pro publico bono

DEDICATED to PBKs.
For PBKs who are affiliated to AIVV, and supporting 'Advanced Knowledge'.
Post Reply
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: pro publico bono

Post by ANU » 13 Nov 2010

Brothers

Pbk indiana, please tell me what was said by Krishna, what is that "second one"? This appears to me as complete chaos. Pbk indiana said that Baba said that
pbkindiana wrote:second one saying that Shiv enters in the 108 rudrabeads was spoken by child Krishna.


For God's sake :D please, let us not make things even more complecated. For years it has been taught in AIVV that Shiva enters all Rudra Mala beads. Then, suddenly, Baba said that Shiva doesn't enter anyone, only the mukarrar rath (see VCD 975). So, according to what Baba explained in relation to this ambiguity it was Krishna who for years has been teaching us that Shiva enters Rudra Mala beads and we learn that it was wrong now, after students' questions that in fact should not have been asked, becasue we have been taught in AIVV that everything always is spoken by ShivBaba , it is 'patthar ki lakhir' and 'whatever Baba says is ShivBaba's word that is 100% true'.

On one hand we have been taught that Shiva enters Rudra Mala beads (and these supposed to be ShivBaba's words 100% true), on the other hand we heard that Shiva enters only in mukarrar rath and no one else (and these also supposed to be ShivBaba's words 100% true), on the third side we were taught about Shiva's entrance many times that 'bail par savari hamesha nahiin hain" (ride on the bull does not take place continuously) - meaning Shiva leaves the mukarrar rath from time to time (and this was also narrated by Shiva and it is 100% true). And on the fourth hand Sakar Murlis state clearly that Shiva enters other children ( I posted those points above).


Brothers, please.... does it make sense? For me it sounds very unclear and confusing. What is the reason of all this...? ;-) What's going on?

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

Re: pro publico bono

Post by pbkindiana » 14 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
Please post the quoted Murli points in Hindi. Do you have them? The way they are translated may be wrong. I have never heard points like this in Hindi. I do not want to say by this that I know all the Murlis; I heard quite a lot and never heard points like those translated. They sound strange. Sometimes wrong usage of one word spoils the entire meaning and brings about completely new meaning. We should be very careful about words. They have their very precise meanings and should not be used carelessly. Sometimes, it seems to me that people use them in the way that confuses
Dear Anu,

I am a non-Hindi speaking soul, so i can only post the English Murli quotes.

Surprisingly, you guys are born in the Hindi speaking bodies and read Godly knowledge in Hindi and yet most of them do not know the whereabouts of Shiv and the insight of this Godly knowledge. As Shiva has pledged that He will not leave till He has established swarag in this world of narak.

indie.

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

Re: pro publico bono

Post by pbkindiana » 14 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
Please post the quoted Murli points in Hindi. Do you have them? The way they are translated may be wrong. I have never heard points like this in Hindi. I do not want to say by this that I know all the Murlis; I heard quite a lot and never heard points like those translated. They sound strange. Sometimes wrong usage of one word spoils the entire meaning and brings about completely new meaning. We should be very careful about words. They have their very precise meanings and should not be used carelessly. Sometimes, it seems to me that people use them in the way that confuses
Dear Anu,

I am a non-Hindi speaking soul, so i can only post the English Murli quotes.

Surprisingly, you guys are born in the Hindi speaking bodies and read Godly knowledge in Hindi and yet most of them do not know the whereabouts of Shiv and the insight of this Godly knowledge. As Shiva has pledged that He will not leave till He has established swarag in this world of narak.

indie.

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

Re: pro publico bono

Post by pbkindiana » 14 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
PBK indiana, please tell me what was said by Krishna, what is that "second one"? This appears to me as complete chaos. PBK indiana said that Baba said that second one saying that Shiv enters in the 108 rudrabeads was spoken by child Krishna.
Yes it was mentioned in Ak that Krishna interfered saying that Shiva enters in the 108 rudrabeads.

Few years back when i visited Baba and asked Baba personally whether Shiva enters the 108 rudrabeads, Baba replied that Shiva does not enter the 108 rudrabeads but BapDada enters.

Also in one recent discussion cd, a brother asked Baba why is it said that the angry ones cannot come to heaven. That brother's question was if the angry ones cannot come to heaven, then can the lustful ones come, is it?
Baba replied that child Krishna said that.

I am very sure that most PBKs are aware of Krishna's interference in AK.

As it is said that the swans can differentiate between milk and water. Milk is Ram's churnings and water is Krishna's interferences. When we read AK, it is so clearly observed the term 'we' is used frequently. So if Shiva is speaking Ak, then He will use "I" and not "we".
For God's sake :D please, let us not make things even more complecated.
Why should it be complicating when it is a fact that child Krishna is interfering AK as he has interfered in Sakar Murlis. When I visited Baba last year and enquired why Krishna bachhi is interfering and why Shiva kept quiet when Brahma Baba interfered in Sakar Murlis --- Baba replied that he is a sweet child and the way Baba gestured that it is okay.

For years it has been taught in AIVV that Shiva enters all Rudra Mala beads. Then, suddenly, Baba said that Shiva doesn't enter anyone, only the mukarrar rath (see VCD* 975). So, according to what Baba explained in relation to this ambiguity it was Krishna who for years has been teaching us that Shiva enters Rudra Mala beads and we learn that it was wrong now, after students' questions that in fact should not have been asked, becasue we have been taught in AIVV that everything always is spoken by ShivBaba , it is 'patthar ki lakhir' and 'whatever Baba says is ShivBaba's word that is 100% true'.

On one hand we have been taught that Shiva enters Rudra Mala beads (and these supposed to be ShivBaba's words 100% true), on the other hand we heard that Shiva enters only in mukarrar rath and no one else (and these also supposed to be ShivBaba's words 100% true), on the third side we were taught about Shiva's entrance many times that 'bail par savari hamesha nahiin hain" (ride on the bull does not take place continuously) - meaning Shiva leaves the mukarrar rath from time to time (and this was also narrated by Shiva and it is 100% true). And on the fourth hand Sakar Murlis state clearly that Shiva enters other children ( I posted those points above).
If you can accept child Krishna's interferences in Sakar Murlis and AK, then one will never be confused of the ambiguity in AK. It is said that Krishna Bhagwaanuvaach leads to degradation and Shiv Bhagwaanuvaach leads to true salvation, so when did Krishna speak that causes degradation. If one can have the awareness that mother (Krishna) is interfering, then one will never get confused and agitated.
Brothers, please.... does it make sense? For me it sounds very unclear and confusing. What is the reason of all this...? ;-) What's going on?
If one has faith in ShivBaba and the permanent Chariot (Ram), then there is nothing to get confuse.

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: pro publico bono

Post by ANU » 14 Nov 2010

Dear pbk indiana

"We" is mostly used in classes, when topics are clarified. "I" is used really rarelly. So, It would mean, concluding from what your wrote, that most of those things have been narrated by Krishna. It would mean that most of what is said in those classes comes from Krishna and is false

Yes, I heard that Krishna interferred and interferres. This really makes the entire adventure hilarious. Imagine, what if the answers to questions who says what asked by students are given by Krishna, not Shiva! Hoho! :laugh:

Please explain, what is the final answer to the question about Shiva's entering the Rudra Mala? And who gave that answer - Shiva or Krishna?

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

Re: pro publico bono

Post by pbkindiana » 15 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
"We" is mostly used in classes, when topics are clarified. "I" is used really rarelly. So, It would mean, concluding from what your wrote, that most of those things have been narrated by Krishna. It would mean that most of what is said in those classes comes from Krishna and is false
I am forwarding a question i asked Baba a couple of years ago.

My question ---If ShivBaba is speaking advance knowledge, then why it is said in advance knowledge like for example:- (our Father has come), (we have to study), (Godfather of the world is our teacher), (we will obtain the inheritance), (we have to imbibe divine virtues) and there are so many more that indicates ShivBaba is not saying these sentences.

Baba's reply ---ShivBaba narrated the Murlis having entered in Brahma's body. Sometimes student speaks in between when the teacher is telling the lessons. Similarly here also Brahma's soul used to interfere and speak in between as he is first class student. But we should never differentiate the both and always think that it is ShivBaba who is speaking.
Please explain, what is the final answer to the question about Shiva's entering the Rudra Mala? And who gave that answer - Shiva or Krishna?
Krishna does not know to give the clarifications but he interferes. I feel that it is unnecessary for Shiv to enter the rudrabeads as Shiva is focusing only one soul ie Ram. Shiva wants Ram to emulate his stage and become the titledhari Bhagawan.
It is said in AK that Father Rudra enters the rosary of 108 and Prajapita is called as Rudra. That is why it is called Rudramala and not Shivmala.

Do you think that Shiva will enter the 108 rudrabeads as the 100 beads will join hands with their own clan and defame Father practically when Mahakali plays her role. The eight will never oppose the Father practically as they are the direct children of Father Ram.

When "who is the God of Gita" does not sit in the intellect of Brahma DL, then he does disservice (by interfering in Ak and making it ambiguous ).

When i visited Baba last year and asked Baba regarding the role of ShivBaba, Baba replied that Brahma is also included in ShivBaba. Then i asked --- why is it not said 'Shiv - Brahma' if Brahma is inclusive in the role of ShivBaba. Baba replied that --- later on it will be said as 'Shiv - Brahma'. Then i realised that the soul of Brahma is replying to me. Even in AK, it is said that the phrase of "Shiv - Brahma" does not exist in the path of Gyan and also in the path of Bhakti.

I know that it is hard for the PBKs to digest the fact that Brahma is interfering in AK and causing the ambiguity but this drama is preordained, so we accept it whether we like it or not. It is just a matter of time and everything will be cleared when Shankar has complete control on the bull.

Anu, I am so sorry if i have confused you.

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: pro publico bono

Post by ANU » 15 Nov 2010

Dear indie

You don't confuse me at all. All this sounds like a good play. It is nice to read your comments and sharing.

In Sakar Murli (points are quoted earlier) it was said that Shiva enters others children, not that he enters only one Chariot.
Calling Krishna the first class students and giving him right to interfere sounds to me strange. The first class student is the one who obeys rulesl who is always ahead of the others in studies. It cannot be said about Krishna. His behaviour as described in AK may be another self praise of that Krishna himself. Krishna's interference in almost everything doesn't allow us to receive the Sacci Gita, am I right?

We received the teaching that everything is narrated by ShivBaba and is 100% true. Then, we received teachings that Krishna interfers and makes the entire knowledge ambiguous. Yet we should think that it is ShivBaba speaks and teaches us narrating the true knowledge 100% true, don't raise questions or doubts, no matter what we hear. We should not use our brains, but believe that whatever we hear is 100% true. This is the most contradictory and strange think I have ever heard and it supposed to be the teaching from God Himself. All right, let's go ahead. You yourself heaven't folowed the rule by thinking that Krishna speaks to you not Shiva. Please think, what's a point in giving someone the information about facts that may protect you from absorbing lies (Krishna interferes and tells you lies) and saying you at the same time that you must not use this information and always think that it is ShivBaba speaking and you hear 100% truth. In such a case, giving the information about Krishna is a complete nonsense.

I am afraid I can notice here a pattern of brainwashing. This pattern is based on provinding a person with pieces of information that excludes each other and forcing him to accept them as 100% truth and don't think. Please correct me if I am wrong. In China millions people were mentally killed by branwashing. If we are to deliver the message like this to the world and tell the world that all this is 100% truth, I think that we won't make ourselves different from any of sects considered as the ones practicing brainwashing. Do you understand my concern?

Please, think, we received the teaching in AK that if the creation doesn't remain under the control of the creator , it is not a creation, is is not a child. Here, Krishna who cannot be controlled by his Father and stopped from bad behavior, regardless of the fact Krishna fights with his Father and doesn't remain under his control, he is called a sweet child and the first class student. Well....

Then, finally who narrates advaced knowledge in AK? We received teachings and can read it also in the AK literature that the advance knowledge is what comes out after studying Murlis, pictures, comparing them and churning. Who studies? Human souls. Who churns? Human souls. Who compares? Human souls. Then, we ahave to agree that the AK is a product of human souls' churning. Shiva has nothing to do with this as he doesn't study, doesn't think, doesn't churn. So, who is the source of the advanced knowledge we are receiving? How can it be Shiva? The Prajapita is the creator of AK and Krishna, an uncontrolled creation, comes and disturbs. But we should not think about all this and always think that it is Shiva himself who speaks to us and we hear 100% truth; thet we are receiving the True Gita narrated by Shiva himslef (Shiva ki Sacci Gita). Am I right? Does it make sense?

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: pro publico bono

Post by Sach_Khand » 16 Nov 2010

So now, what is the explanation to Sevakram becoming child of Brahma and hence a Brahman. To prove the point that Prajapita too is a Brhaman, it was said in AK that when the Wife of Sevakram after hearing the narration by Dada Lekharaj about his experiences told the same to Sevakram (as Sevakram was not present when Dada Lekharaj was narrating his experience to his sister). And Shiv had entered that woman while she was repeating the narration by Dada Lekharaj to Sevakram.

When followers of Virendra Dev Dixit questioned him too much about how can Shiv enter a woman first because if Shiv enters a woman first then that woman becomes Prajapita ( in whomsoever Shiv enters first is Prajapita was the confusion). And the answer given by Virendra Dev Dixit was that actually Shiv entered both simultaneously. Strange answer. But there was no way to question futher but to keep mouth shut. :confused: And also there was no hope of getting any logical answer.

So now what does Arjun say about this? Virendra Dev Dixit is considered as ShivBaba by all the followers of Virendra Dev Dixit and this ShivBaba is changing his explanation. So does it prove that ShivBaba lies ? If the answer has to be in YES or NO, then what would be the answer of Arjun? Has ShivBaba lied?

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

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: pro publico bono

Post by ANU » 17 Nov 2010

sach_khand wrote:So now, what is the explanation to Sevakram becoming child of Brahma and hence a Brahman. To prove the point that Prajapita too is a Brhaman, it was said in AK that when the Wife of Sevakram after hearing the narration by Dada Lekharaj about his experiences told the same to Sevakram (as Sevakram was not present when Dada Lekharaj was narrating his experience to his Sister). And Shiv had entered that woman while she was repeating the narration by Dada Lekharaj to Sevakram.
I think it is worth remembering that the explanation of these things also has changed in AIVV. In the early version of the Trimurti, there was only one mother and one Father (Jagadamba and Prajapita). There was no mentions of Dada's sister as another mother. In the early version of the Trimurti, Gita mata listened to Dada's words and transmitted them to Prajapita (Dada's partner). There were no mentions of entering simultaneously in both of them. Prajapita was said to be the first Brahmin - the child of Brahma (Mother Jagadamba) as he heard narration from her mouth. The other mother was presented as Radha Bacci who together with Dada was born at that time as Radha and Krishna.

Later on when students started asking questions why Dada/Krishna who was born as a child of Jagadamba in the shooting period will be born as a child of Lakshmi (choti Maa) in the Golden Age, the version of two mothers paticipating in the process of narration of Gyan was born. Then, Prajapita was presented as the one who had two wifes (Bari Maa and Choti Maa), as the one who lived in Calcutta brothel and was polygamous. And Baba explained that Dada entrusted his daughter Nirmalshanta to Prajapita and Choti Maa as they did not have children. Choti Maa (Dada's sister) was presented as his first wife and both were like Vishnu in their last birth. Bai Maa (Jagadamba) was supposed to be the second wife of Prajapita (Sevakram). All this was explained in classes dedicated to the Trimurti.

Meanwile, students asked also about why it was taught that Prajapita is the one in whom Shiva enters first while in fact the entrance in Brahma had to take place first. As teh respond to this question the idea of simultaneous entrance in two was introduced.

However, today some facts from history have been brought to light showing that Dada's sister was not the wife of Sevakram and Sevakram was not the adopted Father of Nirmalshanta Dadi.

Unfortunately, no evidence have been provided yet by AIVV students proving that Sevakram and Choti Maa at the beginning of the Yagya were all this what has been taught to students.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: pro publico bono

Post by Sach_Khand » 18 Nov 2010

ANU wrote:...
Meanwile, students asked also about why it was taught that Prajapita is the one in whom Shiva enters first while in fact the entrance in Brahma had to take place first. As teh respond to this question the idea of simultaneous entrance in two was introduced.

However, today some facts from history have been brought to light showing that Dada's Sister was not the wife of Sevakram and Sevakram was not the adopted Father of Nirmalshanta Dadi.

Unfortunately, no evidence have been provided yet by AIVV students proving that Sevakram and Choti Maa at the beginning of the Yagya were all this what has been taught to students.
I have come to know that a PBK (has left his body few years ago), whom I knew personally as he was from my place, was banned from PBK because he had started sharing his thoughts with other members regarding some points. And was made to give in writing that therafter he would first get all his churnings approved by Virendra Dev Dixit and then only would share them if and only if they were approved.
What is all this?

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

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

Re: pro publico bono

Post by pbkindiana » 29 Nov 2010

Anu wrote:
I think it is worth remembering that the explanation of these things also has changed in AIVV. In the early version of the Trimurti, there was only one mother and one Father (Jagadamba and Prajapita). There was no mentions of Dada's Sister as another mother. In the early version of the Trimurti, Gita mata listened to Dada's words and transmitted them to Prajapita (Dada's partner). There were no mentions of entering simultaneously in both of them. Prajapita was said to be the first Brahmin - the child of Brahma (Mother Jagadamba) as he heard narration from her mouth. The other mother was presented as Radha Bacci who together with Dada was born at that time as Radha and Krishna.
Dear Anu

Even in the earlier part of AK, it was mentioned that there were two mothers but only Jagadhamba Maa was given the importance as she was the one who had narrated Dada Lekraj's visions to Prajapita. The other mother did not utter a word as she listened quietly and she has that character of not saying anything which she couldn't understand.
Later on when students started asking questions why Dada/Krishna who was born as a child of Jagadamba in the shooting period will be born as a child of Lakshmi (choti Maa) in the Golden Age,
Only in the beginning DL was born as a child to Jagadamba as she had passed on the explanations of Prajapita to him. Jagadhamba herself is Brahma and when the word 'Brahma' has been uttered, then the senior mother should be in a female body. DL can only become a Brahma through Jagadamba and she couldn't make him into a Krishna. When Vaishnavi becomes the true Gita by merging her sanskars to Narayan, then she will sow the seed of knowledge in Brahma DL. DL will be born in the form of Krishna in the shooting period and he will become Vishnu in one second. He will take birth physically from the same ones who give birth to him in knowledge in the shooting period. Junior mother will give birth to him in the Golden Age.
Meanwile, students asked also about why it was taught that Prajapita is the one in whom Shiva enters first while in fact the entrance in Brahma had to take place first. As teh respond to this question the idea of simultaneous entrance in two was introduced.
Shiva entered Jagadamba first to do the foundation of bakti and then entered in Prajapita to do the foundation of Gyan. Shiva had to enter Brahma first for Prajapita to become the first brahmin, otherwise how can he become Prajapita without becoming a brahmin first.

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: pro publico bono

Post by ANU » 09 Dec 2010

Only in the beginning DL was born as a child to Jagadamba as she had passed on the explanations of Prajapita to him. Jagadhamba herself is Brahma and when the word 'Brahma' has been uttered, then the senior mother should be in a female body. DL can only become a Brahma through Jagadamba and she couldn't make him into a Krishna. When Vaishnavi becomes the true Gita by merging her sanskars to Narayan, then she will sow the seed of knowledge in Brahma DL. DL will be born in the form of Krishna in the shooting period and he will become Vishnu in one second. He will take birth physically from the same ones who give birth to him in knowledge in the shooting period. Junior mother will give birth to him in the Golden Age.

I am afraid this explanation is not along with the official AK teaching at this time. The AK says that Dada's elder sister who was the wife of Sevakram (the are no evidence for this; there are evidences against this at present) and she played the role of transmiting knowledge directly to Dada at the beginning. It is not about the future, but about the past, the beginning of the Yagya. This explanation was introduced in AIVV relatively recently, few years ago, when students started asking questions how it is possible that Dada hear explanations from Jagadamba and will be born from Lakshmi. The explanation of who was the direct narrator to Dada was changed - initially it was explained that it was Jagadamba, then it was changed and said that Lakshmi (Radha Bacci) transmitted knowledge to him.
Shiva entered Jagadamba first to do the foundation of bakti and then entered in Prajapita to do the foundation of Gyan. Shiva had to enter Brahma first for Prajapita to become the first Brahmin, otherwise how can he become Prajapita without becoming a Brahmin first.
Well, again ambiguites. In the Sakar Murli it was said that the first one in whom Shiva enters is Prajapita. So, if he enters first in Jagadamba, she becomes Prajapita. That is why some students asked, how it is possible. And then, the version about simultaneous entrance was introduced in AK.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: pro publico bono

Post by Sach_Khand » 11 Dec 2010

pbkindiana wrote: Shiva entered Jagadamba first to do the foundation of bakti and then entered in Prajapita to do the foundation of Gyan. Shiva had to enter Brahma first for Prajapita to become the first Brahmin, otherwise how can he become Prajapita without becoming a Brahmin first.
In CSM Discussion class Nr 975, timing approximately 52 min, the Teacher says that Shiva doesn’t enter other children apart from the mukarrar rath (appointed Chariot).
:confused: :shock:
Which is correct of the above two quotes?

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

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

Re: pro publico bono

Post by pbkindiana » 11 Dec 2010

Anu wrote:
Well, again ambiguites. In the Sakar Murli it was said that the first one in whom Shiva enters is Prajapita. So, if he enters first in Jagadamba, she becomes Prajapita. That is why some students asked, how it is possible. And then, the version about simultaneous entrance was introduced in AK
Dear Anu,

But then it is also said that "how can he become prajapita without becoming a brahmin first" --- Brahmins are born through Brahma, so definitely there should be a mother (Brahma) for Prajapita to become a brahmin. If you say that if Shiva entered first in Jagadhamba, then she should become Prajapita but how can a woman be declared as world Father. In hinduism it is said mata first and then only pita, so the shooting should take place in sangam yug as Shiva entered in a mother first . I don't believe in the term 'simultaneous entrance' as Shiva is only one soul and how is it possible for him to enter two bodies simultaneously. He can enter one by one only.

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: pro publico bono

Post by ANU » 11 Dec 2010

Dear Indiana

I do not know how Shiva be present simultaneously in two bodies. Thisis what Baba in AIVV teaches at this time as the respond to the question of some students that i have already mentioned.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests