The Benares Guru

To discuss the BK and PBK versions of the factual Yagya history from the beginning.
Post Reply
User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 10 Jan 2012

sita wrote:Post about the Benares guru is here post of dyavu of 8 jan .
Of course I read that post, but the details of it are either wrong or contradicting other reports of the same event. They also contradict the PBK version that Sevakram was the one who made the difference to Lekhraj Kirpalani. There was another longer Q&A with Virendra Dev Dixit, here; Q&A: PBK Murli discussions.

I don't think it refers to the same circumstances as the historic events. Again, I once spoke with elderly Sindis who were alive at that time and they mentioned the great changes that came over Lekhraj Kirpalani. They had no strong feelings against the BKs and were on good terms with them. Changes like that in a person do not happen just because you go to pay off someone's gambling debts ... unless perhaps Guru's can give Siddhi powers and he gave some kind of Siddhi power to Kripalani?

Why should we suspect Lekhraj Kirpalani did not go to Benares to learn hypnotism/spiritualism? He definitely became a medium or possessed later, according to the knowledge.

I think it was in Adi Dev that it said he went to pay a gambling debt. I cannot spare the time to check right now.
dyavu wrote:Great...Yes, Brahma Baba went to Banares and paid Rs.10000 to his guru. It was mentioned by Shewakram in one of his affidivate to court in 1939. Shewakaram knows Dl from more than 20 years. I saw both sides view, OM mandali's as well as Anti Om mandali's in this Rs.10000 matter. Anti Om Mandali claimed that DL paid Rs.10000 to his Guru to learn Black magic but really what happened was one day His guru called DL and said i need Rs.10000 because one of his follower was great loss in business he needed the money. DL immediately arranged RS.10000 and ready to go to Banares ( When his guru called DL was busy in his grandson's function in his House on that day.)his wife and others asked why are leaving the function? DL told " I need to meet my guru". Guru's call is death's call, i need to go."

I think immediately he went to Banares. I do not remember the exact date but it's around 1935-36.

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

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by sita » 10 Jan 2012

i don't remember where it was coming from, i believe from some Dadi, but it was said that Brahma Baba used to have a Guru from Calcutta whom everyone used to fear (as if they have known him) and there has been great change in Brahma baba after his going to Calcutta.

It is possible the Sindhi peole just know the gossip, you know normally this is what people arre exposed to and they often also develop it themselves. Benares like the center of the gurus, black magic etc. Sounds pretty much like gossip to me. Gossip is created where there is not accurate knowledge about the real fact and some own inagination is projected to it. It is the same about the commitee, if they have not followed Brahma baba by his feet and don't know exactly where has he gone and what has he done, one speculates, and of course if he is problem to sociely, easily all bad things will be attributed to him. Still i find Dadis, family members as credible source of information regarding the early days, althought they may also have their own projections and some information can also be hidden from them, but anyway it is more internal information.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 11 Jan 2012

Yes, I agree, we really don't know and the fantasists like Jagdish Chanders have made it 10 times worse for us to know the truth. I think too, many of the surviving Dadis were all young girls at the time or, llike Janki Kirpalani, not even there.

It was written by the Om Mandli in court papers (therefore, I am suggest it is accurate) that Lekhraj Kirpalani retired in 1932 and started his satsangs ... so this 'potential' event could have happened back then when the girls would have been even younger. It is a quite early retirement as he was only 54 in 1938, therefore 48 in 1932.

Yes, I have heard of the "scary guru" story and I also know that there are strange and gifted Saddhus, Siddhis and spiritualists in India who can do inexplicable things.

However, in Advance Knowledge, there seems to be a confusing of the two "gurus", this one and the claim that Shiva spoke through Lekhraj Kirpalani's partner to him and THAT was what made the changes.

I think the truth is less than clear.

Likewise, Jagdish Chander's claim that Lekhraj Kirpalani had 12 gurus ... I have to admit I will believe ZERO % of what Jagdish Chander writes unless I see evidence of it elsewhere. Chander was not there. He was a fantasist. I have no idea if he was being directed to do what he did, or just made it up himself.

The strange thing is, Lekhraj Kirpalani, Om Radhe and the Seniors all allowed him to do so ... to print outright lies. That to me paints their face clearly.

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

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by sita » 11 Jan 2012

No, some of the matters Jagsish has written has to be true. I would even say most of them. 12 gurus is even mentioned in the Murlis, i think.

I don't know if Adi Dev is published before of after BB death.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 12 Jan 2012

sita wrote:No, some of the matters Jagsish has written has to be true. I would even say most of them. 12 gurus is even mentioned in the Murlis, i think. I don't know if Adi Dev is published before of after BB death.
No, but there were earlier versions.

We know that Murlis have been re-written many times ... and contain many symbolic references according to the PBKs.

How do we know if 12 Gurus refers to Lekhraj Kirpalani or Sevakram?

I am sorry but for me it means nothing if it is in the Murlis unless there is other third party evidence, names etc. So much have been changed, added and removed.

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

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by sita » 12 Jan 2012

If you accept there is no Shiva entity, then the Murlis are only whatever Brahma baba has has spoken with direct reference about his personal life. There are many references about the personal life of brahma Baba in the Murlis, about his childhood etc. Yes, theyhave been editig, but due to this fact, if you trash all of them you lose some valuable information you may at least use like clue. Ofcourse this may be checked through cross reference.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 12 Jan 2012

Unfortunately, Sita, the Brahma Kumaris have been so stupid, dishonest and incompetent that it is almost impossible to *know* anything. It is like they took a food mixer to the rubbish in garbage can outside a restaurant ... and now we are left trying to work out what the people ate.

What does a statement like "had 12 gurus" mean? One doesn't own gurus like race horses.

The picture the BKs paint is of Lekhraj Kirpalani, like Christ, surrounded by 12 disciplines ... and "all of them were ignorant and could not understand his visions". So what does it actually mean? Lekhraj Kirpalani gave some donations to a temple or saddhu once, twice ... five times? That is no big thing in India. It is not special. It might be a big thing to little girls who have never lived outside but, in real terms, it means and proves nothing. And we do not know if it is true.

One cannot study under 12 different gurus at once, so was he just a rich business man throwing money at few holy men for good luck, suspicion or tradition?

Perhaps they were not ignorant. Perhaps the holy men, astronomers, saddhus just told him to calm down and that he was crazy to think he was Vishnu and Krishna, and he did not like what they said?

Yes, I know that rich landlords, Rajput etc have, essentially, paid for and controlled local priests and small temples etc but Lekhraj Kirpalani was not that wealthy and if he had ownership of 12 temples etc, there would be a record of it at local temples.

The problem is ... again ... the Brahma Kumaris' *insane* tendency towards exaggeration over their godman superstar Lekhraj Kirpalani makes it impossible for us to know. They are like drunks or drug addicts. And like any insane person, when one starts to look more closely at their insanity they become angry, defensive and shut down.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 12 Jan 2012

Think about it ... when did Lekhraj Kirpalani earn enough money to buy a big house and start throwing money at holy men? He started off poor and built himself up. He started his own satsang around 1932 aged 48 (54 in 1938). That does not leave a very big window for Lekhraj Kirpalani to have been "holy".

Unfortunately, Sita, the Brahma Kumaris have been so stupid, dishonest and incompetent that it is almost impossible to *know* anything. It is like they took a food mixer to the rubbish in garbage can outside a restaurant ... and now we are left trying to work out what the people ate.

What does a statement like "had 12 gurus" mean? One doesn't own gurus like race horses.

The picture the BKs paint is of Lekhraj Kirpalani, like Christ, surrounded by 12 disciplines ... Lekhraj Kirpalani is so great and "all of the gurus were ignorant and could not understand his visions". So what does it actually mean? Lekhraj Kirpalani gave some donations to a temple or saddhu once, twice ... five times? That is no big thing in India. It is not special. It might be a big thing to little girls who have never lived outside but, in real terms, it means and proves nothing. And we do not know if it is even true.

One cannot study under 12 different gurus or 12 different paths at once. Probably not in one life time. He just a rich business man throwing money at few holy men for good luck, suspicion or tradition.

Perhaps they were not ignorant. Perhaps the holy men, astronomers, saddhus just told him to calm down and that he was crazy to think he was Vishnu and Krishna, and he did not like what they said?

Yes, I know that rich landlords, Rajput etc have, essentially, paid for and controlled local priests and small temples etc but Lekhraj Kirpalani was not that wealthy and if he had ownership of 12 temples etc, there would be a record of it at local temples.

The problem is ... again ... the Brahma Kumaris' *insane* tendency towards exaggeration over their godman superstar Lekhraj Kirpalani makes it impossible for us to know. They are like drunks or drug addicts. And like any insane person, when one starts to look more closely at their insanity they become angry, defensive and shut down.

So we have to look for independent or third party evidence first.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 12 Jan 2012

Think about it ... when did Lekhraj Kirpalani earn enough money to buy a big house and start throwing money at holy men? He started off poor and built himself up. He started his own satsang around 1932 aged 48 (54 in 1938). That does not leave a very big window for Lekhraj Kirpalani to have been "holy".

What does a statement like "had 12 gurus" mean? One doesn't own gurus like race horses. All I know is that there was no talk of any Shiva being until sometime after 1950.

Unfortunately, Sita, the Brahma Kumaris have been so stupid, dishonest and incompetent that it is almost impossible to *know* anything. It is like they took a food mixer to the rubbish in garbage can outside a restaurant ... and now we are left trying to work out what the people ate.

The picture the BKs paint is of Lekhraj Kirpalani, like Christ, surrounded by 12 disciplines ... Lekhraj Kirpalani is so great and "all of the gurus were ignorant and could not understand his visions". So what does it actually mean? Lekhraj Kirpalani gave some donations to a temple or saddhu once, twice ... five times? That is no big thing in India. It is not special. It might be a big thing to little girls who have never lived outside but, in real terms, it means and proves nothing. And we do not know if it is even true.

One cannot study under 12 different gurus or 12 different paths at once. Probably not in one life time. He just a rich business man throwing money at few holy men for good luck, suspicion or tradition.

Perhaps they were not ignorant. Perhaps the holy men, astronomers, saddhus just told him to calm down and that he was crazy to think he was Vishnu and Krishna, and he did not like what they said?

Yes, I know that rich landlords, Rajput etc have, essentially, paid for and controlled local priests and small temples etc but Lekhraj Kirpalani was not that wealthy and if he had ownership of 12 temples etc, there would be a record of it at local temples.

The problem is ... again ... the Brahma Kumaris' *insane* tendency towards exaggeration over their godman superstar Lekhraj Kirpalani makes it impossible for us to know. They are like drunks or drug addicts. And like any insane person, when one starts to look more closely at their insanity they become angry, defensive and shut down.

So we have to look for independent or third party evidence first.

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

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by sita » 12 Jan 2012

Yes, I think 12 gurus have not been at once. One can possibly lead religious life since young.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 12 Jan 2012

Of course, I agree. We just don't know the truth as regards Lekhraj Kirpalani. Some say he was not religions and had not studied the vedas. He followers claim he was God and above them all.

I've been to more than 12 churches and heard more then 12 priests ... that does not make me Christ.

At present we have two or three views. Let's keep working towards finding out the truth. The most difficult impediment, I am afraid, will be the BKWSU.

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

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by sita » 12 Jan 2012

Where do you have the information he was not religious from, because it is said he was very religious, worshiping Narayan etc.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by fluffy bunny » 12 Jan 2012

sita wrote:Where do you have the information he was not religious from, because it is said he was very religious, worshiping Narayan etc.
From the same sources as I gave you before. It was only said he was "very religious, worshiping Narayan" by the same people who said Shiva popped into him and said "Shivohum, Shivohum" in 1936 when he was 60. People who were either not in the religion at the time (like Chander, Dad Janki etc) or young, uneducated girls (like the Dadis).

So what does "worshiping Narayan" mean? For example, he was a shopkeeper that bought a picture to put on his wall and offered incense to it?

We know he was not educated, we know he was from a jati which gave little value to education, we know he never attended any religious school to become qualified in religion, we know he had a very poor appreciation of the vedas, we know he was having an active sex life until quite late, and in the Murli it goes on about how he was.

The academics who researched the religion in the 70s when it was in its relatively pure state suggested that his religious influences came from his wife side as they run in parallel to many of the Vallabacharya beliefs.

In English, the word we use is "Hagiograph" or hagiographised. A hagiography is a story of a saint's life which is not real but which is made up to encourage people religiously. Lekhraj Kirpalani has been turned into a saint. It is not real.

One of the biggest problem BKs have is at accepting the scale of difference between the facts which are emerging now, and what the tell us about the mind set of the BKs, and the mental conditioning they have had. Because he have been denied the full truth, and lulled asleep into dreams, it is difficult to wake up and get up.

Like when one wakes from a very deep sleep and vidid dream and wants to go back to the much preferable dream.

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

Re: The Benares Guru

Post by sita » 13 Jan 2012

From the same sources as I gave you before.
You mean the sindhi neghbours?

In the Murlis also there are refrences about the religious practices of Brahma Baba. We also know about the story of Laksmi massaging the feet of Vishnu. Dadi Nirmal Shanta also says he would not allow them to eat without first going to the temple. If there are lies in the stories it does not mean all are lies.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests