Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

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

Re: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by pbkindiana » 13 Jan 2011

Anu wrote:
And finally, what are the criteria for creating these groups? Who are Islamis, who are Buddhists, who are Christians... and so on in the AK teaching? How did Baba create this groups? I do reasearch in these topics in AK and so far haven't come across any definition which I could rely on.
Baba has never created any groups; He is trying to unite the brahmins who are catergorized in different religions into one family, one religion with His complete stage. It is said in AK that the PBKs are categorized in different groups of religions and when the peels of their religions are removed, then they belong to the suryavanshi. The brahmins of the sangam yug consist of different types of religions and speaking of religions, it denotes the characteristic of the religions that are present in the brahmins' attitude. Baba always say that"do not see the body but see their sanskars and nature" and those thousand of PBKs who have the Indian skin tone are actually dividied into different religions based on the characteristics of different religions.

For an eg. a sister related to me an incident which had taken place right under her nose while visiting Baba. One of the surrendered sister was trying to dominate the other sisters in the Yagya and giving orders to them. Baba was noticing her for few days and then Baba told her strictly that "you behave like a Russian" --- so Baba is actually pointing out the characteristics of the islamis, buddhists, christians, etc., which are noticeable in their behaviour.

Also one must understand that this world is made up of different religions and the support of the outside world are the brahmins of sangam yug who belong to different religions. For the outside world of different religions to be united as one family, the 9 groups of brahmins in sangam yug have to be united as one universal gathering of brotherhood. It is only possible through the appointed Chariot of Shiva as He is the Father of humanity to unite his children irrespective of their groups.

Hence it is necessary for all these religions for degradation to commence fr. Copper Age onwards, otherwise why should Shiva come and establish the ancient deity religion. The brahmins who are deities, having deities' sanskars, get coloured by the religious fathers who come down fr. Copper Age onwards, remove the peels of their religions when they have recognized ShivBaba and start following Shrimat.

Arjun wrote:
If there are any PBK members of this forum from foreign countries, they can speak more authentically.
As for me, Baba has never shown any discrimination towards me and the PBKs who live in the foreign country where i live. So far Baba has never been bias to any of us. When i told Baba personally that i can speak few words of Hindi only and that too the simple words -- Baba replied "don't worry, you will learn Hindi soon." He never laugh or mock me. Baba treats his children equally whether they are fr India or fr foreign.

indie.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11543
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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by arjun » 13 Jan 2011

anu wrote:I don't take responsibiliy for the translation. In fact, when I compared the translation with the Hindi equivalents of these points, I had an impression that some points in English may be misleading.
From the Murli quotations produced by you only in English it appears as if it has been taken from the draft version of old True Gita-Vol-I published by AIVV in Hindi. The old Hindi version of the above Book had some errors and the English translation that you have produced was also a draft version. However it would be better if you produce the Hindi version of the translations so that we could compare both the versions to come to any conclusion. You keep advising others to refrain from making assumptions but you are doing the same thing by calling the above translations as misleading without producing the Hindi versions. Is it justified?
I wnet through these points several times and asked myself this question: "How may these points be the ground for calling Islamis - vyabhicari+loyal; Buddhists - cowardly pure and sanyasi; Christians - angry and making advertisement; Sanyasis - egoistic and pure; Muslims - greedy; Russians - atheistic and egoistic; Samajis - attached. These are labels that AIVV sticks to selected religions. I find these labels inadequate to the reality. Why should we define groups of people by labeling them like this? This leads to stereotypes and prejudice.

And finally, what are the criteria for creating these groups? Who are Islamis, who are Buddhists, who are Christians... and so on in the AK teaching? How did Baba create this groups? I do reasearch in these topics in AK and so far haven't come across any definition which I could rely on.
The Murli points that you have quoted describe the same characteristics of different religions which are described in AK. We should keep it in mind that the role through Brahma Baba was a mother's role, a lenient, affectionate role. So, the criticism of other vidharmi religions was limited and couched in soft language, but Shankar's role is a strict Father's role and hence the criticism may appear to be harsh, but the criticism is only to make us aware of the negativity that different religions (especially the leftist religions) have spread so that we could shed those peels of vices and become soul conscious. Although the Father criticizes other religions, but he does not have any hatred for any soul. He always says that we have to see every soul as future deity souls and not as belonging to any other religion.
pbkindiana wrote:As for me, Baba has never shown any discrimination towards me and the PBKs who live in the foreign country where i live. So far Baba has never been bias to any of us. When i told Baba personally that i can speak few words of Hindi only and that too the simple words -- Baba replied "don't worry, you will learn Hindi soon." He never laugh or mock me. Baba treats his children equally whether they are fr India or fr foreign.
Thanks for relating your own experiences.

User avatar
Roy
Posts: 1318
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Affinity to the BKWSU: questioning BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I have been associated with Raj Yoga since 1985, and have only quite recently come to learn of the PBKs and this forum, which i find a great place to get deeper insights into all things Gyani, and hear input from many sides. I find this most healthy, stimulating, and informative, and hope this continues for some time to come.
Location: UK

Re: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by Roy » 13 Jan 2011

This continues to be a most enlightening topic... thank you for your contributions my brothers!

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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by ANU » 13 Jan 2011

You keep advising others to refrain from making assumptions but you are doing the same thing by calling the above translations as misleading without producing the Hindi versions. Is it justified?
Arjun, I don't have all those points in Hindi in electroninc version. I will write them in the near future and post those points which I felt might be misleading. I wrote: "...I had an impression that some points in English may be misleading. " thinking that it rather refers to me and my personal experience. If you find it not accurate, I am sorry for having written somethinmg inaccurately.
The Murli points that you have quoted describe the same characteristics of different religions which are described in AK. We should keep it in mind that the role through Brahma Baba was a mother's role, a lenient, affectionate role. So, the criticism of other vidharmi religions was limited and couched in soft language, but Shankar's role is a strict Father's role and hence the criticism may appear to be harsh, but the criticism is only to make us aware of the negativity that different religions (especially the leftist religions) have spread so that we could shed those peels of vices and become soul conscious.
I can only say from my experience as a therapist that constant criticism exerts bad influence to the same extent as constant praise or leniency. I noticed that Baba permanently criticises souls of videshi dharms for vyabhicar, anger and other vices and doesn't say anything like this about swadeshi. He often uses comparisons with the outside world while talking about Islam, Buddhism, Christians an dothers. Based on his teachings I gathered his points and create two images: a negative image of vidhesh and a rather positive image of svadesh dharm as if those vices were not present in svadeshi dharms at all. I compared them with the outside world as Baba himself refers to examples in the outside world. ANd I found out that the countries which Baba calls Buddhists, like China, Japan, Cambodia, Korea - displayed in their history more or less the same ammount of vyabhicar, promisquity, anger and expansive and bloody wars as for instant some countries described by Baba as Christian or Islam. And on the other hand, I find among countries which Baba calls Islamic or Christians examples of very peaceful communities. So, finally, I started to wander, who Baba defines as Islami, Buddhi, Christian, Muslim and so on. I mean on what ground does he create groups of souls which he calls with these labels. I haven't found any answer so far.
indiana wrote:As for me, Baba has never shown any discrimination towards me and the PBKs who live in the foreign country where i live. So far Baba has never been bias to any of us. When i told Baba personally that i can speak few words of Hindi only and that too the simple words -- Baba replied "don't worry, you will learn Hindi soon." He never laugh or mock me. Baba treats his children equally whether they are fr India or fr foreign.
I watched discussions with videshis in which Baba appeared as very warm and welcoming. However, I also watched classes and discussions with Indians in which Baba laughed at videshis for not being able to speak Hindi; he was even mocking them by imitating a child who cannot speak and he asked questions "How can those people become adult children? They will always remaing immature." I can quote some more examples. For instance: In discussion in Delhi, in the first half of the last year, he called videshis "animals who have to die", in class 438 he calls videshi servants, thefts and low category souls.

So who are those souls which he calls like this?

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

Re: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by pbkindiana » 14 Jan 2011

Anu wrote:
I watched discussions with videshis in which Baba appeared as very warm and welcoming. However, I also watched classes and discussions with Indians in which Baba laughed at videshis for not being able to speak Hindi; he was even mocking them by imitating a child who cannot speak and he asked questions "How can those people become adult children? They will always remaing immature." I can quote some more examples. For instance: In discussion in Delhi, in the first half of the last year, he called videshis "animals who have to die", in class 438 he calls videshi servants, thefts and low category souls.

So who are those souls which he calls like this?
Are you an Indian in the first place? Just because you are in an Indian body, that doesn't categorise you to be an Indian. In AK it is said that PBKs consist of 9 different types of religions. The nine types of religions are formed irrespective of their skin tone. PBKs take birth in different religions from Copper Age onwards. So when it is said that Father has come in the form of a vidhesi, it denotes that He has come for the PBKs who are coated with the peels of different religions ie. characteristics of different religions. As from Copper Age onwards the PBKs will get coloured with the religious Father when they take birth in that particular religion. For eg. when i take birth in the Islamic religion, then i will definitely follow the rules of Islam to which i get coloured and carry those rules in my sanskars. Along the road of taking birth in different religions, i carry those sanskars of the other religions and the sanskars of the ancient deity religion becomes scarce. So the PBKs become vidhesis according to the sanskars of getting coloured when they take birth in different religions. So in fact, the PBKs and BKs are referred as vidhesis. The PBKs are in the seed form of different religions and the BKs are in the base form. Just like Baba say -- the seed form of Maya and the base form of Maya.

When Baba speaks of the indians, then Baba is referring to the vijaymala souls who will never take birth in other religions. They will always take birth in hinduism.

Few years ago, when i was in a group of foreigners, one australian brother asked Baba that how soon can he become an Indian. Baba replied that "follow Shrimat and you will become Indian." I still remember when i read AK (the year 1999), it says that the 450,000 souls are the orignal Indian souls but it did not say that the 450,000 souls are in the Indian bodies. Baba always say do not see the body but see their nature and sanskars. So when Baba speaks of the vidhesis,then He actually is speaking about the vidhesis which consist of the sangam yugi brahmins and most of the sangam yugi brahmins are having the Indian skin tone.

Do not see the body but see their nature and sanskars of which religion's characteristics they carry. I remember when i visited Baba a few years ago, one brother from India who can speak English, told me that a few brothers were complaining about another brother (also an Indian staying in India) to Baba. Baba replied that brother is behaving in that manner because he is having the peels of Christianity.

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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by ANU » 14 Jan 2011

indiana wrote:Are you an Indian in the first place? Just because you are in an Indian body, that doesn't categorise you to be an Indian.
Yes, exactly. I mean it. The origin of the body doesn't mean that the soul belongs to that body. Baba repeats this again and again. That is why I raise the question: On the basis of what were those groups created in AK theory and on the basis of what were they labeled Deity, Islami, Buddhi, Christian, Sannyasi and so on. On the basis of what were definitions created "tolerant, angry, cowardly pure, lusty...." and so on.

For eg. when i take birth in the Islamic religion, then i will definitely follow the rules of Islam to which i get coloured and carry those rules in my sanskars. Along the road of taking birth in different religions, i carry those sanskars of the other religions and the sanskars of the ancient deity religion becomes scarce.
Who created those sanskars in you? We were taught that sanskars are imperishable, so you must have them in you, according to what you said about following Islam. Who create the group of people belonging to Islamic religion, in this case? You and others. So, you are part of it, aren't you? (I am only giving an example based on your way of exlanation). Baba defined Islamis as lusty. On the basis of what? Who become the model for the observation and stating "Islamis are lusty" as it has taken place in AK? This is what I am searching for, do you understand?

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11543
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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by arjun » 14 Jan 2011

Om Shanti. Anu has been repeatedly raising the issues of AK vis-a-vis foreigners and his/her research related to Yagya history. When I wrote to Baba conveying anu's concerns on the two issues, I got the following response from Baba:

1. Anu's concerns that foreigners cannot be part of the rosary of 108:
Baba's reply: "Agar videshi 108 ki mala mein nahi aayengey toh fir vo mala poori hi nahi hogi."
"If foreigners are not included in the rosary of 108, then that rosary will not be complete at all."


2. Anu's concerns that her research on early Yagya history was ignored by Baba:
Baba's reply: "ABC ne Yagya ke aadi ki kahani se sambandhit kayi research nikaaley aur Baba ke paas verification ke liye bhej diya. Jinko Baba ne jitna ho sakey utna uttar de diya tha. Baaki kuch aisey bhi prashna thay jinka uttar nahi dey sakey kyonki Baba boley Yagya ki asli history toh kisi ko pata nahi hai aagey chalkar jab clear ho jayega to fir tabhi hi un savaalon ka jawaab diya ja sakta hai."

"ABC did research related to the story of the beginning of the Yagya and sent it to Baba for verification which were answered by Baba as far as possible. But there were some such questions also which could not be answered because Baba said that nobody knows the true history of the Yagya. Everything will become clear in future. Only then can those questions be answered."

The answers were given by Baba in Hindi whereas the English translation has been done by me. I have reproduced anu's name in the answer as ABC because Baba had written his/her original name which I do not wish to reveal on this forum.

OGS,
Arjun

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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by ANU » 14 Jan 2011

arjun wrote:Anu has been repeatedly raising the issues of AK vis-a-vis foreigners and his/her research related to Yagya history.
Yes, and I will keep raising it, becasue I think that if someone doesn't know the histroy of the Yagya himself should not teach the others about it and should not give them details of that history without any evidence. The only evidence we have now is: Baba himself doesn't know the history of the Yagya and says this openly (as Arjun wrote Baba's answer: But there were some such questions also which could not be answered because Baba said that nobody knows the true history of the Yagya. Everything will become clear in future. Only then can those questions be answered). So the question is: if he doesn't know the history of the Yagya, how does he teach it? On the base of what did he manage to give so many details about Sewakram? This sounds to me extraordinary.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11543
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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by arjun » 15 Jan 2011

anu wrote:So the question is: if he doesn't know the history of the Yagya, how does he teach it? On the base of what did he manage to give so many details about Sewakram? This sounds to me extraordinary.
On the basis of the Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis and BK literature. He takes responsibility for only that portion of Yagya history that is mentioned in bits in these documents. For the rest, he has accepted several times that there are no proofs or that research has to be done.

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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by ANU » 16 Jan 2011

arjun wrote:On the basis of the Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis and BK literature. He takes responsibility for only that portion of Yagya history that is mentioned in bits in these documents. For the rest, he has accepted several times that there are no proofs or that research has to be done.
So, let's go to examples and let's analyse a real example. The example of the history of the Yagya connected with the Trimurti seems to be the most important. I keep your point quated above as the ground and I ask the question: How does the teacher who doesn't know the history teach history (I keep in mind your point quated in your previous post in which Baba admits that hi himself doesn't know the history of the Yagya) [" But there were some such questions also which could not be answered because Baba said that nobody knows the true history of the Yagya. Everything will become clear in future. Only then can those questions be answered.}


Baba had given many lectures on the Trimurti and connected the Trimurti class very closely with the history of the Yagya. We can learn from those classes details about who, when, in what way met and spoke to the others, what their mutual relationships were like, what their motives and intentions were, what their diet was like, what skills they had. We learnt that the role of Prajapita was played by Sevakram, who had two wives. His first wife was Dada Lekhraj's elder sister. Sewakram and his wife created the form of Vishnu at that time. And Sewakram was Dada's business partner. Sewakram married also another woman who became his second wife. Sewakram and his first wife (Dada's elder sister) adopted Nirmalshanta Dadi (Dada's daughter) and reared her. We learnt that Dada came to his elder sister in Calcutta and revealed details of her visions to her; than she spoke to the second wife of her husband. We learn that the first wife of Sewakram was an ideal wife, she never hated anyone, she had pure heart and she loved the second wife of her husband. Then we learnt that the second wife spoke to Sewakram, Shiva entered her and him simultaneously (despite the fact that we also learnt that Shiva cannot be present in two bodies at the same time); Sewakram spoke to her, she spoke to ... and here we have two versions: in one version she spoke to the first wife again and the first wife spoke to Dada and in the second version she spoke to Dada directly and the firs wife helped Dada to believe in himself. Then, all of them moved to Sindh and Sevakram along with his two wives was in the Yagya as the head; then he became the head of Anti Party.

This is the story which I learnt from Baba's classes. I can post points and excerpts from his classes as evidence of each statement written above. If someone learnt a different story, please post it.


Now, let's go to so called proofs from SM, AV and BK's literature.
On the basis of SM we can state that someone (few people) who were more influencial than Dada participated in the Yagya at the beginning. Those people somehow helped Dada to understand the mistery of his experience and guided him at the beginning. We have few SM points to support this theory or in the other way round Baba built this theory on few points from SM. if necessary I will post all of them here. I find those points very general; they don't provide much substantial information (e.g. there were such children at the beginning who used to give directions to Mama and Baba). We cannot learn who they were, what their names were, what their relationships were with Mama and Baba. The theory that there was a male and a female finds a support in one point (he was with us for 10 years and she used to go in trance). We have no guarantee that the sentence was not a stylish blunder. How can we rely on the assumption that this point is true? I'll refer to our discussion on Main bhI śAstr nahIn padhA hum, tumko bhI nahIn padhAte hain. (Mu 19.02.2000) - we had different views on possible translation of this point. Arjuna wrote that this is a stylish mistake, in fact we should translate it in a different way from what it states. I ask the question: why in some cases we should skip mistakes (like style, forms and so on) and take for sure that sentences mean what we think, in other places we meticulously analyse each grammar form and point at BK saying that they lie (like in the case of using 'this one', ' that one', ' these ones', those ones' in clarifications of SM) and in other cases we don't even raise a thought that the sentence on which we build a theory may contain a mistake?

From the AV we know that East Bengal played some important role. The point is: Sakar tAn ko dhUndhA bhI yahAn se ho hai. (My translation: He has found the corporeal body from here [he spoke about Bengal) ) This point may mean a lot and we don't have any confirming evidence that this point refers to Sewakram.

Now, let's go to BK literature. BK literature shows Sewakram in a positive light as a business partner of Dada Lekhraj. I saw they mentioned the name Sewakram in 2 or 3 places. I know the comic book and I know a book written by Nirmalshanta herself. Both mentioned the name Sewakram. While the comic book shows Sewakram as a rather unskilled man who reveals that without Dada he cannot do anything in business and Nirmalshanta wrote about Sevakram as the most truthful and honest confident of Dada. The literature published by Om Radhe (available in BK forum) mentions Dada's elder sister by name (Haki Hathiramani) and age; doesn't mention Sewakram as her husband. Om Radhe mentioned the name Sewakram in three places: twice she mentioned Narayan Shewakram who was a secretary of Anti Om Mandali and once she mention Shewakram who was Dada's sleeping partner who owed Dada money. Now, going back to Nirmalshanta, she herself presents her parents in her book. She wrote that Dada and Yashoda were her parents and Haki Hathiramani (Dada's elder sister )along with her husband Kismatram Hathiramani as her adopted parents who actually brought her up. She did not 't mention Sewakram as Dada's sister husband and her adopted Father. She mentioned Sewakram as someone else, seperated from her, as Dada's partner living in Calcutta in the same building as Dada and his family.

So, now when we compare the history of the Yagya narrated in the Trimurti class with what we know from SM, AV and BK literature we cannot deny the fact that Baba's story contains many information which remain not confirmed by anything (like guessing or speculations) and it also contains information which remain in total contradiction to those sources Arjun mentioned as the basis of Baba's clarification.

Moreover, when Baba was informed about all this and kindly asked for explanation of his theory and those sharp contradictions which put his dogma in new light, he said "nobody knows the history of the Yagya; everything will become clear in future; only then can those questions be answered".
I conclude based on his answer that nobody means Baba too doesn't know.

What a student like me will think about the teacher who cannot answer simple questions concerning the validity of the theory he teaches and cannot put forward any evidence proving on what he based his story of Sewakram married to Haki and to another woman, about Sewakram being Dada's behenoi, about Sewakram and Haki as Vishnu, about Sewakram and Haki rearing Nirmalshanta, about Dada treating Sewakram as a servant and someone lower than him, about all those motives of four people who were involved in a strange talking to each other to eaxplain Dada's visions and others. All these things taught in Baba's classes as the final truth of the Trimurti remain only hypothesis. And nothing wrong in this until the teacher communicates them as hypothesis. Here, in AK, the teacher has beeing narrating these facts without any confirmation or the facts contrary to what sources show, as the final truth. And the teacher spent hours on teaching and debating on how Sewakram and Dada's elder sister were a married couple, were a form of Vishnu despite of Sewakram's second wife, were rearing Nirmalshanta, and along that second wife were teachers at the beginning. He spent hours on teaching and debating how Dada humiliated poor behenoi Sewakram, he spent hours on describing in details internal motivations of all those four heros.

Let me ask the question: What are the proofs of all these stories the teacher taught? And another questions: How will the teacher explain those contradictions?

After years of teaching and debating on above mentioned topics of the Trimurti and the Yagya story, after giving so many clarifications, the teacher cannot support his teaching with facts and evidences; he relies on the time which should bring the answers and he relies on BKs who are supposed to reveal hidden facts in the future. After over 30 years of teaching, the history has become darker and the teacher hasn't managed to gather evidences. I think that nothing wrong in this;things like this happen. Only one think distrubs me: AIVV calls AK the Truth of the Trimurti Shiva; it doesn't provide the clarification of the Truth (the definition of the Truth) and it calls hypothesis, guessing and explanation based on imagination 'the teaching of God" and spreads it in the world. I would have been fully satisfied if I would have received the message about AK "this is what may be true, we don't know yet, now we can rely only on hypothesis and guessing". BUT I received the message "this is the final truth and none of the sentences spoken here - God's speaking here; everything comes from God's mouth - can be false." How cannot it be false? It already appears to be at least inconsistent in various aspects! Moreove, some AK students themselves admit that many parts of AIVV teaching come not from God but from Krishna.


Let's go to another example. I posted many points from SM which provide some information about the Kalpa Tree and various religions. I compared those points with Baba's clarification of the Kapla Tree and still cannot understand on what basis he stated:
1. Deities are tolerant
2. Kshatriyas are facing /challenging
3. Islamis are adulterous (vyabhicari) and loyal
4. Buddhists are cowarly pure and non violent in a limited sense
5. Christians are angry and full of pomp
6. Sanyasis are cowarly pure and arrogant
7. Muslims are greedy, lusty
8. Sikhs are truthful, innocent, hard working, respecting household and deities
9. Arya Samaji are attached, create jakal like souls, gather rubbish
10. Aheists are arrogant, non-cooperative, they are bysy in meterialistic analysis

I mean, these statements which I learnt from Baba as the key descriptions of souls belonging to certain religions, by no means can be deducted from those points in SM (at least from the Hindi version). These statements above (I was taught them as I quoted them) present the inherent nature of souls and reveal their character.

I raise questions: On the basis of what did Baba create each of these description? Who became on object of observation? Where are those who displayed these behavior as their inherent nature, so that they could be observe to check how these descriptions work in practice. I understand that some people have revealed alredy their inherent nature as such quoted above and on the basis of this Baba created descriptions.

I raise these questions especially because Baba emphasis the issue of proofs in his teachings. When I sent him a request to clarify this topic a bit, I did not receive any answer. So, again I wonder why?

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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by Sach_Khand » 17 Jan 2011

ANU wrote: I raise these questions especially because Baba emphasis the issue of proofs in his teachings. When I sent him a request to clarify this topic a bit, I did not receive any answer. So, again I wonder why?
Dear ANU, I feel sorry for you and was really tired to read your above extra long post. My freindly advice, better stop giving much importance to all this and give more attention to know your own self. Why get distrubed with something which you feel as rubbish? We need to go step by step to reach our goal. And each step depends on where we now, at present, have our feet. So, what I think is that we better go based on our present experiences only. Let it in the end be proved any xyz to be ShivBaba. It does not matter, neither for us personally nor for ShivBaba. Still each is ShivBaba's child. And He loves us. Each of us have to reach the state of soul consciousness where we can experience the knowledge and then understand.

Please, please, please,.. I once again request you not to waste your time and energy in these debates too much to the point where you feel disturbed, nervous and drained out. You are what you are. No one needs to be certified from others. So, just leave and be silent when you feel that it is waste writing or debating. And this is my earnest request.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11543
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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by arjun » 17 Jan 2011

anu wrote:We learnt that the role of Prajapita was played by Sevakram, who had two wives.
I have heard Baba speak about Brahma Baba's partner (bhagidar) and not Sevakram. And He speaks about two mothers being present with the partner and not 'two wives of Sevakram'.
Now, let's go to so called proofs from SM, AV and BK's literature.
You know the proofs from SM, AV and BK literature better than me. It is upto you to accept or reject them.
BUT I received the message "this is the final truth....
It is the mistake of the person who gave you the message. He should have made everything clear during or before the Advance Course that the Yagya history as told in the AK is based only on SM, AV and BK literature.
Let's go to another example. I posted many points from SM which provide some information about the Kalpa Tree and various religions. I compared those points with Baba's clarification of the Kapla Tree and still cannot understand on what basis he stated:
You have already provided Murli proofs for the description of various religions. However, it will take time for me to arrange all the relevant points. If needed I may have to send an email to Baba. So please wait.

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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by ANU » 17 Jan 2011

sach_khand wrote:Dear ANU, I feel sorry for you and was really tired to read your above extra long post. ... You are what you are. No one needs to be certified from others. So, just leave and be silent when you feel that it is waste writing or debating. And this is my earnest request.
Dear sach khand, thank you for advice. I made an extra effort to put some topics together, as a respond to Arjun's post. I had an impression that our conversation with Arjun goes to nowhere, becasue we select only some aspects of the issue and miss the whole picture.

I speak for myself only and personnaly for me the whole story does matter, because from the perspective of the entire description of the Yagya story and the Trimurti clarification in AIVV as I posted it above, I think that I was fed with false information in AIVV. My time, my power of mind and intellect and energy were stolen and those who distributed false information do not take responsibility for their words and acts. Moreover, despite hundreds hours of classes in which the teacher creates the above mentioned story of the Yagya and Trimurti, some students (like Arjun) say that they do not know anything about Baba's teaching that Sevakram had two wifes and that the name Sevakram was used at all.

All right, let it be. Debating leads to nowhere.
arjun wrote:I have heard Baba speak about Brahma Baba's partner (bhagidar) and not Sevakram. And He speaks about two mothers being present with the partner and not 'two wives of Sevakram'.
Dear Arjun, I recommend you to go again trhough the classes and discussions dedicated to the Trimurti and you will get all these points in a nice and clear way, right from the first hand. I propose you could start from VCD 975. You can find in this class the essence of what I wrote above.
You know the proofs from SM, AV and BK literature better than me. It is upto you to accept or reject them.
Arjun, I don't understand what you mean. Reject what and why? I presented the entire view based on all three sources which you mentioned as the basis of clarification. And all available sources I proved that Baba's teaching contains lots of contradictions, inconsistencies and ambiguities. I think that it is not a question of rejecting or accepting something, but to look at facts and come to conclusions. What causes problems, from my view, is the attitude of Baba, who doesn't discuss these things in an open and honest way, avoids the issue and repeatedly says about it something irrelevant, in my opinion.
It is the mistake of the person who gave you the message. He should have made everything clear during or before the Advance Course that the Yagya history as told in the AK is based only on SM, AV and BK literature.
Those people made no mistakes. They simply repeated Baba's words. I fully accept that SM, AV and BK literature are the basis of AK explanation on the Trimurti and Yagya story. And this is exactly what I am pointing at - all these three sources put together don't confirm what Baba teaches about the Yagya story, Sewakram, Prajapita, his wives, Dada's sister and few other topics. Still, it is OK and nothing to worry about, if the teacher provides evidence that his theory is right. But here, the teacher avoids the topic and states "nobody knows the history of the Yagya", "the future will bring the answer. So, it becomes clear that he himself neither has any evidence to clarify those doubts, nor doeas he know himself. On what bases does he create those tailes?

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11543
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: Reflections on Sakar Murlis and Avyakt Vanis

Post by arjun » 11 Feb 2011

You have already provided Murli proofs for the description of various religions. However, it will take time for me to arrange all the relevant points. If needed I may have to send an email to Baba. So please wait.
Anu,
Om Shanti. I wish to inform that I am in the process of collecting the relevant Murli points related to the salient features of different religions as described in AK. It took me time to collect Murli points from the resources already available with me. After that I have written to Baba/Head Office to provide the relevant Murli points wherever I could not find. For example, there are no Murli points on deity and Kshatriya religion in the book True Gita-Vol-I. But they are definitely available in various Sakar Murlis / AVs. I have also asked one of the senior PBK sisters to help me in this regard. So, it may take some more time to compile all the points and present on the forum.
Thanks for your cooperation and patience.
OGS,
Arjun

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mbbhat and 9 guests