Sakar Murlis: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal ?

Mainly DEDICATED to Ex-BKs.
A neutral forum for congenial discussions and reservations related to the Godly Knowledge between ALL parties.
sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Sakar Murlis: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal ?

Post by sachkhand » 16 May 2009

Aum Shanti.

In thread: Is Veerendra Dev Dixit not aware of Supreme Soul Shiv? page 3,
arjun on 13 May 2009,
No, it does not mean that just because some sentences are in direct speech, they have been spoken by ShivBaba in direct speech. They are definitely preceded somewhere by indirect speech, like 'the Father says' , 'Baba says' etc. So, on the whole the entire Murli is in an indirect speech.

shivsena on 13 May 2009,
I fully agree with arjun Bhai that the whole Murli is an indirect speech in third person, describing the future Sangamyugi drama and it is directed to and will be understood only by potential 108 (Gyani souls) only.
Also the avaykt Vanis are also in third person for potential 108 souls who will
attain the Bap-samaan avaykt stage numberwise.

shivsena on 14 May 2009,
i feel that God Shiva or whoever has recited the Murlis needs to be indirect to make the souls numberwise;...
Dear PBKs (including Shivsena),
What is the meaning of the words made bold in the above quote?

Who spoke in the daily morning and (irregular) evening classes of Dada Lekharaj in Mount Abu?

Was it Dada Lekharaj alone? Or did any other soul too spoke through Dada Lekharaj?

If it was only Dada Lekharaj, then why are those words called Murli or ShivBaba's MahaVakyas?

If some other soul/s spoke through Dada Lekharaj, then who is/are that soul/s?

In scriptures it is said that there are four types of speech. Vaikhari is the spoken speech, whereas other three are the speech that come before Vaikhari and result in the Soken Vaikhari speech. So is it that Supreme Soul Shiv spoke in one of those subtle speeches and Dada Lekharaj gave them gross form that is Vaikhari speech. And hence the Murli appears to be indirect speech.

Or is it that Dada Lekharaj visualised the future happenings and narrated them in advance? (IF it is so then in a way BKs are actual Advance Party people.)

Or is it that Dada Lekharaj churned knowledge he had read in scriptures and also his experiences, and then told about his churnings in the classes he conducted.

Or is it that Dada Lekharaj was a deceiver and just gave words to his fantacies, knowingly.

Or finally, is it that Dada Lekharaj had lost his senses due to sakshatkars (visions) and was a mental case?

I expect PBKs to answer this question, and if they do not know then they will get clarification to this basic question. Because Murlis are the basis for Rudra Gyaan Yajnya. And Virendra Dev Dixit has even said that Murlis are like lines carved in stone (patthar ki lakeer) which cannot be false.

What are Murlis (words spoken through Dada Lekharaj in classes in Mount Abu) for PBKs?
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11588
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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by arjun » 16 May 2009

sachkhand wrote: Who spoke in the daily morning and (irregular) evening classes of Dada Lekharaj in Mount Abu?
It was God Shiv who spoke through Brahma Baba at Mt. Abu while narrating the Sakar Murlis. Although Brahma Baba also spoke some sentences during the Murlis, yet the children are expected to consider the entire Murli to have been spoken by ShivBaba.
Was it Dada Lekharaj alone? Or did any other soul too spoke through Dada Lekharaj?

If it was only Dada Lekharaj, then why are those words called Murli or ShivBaba's MahaVakyas?

If some other soul/s spoke through Dada Lekharaj, then who is/are that soul/s?

In scriptures it is said that there are four types of speech. Vaikhari is the spoken speech, whereas other three are the speech that come before Vaikhari and result in the Soken Vaikhari speech. So is it that Supreme Soul Shiv spoke in one of those subtle speeches and Dada Lekharaj gave them gross form that is Vaikhari speech. And hence the Murli appears to be indirect speech.

Or is it that Dada Lekharaj visualised the future happenings and narrated them in advance? (IF it is so then in a way BKs are actual Advance Party people.)

Or is it that Dada Lekharaj churned knowledge he had read in scriptures and also his experiences, and then told about his churnings in the classes he conducted.

Or is it that Dada Lekharaj was a deceiver and just gave words to his fantacies, knowingly.

Or finally, is it that Dada Lekharaj had lost his senses due to sakshatkars (visions) and was a mental case?
In view of the answer to the first question, all other questions hold no relevance.
What are Murlis (words spoken through Dada Lekharaj in classes in Mount Abu) for PBKs?
Shrimat.

OGS,
Arjun

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 17 May 2009

AUM Shanti.
arjun wrote:It was God Shiv who spoke through Brahma Baba at Mt. Abu while narrating the Sakar Murlis. Although Brahma Baba also spoke some sentences during the Murlis, yet the children are expected to consider the entire Murli to have been spoken by ShivBaba.
... In view of the answer to the first question, all other questions hold no relevance.
In thread: Is Veerendra Dev Dixit not aware of Supreme Soul Shiv? page 3,
arjun on 13 May 2009,
No, it does not mean that just because some sentences are in direct speech, they have been spoken by ShivBaba in direct speech. They are definitely preceded somewhere by indirect speech, like 'the Father says' , 'Baba says' etc. So, on the whole the entire Murli is in an indirect speech.
Your answer above makes the list of my question relevant. Which of your answers correct? Your answers are contradicting. On one hand you say it was God Shiv who spoke through Brahma Baba at Mt. Abu while narrating the Sakar Murlis. And on the other hand you contradict it by saying that Shiv has never spoken directly through Brahma Baba. Then we have to beleive just Brahma Baba's words and what he thinks God Shiv says.
Do you take back your words that Murli has no direct speech of Shiv and are completely in an indirect speech. Or do you mean to say that Shiv Himself talked about Shiv in indirect speech. Please clarify.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11588
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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by arjun » 18 May 2009

sachkhand wrote:Or do you mean to say that Shiv Himself talked about Shiv in indirect speech.
Yes.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 21 May 2009

AUM Shanti.
arjun wrote:Yes.
Above is the answer arjun gave to my querry, "Or do you mean to say that Shiv Himself talked about Shiv in indirect speech."
Dear Arjun,
Will you please tell whether this is your personal view and beleif or just assumption. Or is this the official view point of AIVV.
If you do not know the official view, then please get it clarified and make us known.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11588
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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by arjun » 22 May 2009

sachkhand wrote:Or is this the official view point of AIVV.
If you do not agree with my view or feel that it is not the official view of the AIVV, then you are free to write to Baba yourself and get the clarification. You have done this in the past and also received reply from him.
Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by shivsena » 22 May 2009

Dear sachkhand Bhai.

You have started a very important topic about who has recited the Murlis and i am willing to discuss on this topic with you face to face only, as i cannot put my thoughts on paper regarding this.

shivsena.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 22 May 2009

AUM Shanti.
arjun wrote:If you do not agree with my view or feel that it is not the official view of the AIVV, then you are free to write to Baba yourself and get the clarification. You have done this in the past and also received reply from him.
Dear Arjun,
I had thought of doing it, but I have been told not to waste time in writing to that email ID ( see thread: An important request to Veerendra Dev Dixit and/or AIVV members.)
And so I requested you. If you are not willing to do it, then I request any other member of this forum to do this job. It will help a lot in clarifying many issues realted to this Knowledge.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 22 May 2009

AUM Shanti.
shivsena wrote:Dear sachkhand Bhai.
You have started a very important topic about who has recited the Murlis and i am willing to discuss on this topic with you face to face only, as i cannot put my thoughts on paper regarding this.
Dear Shivsena,
you can write me personal message or write email to me. I too am interested in meeting you face to face.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11588
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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by arjun » 22 May 2009

sachkhand wrote:I had thought of doing it, but I have been told not to waste time in writing to that email ID ( see thread: An important request to Veerendra Dev Dixit and/or AIVV members.) And so I requested you. If you are not willing to do it, then I request any other member of this forum to do this job. It will help a lot in clarifying many issues realted to this Knowledge.
I suppose you got such a reply from AIVV as your letter was more like a challenge or a legal notice to AIVV and not in a polite manner. But if you draft your question in a few relevant words and ask Baba in a polite manner, I am sure you will definitely get an answer.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 23 May 2009

AUM Shanti.
arjun wrote:I suppose you got such a reply from AIVV as your letter was more like a challenge or a legal notice to AIVV and not in a polite manner. But if you draft your question in a few relevant words and ask Baba in a polite manner, I am sure you will definitely get an answer.
Dear Arjun,
I do not think so.
I cannot ask Virendra Dev Dixit because I do not consider him as ShivBaba now. And if I ask AIVV to clarify their stand then again it would be considered as impolite and challenging.
I just wanted to know the stand of AIVV. If you are representing AIVV in this forum then I request you to get clarification even to this question. Because you are getting clarification from Virendra Dev Dixit (or senior members I suppose) to many doubts or questions raised by members here.
It is up to you whether to clarify what hardcore PBKs beleive or just keep silent.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11588
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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by arjun » 23 May 2009

sachkhand wrote:If you are representing AIVV in this forum
No, I am not.
However, I will try to get answer for your question. But I cannot give any time frame. It could be within a few days or a few months.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 24 May 2009

AUM Shanti.
arjun wrote:... I will try to get answer for your question. But I cannot give any time frame. It could be within a few days or a few months.
Dear Arjun,
It all depends on how seriously you take this point. If you wish you can try and get it at the earliest. If not it can take even 12 months or more. Try your best. Rest is drama. You cannot be blamed.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

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: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by shivsena » 07 Jun 2009

Dear sanjeev Bhai and indiana and bk and pbk brothers.

Murli 10-12-2001 says " Aage Baba raat ko 2 baje utkar likhte thei, phir savere Mama Murli padkar phir chalati thi." [meaning: "Before Baba used to get up at 2 am. and write, and then in the morning Mama used to read and then narrate."]

The above Murli point raises many queries:

Why did Brahma baba wake up and write at 2 am??...what did he write??....how many pages did he write??....who dictated to brahma or did he write of his own??...why did brahma himself did not narrate in the morning class what he had written??....what did Mama narrate in the morning class??..was it the contents of what Baba had written or did she add her own churnings??...why did Shiva not narrate directly in morning class???.. how many years did this system go on, from which year to which year??... and finally what happened to these manuscripts,... why these written versions of brahma not available for study for those who came later???

Can anyone please express his views on the same.
shivsena.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Direct or Indirect or just havamahal (nonsense)?

Post by sachkhand » 09 Jun 2009

AUM Shanti.
shivsena wrote: Murli 10-12-2001 says " Aage Baba raat ko 2 baje utkar likhte thei, phir savere Mama Murli padkar phir chalati thi." [meaning: "Before Baba used to get up at 2 am. and write, and then in the morning Mama used to read and then narrate."]
Dear Shivsena,
The above Murli point has been used by Virendra Dev Dixit, but it is not as you have given.
It is as follows:
"Baba raat ko 2 baje uthakar likhte the, Baap baith likhaate the ..." [ meaning: "Before Baba used to get up at 2 am., Father used to sit and dictate ...]

Can anyone clarify which of the above two is true? :confused: :prize: ;-)
And using this point Virendra Dev Dixit has questioned BKs who was that person who used to sit and dictate Brahma Baba (because only Sakar can sit and dictate)?
(And his explanation is that it was the original Prajapita i.e., Sevakram, through whom Shiv dictated and Brahma wrote, and those versions are called as Piu ki Vani. And it is thought that those were among the other materials which were buried in the karachi itself.)
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests