeal form who will be revealed as the practical form of ShivBaba will never leave his body as the soul will be too powerful and will control its body from any types of death.
The students of AK haven't recognised the revelation through the third corporeal form. This is a hard fact, is not it? So, the conclusion is that the Trimurti Shiva, who is the real God the Father, has not been recognized yet. Is it right? God, who is the Heavenly Father, is the Trimurti Shiva. Is it right? The Trimurti Shiva has not been recognized in the world of the Brahmins yet.
To-date, none has recognized the true form of God. None will leave God if they have recognized his true form. As it is said in the Murlis, "the difficult effort is to become the child of GOD."
What for was The Knowledge of the three murti given in the AK? For the mere theory or for using it in practice to recognize the Trimurti Shiva in reality? I think that for using it. What do you think ?
Advanced knowledge says that when Shiv entered for the first time at the beginning of the Yagya, the three personalities ( Brahma, Shankar and Vishnu ) were present when Shiv entered in Sevakram (Ram) to explain the visions of Dada Lekraj as it is said --- "when i come , i don't come alone. I come with the three personalities."

indie.

ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 12 Nov 2010

Dear pbkindiana

Thank you for your comments. My respond I posted was targeted at what arjun Bhai said. He used some expressions that twisted the meaning of what I posted previously and made some presumptions as if they were implicit in what I wroote. Since it seemed to me misleading, I decided to make clear what I meant.

Dear brother,
pbkindiana wrote:Shiva doesn't reveal himself through three corporeal forms but He is revealed as heavenly Godfathr in one permanent Chariot. If Shiva is going to be revealed in three corporeal forms, then it will be said that God is omnipresence and everyone will start saying that God is in me (Shivohum). It is said Trimurti Shiva as it is based on the Murli sentence that "When I come, I don't come alone. I come with the three personalities."
You have used "in" in the place of my 'through'. This changes the meaning. I did not say that Shiva reveals himself in three murtis, but through three murti. The meaning of "in" and "through" are totally different. "In" contains teh presuposition of being present inside something, while "through" means something like being a medium and doesn't presuppose the presence inside this. When someone says that Shiva reveals himself in three murtis, like you did, it makes Shiva omnipresent. I did not say so. According to what has been taught in AK, Shiva reveals himself through three murti and has three tasks completed through them; that is why he is called the Trimurti. Please refer to the Trimurti Shiva comprehensive explanations and recordings of classes conducted by Baba.
indiana wrote:Sach Gita is spoken through one permanent Chariot and never three as it is said in MU. 5/11/08 -- "I teach RajYoga through this Prajapita Brahma and then he becomes the kings of king."


Dear Brother, you are saying that the Sac Gita is spoken through one permanent Charioty and as a proof you quote the point about Raja Yoga. Raja Yoga and the Sacci Gita are not the same; they are totally different things. Here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2142&start=135 you said that Baba himslef says that Krishna interferes and contradictory things are narrated by him, so is it the Sacci Gita? Where is that point in SM about how Sacchi Gita is narrated? What does "this Prajapita Brahma" mean? It remains unclear.
pbkindiana wrote:If Shiva is revealed through Brahma Dada Lekraj, then Brahma DL would not had passed away. The corporeal form who will be revealed as the practical form of ShivBaba will never leave his body as the soul will be too powerful and will control its body from any types of death.
The fact that Shiva revealed himself as Brahma through Brahma Baba in the Brahmin world is widely taught in AIVV by Baba. Then, the time of the second murti - Shankar came right from 1976. This is what if the part of the teaching. This is what I relied on when I wrote that three murtis have been revealed, and the time for the third started in 2008. What do you try to convey by what you said above? Please explain. Regarding Brahma, finally it will be the same soul of Krishna revealed once again at the great final of the drama - as it is he, Krishna, who is the mother. Only the box, meaning 'body' will change. At the end, according to SM and AK, when the Trimurti are revealed before the world, the part of Vishnu meaning the one who will be the murti of Vishnu should be at the central position, as the Father himself should remain behind.
indiana wrote:Advanced knowledge says that when Shiv entered for the first time at the beginning of the Yagya, the three personalities ( Brahma, Shankar and Vishnu ) were present when Shiv entered in Sevakram (Ram) to explain the visions of Dada Lekraj as it is said --- "when i come , i don't come alone. I come with the three personalities.
Dear Bother, I will be ultimetly grateful if you post evidences that it was Sevakram. Please see viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2214 - see the points about Sevakram. Some research have been done in this topic as so far we have only a bunch of hypothesis. It would be extremely helpful if any hard facts are revealed that it was Sevakram. What if it was Krishna soul who said so as it happened in the case revealed by Baba himself? Further, you quote "when i come , i don't come alone. I come with the three personalities" ---- read it carefully once again. He says "when I come", NOT "when I came". It refers to the future or it refers to the regular practice that repeats itself, meaning always when he comes he comes with three of them". "Coming" (aanaa) means "revelation", not necessary the physical act of coming, according to the Advance Knowledge.
pbkindiana wrote:Shiva doesn't reveal himself through three corporeal forms but He is revealed as heavenly Godfathr in one permanent Chariot.
As far as I know and recollect Gyan, this is in contradiction to the basic essence of Gyan. Please, quote points from the SM or any AK class to support your point of view. If I understand correctly what you wrote, it means that Shankar who is considered as the permanent Chariot will be recognised as heavenly God the Father? Does Shiva establish the New World (heaven) through Shankar, so that he will be called Heavenly God the Father? I cannot find any points like this in SM or in AK. The one who is called God is the Trimurti Shiva. He is called 'Trimurti" becasue the has three tasks completed through three corporeal forms and this is the way he reveals himself in the world. Only when he has three tasks done he can fully reveal himself and be recognised and called 'Heavenly God the Father'. What is the meaning of the Heavenly God the Father? Heavenly - "the one who inhabits in heaven; the one who belongs to heaven". Shankar does not inhabit in heaven - this was emphasised in AK numerous times (points: Shankar ko kanton ki jangal men dikhate hain; Shankar ke dvara vinash kahaa jata hain; Shankar apna kaam kar raha hai).

You are welcome to express your view.

ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 17 Nov 2010

Dear All
I posted a comment to a topic from commonroom that seems to be related to this one. I raised few issues in it. If any of you have some points from Gyan to show the broader and more accurate picture if Russia and atheism, pleace post them here or there.

http://bk-pbk.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=952#p34504

ANU

User avatar
shivsena
ex-PBK
Posts: 4338
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To find out the absolute Truth.
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by shivsena » 17 Nov 2010

ANU wrote:
Dear Bother, I will be ultimetly grateful if you post evidences that it was Sevakram. Please see viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2214 - see the points about Sevakram. Some research have been done in this topic as so far we have only a bunch of hypothesis. It would be extremely helpful if any hard facts are revealed that it was Sevakram.
Dear anu.

No pbk on this forum or any pbk met personally has been able to provide any proof of a person named sevakram present in the beginning of the Yagya.....in fact there is no mention of sevakram in any Murli or Vani and this name sevakram has been taken from the comic book "bacchon ke baba" printed by BKs to depict the story of DL.

If any pbk has any concrete proof from Murli or otherwise, then let him please come forward and furnish it on this forum and after that it will be left to prove that sevakram was indeed Ram's soul and that he left his body in 1942, and has taken birth as VD.

Now retrospectively, i do not know how did i ever accept such a theory in the early years when i accepted AK as truth.
shivsena.

ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 17 Nov 2010

pbkindiana wrote:Shiva doesn't reveal himself through three corporeal forms but He is revealed as heavenly Godfathr in one permanent Chariot. If Shiva is going to be revealed in three corporeal forms, then it will be said that God is omnipresence and everyone will start saying that God is in me (Shivohum).
Refering to what pbk indiana wrote, I would like to raise a simple question: "When we teach people that Shiva was present simultaneously in the mother and in the Father at the very beginning of the Yagya, don't we convey the isea of omnipresence, by chance? Why presence in three would be ompripresence and simultaneous presence in two is not?

shivsena wrote:No PBK on this forum or any PBK met personally has been able to provide any proof of a person named sevakram present in the beginning of the Yagya.....in fact there is no mention of sevakram in any Murli or Vani and this name sevakram has been taken from the comic book "bacchon ke Baba" printed by BKs to depict the story of DL.If any PBK has any concrete proof from Murli or otherwise, then let him please come forward and furnish it on this forum and after that it will be left to prove that sevakram was indeed Ram's soul and that he left his body in 1942, and has taken birth as VD.
I know a person who did some efforts to gather the available information about who was present in the begining of the Yagya and who was Sevakram. When it turned out that Sevakram was not the husband of Dada Lekhraj's sister as it was propagated by AIVV, and that he was not the adpted Father of Nirmalshanta Dadi as it was taught in clarification classes, that person sent everything to Baba and asked whether he could help understand this issue. In respond to this Baba sent the message that Didis and Dadis know the reality and the history will reveal itself in the future. That person wrote to Baba again explaining that it is Nirmalshanta Dadi herself who reveals the name Sevakram as the most truthful frind of Dada Lekhraj, but she shows him as Dada's partner in business, not her adopted Father. She mentions Dada's sister Haki Hathiramani and her husband as her adopted parent. Moreover, the name of Dada's sister is also mentioned by Om Radhe in her book "Is this justice"; it is the same name and family name, so it looks like that she was a wife of someone else, not Sevakram. That person said that when all this was sent to Baba, Baba said not to rely on the history as history is made by humans and is false.

I also learnt from the same person that some PBK students from Calcutta and Mumbai did some research on Sevakram in 2000. That person even knows the names of those students and spoke to them. They gathered some information about Sevakram from Calcutta who had a shop and was supposed to be Dada's partner. That research described a person who in 1936 year had 2 or 3 children; left Calcutta and went to reestablish his business in Bombai. The students who did this research sent it to Baba and Baba said they should give up the research as they may cring about confusion. The student who contacted them asked whether thet could send the entire research to him. They said that everything was sent to Baba and they don't have copies anymore. The student in question asked in AIVV whether they could provide him with the results of the research done by those brothers from Calcutta, because he would like to know the date of death of that Sevakram. He argumented that the date of death of that person is one of the most important proofs whether he is or not that person from teh beginning. If Baba Virendra was bort in February 1942, the person that the same soul was before Baba Virendra shoudl die app. 5 months earlier, in the secong half of 1941.AIVV said that the research was done, but it is not available anymore. It was lost somewhere.


So, to summarise everything once again - it has been taught by AIVV that Sevakram was Prajapita and he was the husband of Haki Hathiramani and both were adopted parents of Nirmalshanta Dadi. Nowadays, the available documents show that Sevakram existed, he was one of Dada's partners (Lekhraj had many business partners). Sevakram was not the husband of Dada's sister and he was not the adopted Father of Nirmalshanta. These facts are not accepted in AIVV. Baba said that Dadis, Didis know the reality, but they lie. Baba, when asked by students in discussion class, how is it possible that Nirmalshanta Dadi lies and doesn't remember facts, Baba said that Nirmalshanta is on injections and she is out of her mind [discussion in Rourkela, Orissa}

pbkindiana
PBK
Posts: 616
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by pbkindiana » 18 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
Refering to what PBK indiana wrote, I would like to raise a simple question: "When we teach people that Shiva was present simultaneously in the mother and in the Father at the very beginning of the Yagya, don't we convey the isea of omnipresence, by chance? Why presence in three would be ompripresence and simultaneous presence in two is not?
Dear Anu,

When Shiva first came to this world, He needs to make Prajapita a brahmin, so He entered in a female body and spoke so that Prajapita became a brahmin as it is said in Murlis that "without becoming a brahmin,how could he become prajapita?"

So when Prajapita left his body, Shiva has to find another human form to continue his task (as it is said in Murlis that "I will never leave till paradise is established in this world") so Shiva does not have any choice but to enter someone as Shiva's appointed Chariot had already left his body. So after the two mothers, it was Brahma DL's turn and finally when the appointed Chariot is back, then Shiva does not need anyone else .

So far the world has never accepted Brahma DL as God the Father but revelation is only through ekvyapi and the personified form of ShivBaba will be Baba Dixit (Ram) as it is said Shiv-Shankar.

It is said Trimurti only that Shiva carried out the tasks of establishment, destruction and sustenance through the three murthis but when revelation, it is only through one appointed Chariot to which the world will bow down to Him and say that "God has come."

It can only be said as omnipresence when whoever Shiva enters declare that "Shiv is in me or i am the corporeal form of ShivBaba."

When Ram is revealed to the world as the personified form of ShivBaba, Ram (Baba Dixit) will never declare to the world that Shiva is in him but the world will declare him as the personified form of ShivBaba based on His Incorporeal stage, viceless stage and egoless stage.

Anu, can you apprise me in which cult you belong --- are you a bk or ex-BK or ex pbk?

I just hope you are not in the category of those who run from 'pillar to post' and those who make so much of noise in knowledge (as empty vessels make much noise) in propagating their perspectives when they don't have a corporeal form of a Father or a mother to be revealed as the God of Gita.

indie.

ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 18 Nov 2010

pbkindiana wrote:Anu, can you apprise me in which cult you belong --- are you a BK or ex-BK or ex PBK?
Der indie
Do you judge people by labels you give them? This is very dangerous, I think. And it may end in serious misunderstanding. I study in AIVV. I have spent years on studies and churning on each class Baba delivered. I compared them with Sakar Murlis. Now I simply take part in a discussion with other students. You have starting judging me and giving me some attributes because some discoveries that the results of studies I did are not with line with yours. I search for the truth and want to achieve the final truth, I don't want to lie and cover things that are ambiguous, unclear and contradictory. I pursue to achieve full clarity and simplicity and single mindedness in everything.

Going back to our opinion exchange:

You stated that Shiva's presence in three murti would be omnipresence and wrote that I suggessted Shiva's presence in three which was totally against what I wrote and resulted from your twisting my words. I refered to it and asked you a question based on what we have been taught in AIVV that Shiva was simultaneouly present in Gita mata and Prajapita at the very beginning. That question was: Why the presence in two is not a kind of omnipresence and the present in three would be omnipresence? Answering to my question, you started asking my whether I am "those who run from 'pillar to post' and those who make so much of noise in knowledge (as empty vessels make much noise) in propagating their perspectives" yet you did not answer the question itself.

I am not interesting in propagating my perspectives; I am interesting in the final truth that should be simple and single minded, not ambiguous and full of question marks.

I don't care whether someone is BK, ex-BK or PBK or whatever. Let everyone call himself whatever he wants. Judging people by labels is typical for a certain category of people; I want to stay far from them. I myself take care of being true at the heart, maintaning the clear mind, nourish logical thinking, being courageous to ask questions and having good intentions.
It is said Trimurti only that Shiva carried out the tasks of establishment, destruction and sustenance through the three murthis but when revelation, it is only through one appointed Chariot to which the world will bow down to Him and say that "God has come."
Once again let me ask you: Who is God? What is God called in the Sakar Murli? Is he called the Trimurti Shiva or is he called Shiva-Shankar? Whom shoudl the Brahmin children recognise - Shiva-Shankar or the Trimurti Shiva?

When Ram is revealed to the world as the personified form of ShivBaba, Ram (Baba Dixit) will never declare to the world that Shiva is in him but the world will declare him as the personified form of ShivBaba based on His Incorporeal stage, viceless stage and egoless stage.
Shall Ram be revealed as a personified form of ShivBaba, meaning someone who already has a physical form? Or personified form of Shiva who has no physical form? How can someone who is supposed to be a person (ShivBaba) have another personifcation? I think that it is about the Trimurti Shiva that should be recognised by the world of the Brahmins.

pbkindiana
PBK
Posts: 616
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by pbkindiana » 19 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
Do you judge people by labels you give them? This is very dangerous, I think. And it may end in serious misunderstanding. I am a student of AIVV who has spent years on studies and churning on each class Baba delivered. I compared with Sakar Murlis. Now I simply take part in a discussion with other students. You have starting judging me and giving me some attributes because some discoveries that the results of studies I did are not with line with yours. I search for the truth and want to achieve the final truth, I don't want to lie and cover things that are ambiguous, unclear and contradictory. I pursue to achieve full clarity and simplicity and single mindedness in everything.
Dear Anu,

I feel it is common to ask politely as someone belongs to which cult so that at least i will have the understanding of your beliefs and faith. Also i am not judging you or anyone else as all of us are in the quest of truth. Moreover who am I to judge you or anyone else? Most PBKs have their own churnings and it don't tally with each other, yet we are still sharing and debating as truth has not revealed yet. I did not know that just by asking you belong to which cult will offend you so much.
Going back to our opinion exchange:

You stated that Shiva's presence in three murti would be omnipresence and wrote that I suggessted Shiva's presence in three which was totally against what I wrote and resulted from your twisting my words. I refered to it and asked you a question based on what we have been taught in AIVV that Shiva was simultaneouly present in Gita mata and Prajapita at the very beginning. That question was: Why the presence in two is not a kind of omnipresence and the present in three would be omnipresence?
Please refer back to my last posting as i have stated that whoever says that Shiva is in me or I am the corporel form of God, then the shooting of omnipresence takes place. Even AK does not state that Shiva will be revealed in three murtis. When Shiva enters in human beings, no one knows of his entry, then it cannot be said as omnipresence but if you say that revelation will take place through the three murtis, then it will be said as omnipresence'
It is mentioned in AK that
1. "There are two fathers in unlimited sense. So Shiv and Prajapita need each other to get revealed and both complement each other.
2. "The Supreme Soul Shiva is revealed through the complete purusharth of Rambap. Then Ram is called Bhagawan."
3. "When the Supreme Teacher is revealed, the Father will also be revealed because the form of the Father - Teacher - Sadguru is the same. They are not different forms."

I hope these three points are sufficient that there is only one murti as the personified form of ShivBaba and not three murtis.
Answering to my question, you started asking my whether I am "those who run from 'pillar to post' and those who make so much of noise in knowledge (as empty vessels make much noise) in propagating their perspectives" yet you did not answer the question itself.
Actually i am not referring to you but to others who interfere in my sharing with you by condemning the PBKs and Baba Dixit. It is good and entertaining to share, refute and debate knowledge supported by Murli points but not condemning and humiliating others.
Once again let me ask you: Who is God?
According to me it is ShivBaba and God will be revealed to the world only when Rambap becomes complete.
What is God called in the Sakar Murli?


It is said either Supreme Soul Shiva or ShivBaba. MU. 14/4/99 -- "Only ShivBaba should be called God".
Is he called the Trimurti Shiva or is he called Shiva-Shankar?
When it is said as a point, then it is called as Trimurti Shiva and Shiv-Shankar is a corporeal form. It is said Shiv-Shankar only when Shankar emulates Shiv's stage.
Whom shoudl the Brahmin children recognise - Shiva-Shankar or the Trimurti Shiva?
The brahmin children should recognize ShivBaba and no one can recognize Trimurti Shiva as He is only a point. The brahmin children can recognize Trimurti Shiva only when the rust of the needle-like soul is incinerated and we will learn directly from Shiv. Till then you will only see the appointed form of ShivBaba which is impure.

Let me ask you a question --- It is said in Murlis Trimurti Shiva and never said as Trimurti ShivBaba. Why?
Shall Ram be revealed as a personified form of ShivBaba, meaning someone who already has a physical form? Or personified form of Shiva who has no physical form? How can someone who is supposed to be a person (ShivBaba) have another personifcation? I think that it is about the Trimurti Shiva that should be recognised by the world of the Brahmins.
If Trimurti Shiva (which is a point) is to be recognized, then where is the necessity of Shiva to come down to this impure world. Baba has said umpteen times that Shiva means a point and no one can recognize a point as all souls (humans animals and plants' souls) are points, so we have to say ShivBaba. It is always said two fathers -- the incorporeal Father gives inheritance to the corporeal Father. When Shiv is revealed in Ram, the personality is the same but there will be two souls in one body. It is said Supreme Father Supreme Soul as Supreme Father (Shiva) and Supreme Soul (Ram) merged their nirakari stages. It is also said that this ordinary form will change. It is said Shiva and Shankar is different but the body is only one. I am posting a Murli point that says Shiva needs a body . MU. 1/11/05 --- "God is one. Certainly when he comes, he must be assuming a body. Only then it is called "Bhagwaanuvaach."

indie.

ANU
Posts: 309
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Sharing the results of research in the story of the Yagya collected with co-operation with western students.

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by ANU » 22 Nov 2010

Dear pbkindiana

If you like to ask people about their labels and you find it useful, this is your choice. I find this practice to limit the mind and give birth to various kind of prejudice, from subtle bias to gross bias.
When it is said as a point, then it is called as Trimurti Shiva and Shiv-Shankar is a corporeal form. It is said Shiv-Shankar only when Shankar emulates Shiv's stage.
Dear indiana, I do not agree with this. A point cannot be called Trimurti Shiva. A point is called Shiva. The Trimurti Shiva is said when he comes to the corporeal world. The Brahmin children who are true children of Shiva should recognise Shiva as Trimurti, meaning the one who reveals himself through three murtis (corporeal bodies) and has his tasks accomplished through three murtis (corporeal bodies). The rest of the world will recognised him only as God the Father in one murti. This is the difference between Shiva's true children and the rest. And Shiva communicated this in Murlis narrated through BB. I cannot agree that recognistion of Shiva-Shankar is the ultimate goal. The Trimurti Shiva is the ultimate goal. ANd the Trimurti Shiva has not been used as a synonym of Shiva point of light. In Sakar Murlis Shiva himself was called ShivBaba.

Here I post few points from Sacci Gita translated into English in AIVV

 Children you write Trimurti Shiva's birthday. But three personalities are not in existence now. You say that ShivBaba creates the new world through Brahma. Hence, Brahma should also be present in the corporeal form. However, where are Vishnu and Shankar now? So how can you call it as Trinity? These are matters to be understood. Trimurti means Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar. You are the ones who know the secret of Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar. [Mu 18-2-76 Pg-1]
 People always say Trimurti Brahma. Nobody says Trimurti Shankar or Trimurti Vishnu. Shankar is called Dev-Dev-Mahadev (i.e., greatest among all deities). Then why do they say Trimurti Brahma? [ShivBaba] creates subjects (praja) through him [Brahma] so he (Brahma) becomes His wife. Shankar or Vishnu does not become His wife. These wonderful things are to be understood. [Mu 11-1-73 Pg-3]
 Trimurti Supreme Father Shiva only is the bestower of knowledge and salvager of all. Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar are born together. It is not just Shivjayanti [Shiva's birthday] but Trimurti Shivjayanti. [Mu. 27-09-75 Pg-3]
 Viceless world of deities is being established through Brahma. Destruction is going to take place through Shankar. Then there will be the reign of Vishnu. [Mu 22-01-78 Pg-2]
 They have spoilt the picture of Trimurti by removing the picture of Shiva from it. Just as there are people who destroy artifacts. There was a Muslim ruler who used to just destroy the pictures of deities. Now you children are able to understand how much mystery is stored in the picture of Trinity. [Mu-17-11-76, Pg-1]
3. "When the Supreme Teacher is revealed, the Father will also be revealed because the form of the Father - Teacher - Sadguru is the same. They are not different forms."
Not exactly -please read the points carefully.
 The Father also gets the work done through the three personalities. That's why the picture of Trimurti is specially praised and worshipped. You say Trimurti Shiva. One Father performs three tasks through whom the universal work is being done. [Av. 4-1-80 Pg- 173]
 Now ShivBaba's birthday is coming, you should bring out the picture of Trimurti Shiva. Why not we bring out the accurate picture of Trimurti Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar? [Mu 23-1-75 Pg-3]

pbkindiana
PBK
Posts: 616
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Theists and atheists

Post by pbkindiana » 24 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
Not exactly -please read the points carefully.
The Father also gets the work done through the three personalities. That's why the picture of Trimurti is specially praised and worshipped. You say Trimurti Shiva. One Father performs three tasks through whom the universal work is being done. [Av. 4-1-80 Pg- 173]
Now ShivBaba's birthday is coming, you should bring out the picture of Trimurti Shiva. Why not we bring out the accurate picture of Trimurti Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar? [Mu 23-1-75 Pg-3]
Dear Anu,

It is said "God the Father" and if according to you that Trimurti Shiva reveals himself through the three murtis, then which murti will be regarded as "God the Father" or the personified form of ShivBaba?

It is said "Next to God is Prajapita", "Next to God is Shankar", "Next to God is Krishna", "Next to God is Narayan", but it has never been said as "Next to God is the three murtis".

AV. 20.10.75 -- "One Father and none else." --- so if you assume that Shiva will be revealed through the three murtis, then whom will you accept as "one Father and none else"?

MU. 17.3.68 -- "You have to learn fr the one and only Father." --- so who is this Father whom we will learn. You cannot say Brahma becoz Brahma is the mother's role as it is said that "this Brahma is your mother but the body is male." You cannot say
Vishnu as Vishnu denotes Lakshmi and Narayan.

It is always said in SM that ( "ShivBaba gives inheritance through Prajapita Brahma"), ( "After coming, the Father gives sadgati to all through Prajapita Brahma"), ("The Incorporeal Father gives inheritance through the corporeal Father"), (There are two Fathers etc.) --- but i have nerver come across any quotes mentioning that Shiva gives inheritance through the three murtis.

I am posting few Murli quotes to corroborate that Shiva will be revealed in one Chariot only as the practical form of ShivBaba.

MU. 24.10.74 --- "God takes only one Chariot, which is called lucky Chariot, in which Father enters to make others million times lucky."

MU. 26.4.73 --- "I come only in an ordinary person's body."

MU. 3.2.75 --- "Nothing can be gained fr Brahma. Inheritance is received only fr Father through him. And there is no value of Brahma."

MU. 26.2.75 -- "You know that inheritance cannot be gained fr Brahma. Brahma, Vishnu is worth not a penny."

MU. 20.5.72 -- "There they did not find Father, Teacher, but became a guru immediately. Here there is such a disciplined knowledge. Here your Father, Teacher, and Guru all in one."

AV. 11.11.75 -- "This is ShivBaba's Chariot, one who makes the whole world a heaven."

MU. 16.2.73 -- "As ShivBaba enters Shankar, hence they identify Shiva as Shankar

MU. 6.10.76 -- "It is taken into account that Shiva sermonized sitting in Shankar."

Can you give me a single Murli quote that says "Shiva sermonizes through the three murtis" or "Shiva gives inheritance through the three murtis", or "Shiva establishes heaven through the three murtis" or "Godfather will be revealed to the world through the three murtis."

indie.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests