Some evident errors

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.
Post Reply
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: Some errors:-

Post by arjun » 24 Jul 2015

karan alias mbbhat wrote:On what basis, did he discover his DOB suddenly, only now? What happened to the Day of birth, is it still a mystery? What is the proof of this declaration? Just hearsay, and BLIND BELIEF?
Does he still believe, and do all PBKs still believe, that he was Shevak Ram, the material diamond business partner of Dada Lekh Raj, in his previous birth, or has he turned turtle regarding this as well?
Unofficial dates of birth are not declared officially in India. It is known only to the person and the immediate family. For the world, it is the official date of birth as recorded in the official documents that is considered as the actual DOB. There are millions of people in India with such dual dates of birth. Nobody asks them for a proof.

He never declared that he is Sevakram. It is the PBKs who believe that he was Dada Lekhraj's business partner in the previous birth based on the Murli proofs.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 24 Jul 2015

arjun wrote:Unofficial dates of birth are not declared officially in India. It is known only to the person and the immediate family. For the world, it is the official date of birth as recorded in the official documents that is considered as the actual DOB. There are millions of people in India with such dual dates of birth. Nobody asks them for a proof.
Why did PBKs make a big issue about the official DOB of DL? Are they not aware of the above situation in India? Did their bodily guru Virendra Dev Dixit not even bother to make them aware of same at all???
What was the reason for same?
And why did they choose to BLINDLY BELIEVE the official DOB of DL, EVIDENTLY under the express influence of their bodily guru Virendra Dev Dixit, when ShivBaba or God Himself has CLEARLY mentioned in several Murlis that DL was 60 years old or in his retired stage ('vanprasth avastha') when He entered him, and FURTHERMORE the whole concept of the prediction of destruction being in 1976 was TOTALLY based on DL completing 100 years in 1976, used intentionally by ShivBaba or God Himself for a SPECIFIC PURPOSE, as per DEFINITE PLAN within DRAMA? Whereas, Virendra Dev Dixit and his followers LATCHED ON to the year 1976 with FULL VIGOUR and STRENGTH to propagate their MISLEADING PHILOSOPHY, they TOTALLY DISREGARDED that the year 1976 was SPECIFICALLY CHOSEN by God for a DEFINITE PURPOSE, utilising the fact that DL or Prajapita Brahma was completing 100 years of being in a corporeal body, in 1976?

OK. Now, how come Virendra Dev Dixit discovered his DOB suddenly? Which family member told him about this? To what extent can this be considered to be accurate and reliable? ONLY BLIND FAITH?

Error No. 17)Speaking lies directly:-
He never declared that he is Sevakram. It is the PBKs who believe that he was Dada Lekhraj's business partner in the previous birth based on the Murli proofs.
So, you are now officially declaring that Mr Virendra Dev Dixit never mentioned or said or declared that Sevakram left his corporeal body in 1942, and he now does not believe that he was Sevakram or the concerned material diamond business partner of DL, and only PBKs believe so? So, you are now officially declaring that PBKs depend only on INDIRECT proofs from Murlis spoken by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba or DL, totally keeping their bodily guru in the dark about such beliefs, and not on the DIRECT UTTERANCES of Mr Virendra Dev Dixit, whom they believe to be the DIRECT versions of ShivBaba? So, since when did PBKs become SMARTER or MORE CLEVER than their bodily guru Virendra Dev Dixit or ShivBaba??? And what about your so-called TREACHEROUSLY DECEPTIVE 7-Day course where the name of Sevakram is specifically highlighted, to make COMPLETE FOOLS and THOROUGH IDIOTS of the new incumbents and aspirants, when/if same was not OFFICIALLY AUTHENTICATED by your bodily guru Virendra Dev Dixit?
And what is the purpose behind all this EVIDENT DECEPTION?

View here - viewtopic.php?f=38&t=2521&p=44514#p44514
and here - viewtopic.php?f=38&t=2521&p=44526#p44526

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: Some errors:-

Post by arjun » 25 Jul 2015

mbbhat wrote:Why did PBKs make a big issue about the official DOB of DL? Are they not aware of the above situation in India? Did their bodily guru Veerendra Dev Dixit not even bother to make them aware of same at all???
In case of Dada Lekhraj the difference is of many years and those different dates of birth were not cooked up by us, but were produced by the BKWSU itself in various official documents. So, you cannot compare both the situations at all.
OK. Now, how come Veerendra Dev Dixit discovered his DOB suddenly? Which family member told him about this? To what extent can this be considered to be accurate and reliable? ONLY BLIND FAITH???
It is upto you to believe or leave. You are as usual at your best in arguing on each and every word. But I don't have time for such arguements.
So, you are now officially declaring that Mr Veerendra Dev Dixit never mentioned or said or declared that Sevakram left his corporeal body in 1942, and he now does not believe that he was Sevakram or the concerned material diamond business partner of DL, and only PBKs believe so? So, you are now officially declaring that PBKs depend only on INDIRECT proofs from Murlis spoken by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba or DL, totally keeping their bodily guru in the dark about such beliefs, and not on the DIRECT UTTERANCES of Mr Veerendra Dev Dixit, whom they believe to be the DIRECT versions of ShivBaba? So, since when did PBKs become SMARTER or MORE CLEVER than their bodily guru Veerendra Dev Dixit or ShivBaba??? And what about your so-called TREACHEROUSLY DECEPTIVE 7-Day course where the name of Sevakram is specifically highlighted, to make COMPLETE FOOLS and THOROUGH IDIOTS of the new incumbents and aspirants, when same was not OFFICIALLY AUTHENTICATED by your bodily guru Veerendra Dev Dixit?
The reply is same as above. You may believe or leave. All these issues have already been discussed several times.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 25 Jul 2015

arjun wrote:In case of Dada Lekhraj the difference is of many years and those different dates of birth were not cooked up by us, but were produced by the BKWSU itself in various official documents. So, you cannot compare both the situations at all.
Are words ('parmat') of BKWSU more important to PBKs, or should they be guided by actual Murli points or 'Shrimat' of ShivBaba?
I believe Murli points or 'Shrimat' of ShivBaba clearly certify that age of B Baba was 60 yrs by 1936/37*.
- See post No. 84- http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... aa.#p11850

Committing errors regarding Sevakram or Mr Dixit are one and the same. Regarding Sevakram, I believe PBKs have committed much more errors, than BKWSU about B baba.

* - So, what should be duty of the so called 'Gyani-tu-atmas' or knowledge-full souls? Is it just to criticize BKWSU, based on 'parmat', or their own 'manmat', or find actual truth from the Murli points ('Shrimat')?

[Mostly it is PBKs who raised the question of DOB of B baba, just by taking isolated Murli points, due to which only, some innocent members of BKWSU had committed errors regarding DOB of B Baba, without understanding how to address the issue appropriately at that specific point of time. But now they are also beginning to understand and appreciate the situation better].
It is upto you to believe or leave. You are as usual at your best in arguing on each and every word. But I don't have time for such arguments.
Is this not an important issue? So, should it be believed just by blind faith?
Does this not CLEARLY prove that Virendra Dev Dixit and his followers are carrying out the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya???

So, PBKs have PLENTY of TIME to devote, to devise innumerable ways, how to throw stones at BKWSU, by COMPLETELY TWISTING and MISINTERPRETING the Murli points in SMs and AVs, and rendering them TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT from the original intention of ShivBaba.
But when they are CONFRONTED with the ACTUAL CLARIFICATIONS of those very same Murli points, represented in the RIGHT CONTEXT, they just FURTIVELY SLINK AWAY, saying -
"It is up to you to believe or leave, we don't have time for arguments", is it not?

Those who are not at all interested in the ACTUAL TRUTH, and would like to CONTINUE to BLINDLY FOLLOW the CORRUPTED MISINTERPRETATIONS of their bodily guru Virendra Dev Dixit, are ALWAYS FREE TO DO SO, in accordance with their designated roles in the Drama, since NOTHING can be done in the matter, and they have to wait for their self-imposed DESTRUCTION at the very end of the Confluence Age, as per Drama Plan, and there is NO OBJECTION AT ALL, regarding what such children would desire or wish to do!!!

But, at the same time, as per Drama Plan also, there is a duty to perform, to caution all others, who may have got inadvertently TRAPPED in the BOG of Ravan or Maya, and who may still like to get out of same in time, BEFORE THEY GET DESTROYED - or who may get trapped in future, if they are not ADEQUATELY WARNED in time!!!

warrior
working towards unification
Posts: 284
Joined: 15 May 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: Media
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: There is no Religion Higher than -- Truth.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by warrior » 25 Jul 2015

arjun wrote: The correct month and year of birth of Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit as per reply given by Baba is June, 1942.
Thanks for answer,
What day of month of June? Please give complete date of birth, if possible.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 26 Jul 2015

Error No. 18) Number One Human soul is Golden Aged prince Krishna, not the so-called Conf. Aged Narayan:-


1)SM 24-6-76(2):- Jo bhee aate hain unhen sato, rajo, tamo may pass karnaa hee hai. Krishn bhee poorey 84 janm lete hain. Janm liyaa aur poorey 5000 varsh kaa part bajaayaa. Poorey 84 janm lenge. Ek bhee kam naheen. Poorey aacurate unko part bajaanaa hai. Jab atma pet may hain toh bhee janm toh hai na? Krishn ki atma jab aatee hai Satyug may, jab garbh may pravesh kiyaa, tab se lekar 5000 varsh may 84 janmon ka part bajaanaa hai. Jaise Shiv Jayanti manaate hain, toh ismay baithaa hai na? Krishn ki atma bhee garbh may aayi. Churpur huyi. Us samay se lekar 5000 varsh kaa hisaab shuru hota hai. Agar kam/jaasti ho toh fir 5000 varsh se kam ho jaaye. Yahy badee sookshm samajhne kee baath hai. -37 [Krish, rath]

= All (human souls) who come here have to pass through sato, rajo, tamo stages. Krishn also takes complete 84 births. He takes birth and plays role for complete 5000 years. He takes full 84 births. Not even a birth lesser. He has to play role fully accurate. When the soul is in the womb, that is also birth, is it not? When soul of Krishna comes in Golden Age, as soon as he enters the womb, from then onwards, roles of 84 births have to be played in 5000 years. Like Shiv Jayanti is celebrated, (Father) is seated in this, is it not? Soul of Krishna enters womb, movement ('churpur') occurs. From then onwards the calculation of 5000 years begins. If lesser or more, then it would be lesser than 5000 years*. This is a very subtle matter to be understood.

The reference for Kalpa is the entrance of soul of Krishna into the womb. So, it PROVES that soul of Krishna, the FIRST PRINCE of Golden Age, is the NUMBER ONE human soul.

* - Baba says, if Krishna's period becomes lesser, then period of Kalpa itself would become lesser, hence it is impossible. He has to play role fully accurate.

Note:- Flaw No. 26 is also relevant here. - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&hilit=rejuvenate&start=105

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: Some errors:-

Post by sita » 27 Jul 2015

The point is about the all round part, that it is of 5000 years. From any given point of time, the full cycle to the same point will be 5000 years.

Regarding the start of Satyug, or the time of 1-1-1 it is said that it is from the coronation of Krishna, when he becomes Narayan. I think it is also said from the time of his birth.

The womb is also like intellect, the womb of the intellect that churns something, some activity is taking place in it, some dynamics and movement. Apart from entering wombs, souls also enter mature humans.

The first man Adam is shown mature. Shankar is called Adi Dev.

The beginning of time is the Confluence Age. There is transition. Brahma Becomes Vishnu in one second. Brahma is incomplete form, of the Confluence Age, a mature body, then there is a change so he becomes Vishnu, a deity form, but the body is the same. Or does he leave the body to enters a womb in one second to become Vishnu. If Brahma becomes Vishnu in one second, and Brahma left his body, then has he become Vishnu, has this second come. If not it means he is still incomplete, then the sayings about his completeness are not true.

Is it possible that a man gives birth to a deity? Where there are deities, all are deities, when there are humans all are humans. When it is the day, it is not the night. So the physical mother of Krishna must be a deity so to give birth to a deity. If there is some deity before Krishna, it means he is not the first one. There are no other deities before their parents, because they used to be Brahmins.

For Krishna it is said he is the first leaf, but before the leaf it is the seed.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 27 Jul 2015

Brahma is incomplete form, of the Confluence Age, a mature body, then there is a change so he becomes Vishnu, a deity form, but the body is the same.
Baba clearly says, Prajapita Brahma is incomplete, effort maker; and Adi Dev (subtle Brahma) is pure, with just subtle body.

DL cannot be, or cannot be considered to be, Prajapita Brahma, prior entry of ShivBaba. On entry of ShivBhaba into the MATURE corporeal body of DL, he is FIRST ADOPTED by ShivBaba through VERY OWN lotus mouth of DL himself, who then becomes Prajapita BRAHMA and also the VERY FIRST Brahmin, through whose lotus mouth other Brahmins get adopted or re-created - NUMBERWISE!
In this sense, ShivBaba is the Creator (Generator), mostly towards the beginning of Confluence Age.

A thought may also go like this:-

On first entry of ShivBaba into DL, his PHYSICAL body is mature, but his SPIRITUAL or subtle body is in a state of 'spiritual infancy' en route to full spiritual maturity. When his spiritual or subtle body ALSO becomes FULLY MATURE, i.e. when he achieves his 'karmateet avastha' or COMPLETE ANGELIC stage in 1969, he becomes completely COMBINED with ShivBaba, and therefore becomes Vishnu in one second, and this combination is addressed as BapDada, who continue to sustain the Brahmin Family after 1969, through this subtle form of Vishnu, using the instrumental corporeal body of Dadi Gulzar!
In this sense, Brahma Baba also becomes powerful sustainer (Operator), along with ShivBaba, mostly in the middle of Confluence Age (from 1969).

When DL becomes the VERY FIRST PURE DEITY SOUL, his spiritual or subtle body is the VERY SAME, and therefore becomes a DEITY with a PURE PHYSICAL BODY, also in one second!
If Brahma becomes Vishnu in one second,
But, the 'second' need not mean here in absolutely literal sense. It can mean very short period. But, it can also mean that Brahma FEELS about becoming Vishnu (property) in a second (as soon as he gets a vision & gyaan). But for Vishnu to become Brahma it takes a long period (nearly 5000 yrs).
So the physical mother of Krishna must be a deity so to give birth to a deity. If there is some deity before Krishna, it means he is not the first one. There are no other deities before their parents, because they used to be Brahmins.
Although Krishna should get birth from a pure embodied soul or deity, lots of Murli points clearly say - parents of first prince of Satyug, Krishna, have a lesser status and are less clever than Krishna himself.

Krishna got birth in home of a great King, who is impure (prior entry of Krishna) - Post No. 114 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... eth#p12434
For Krishna it is said he is the first leaf, but before the leaf it is the seed.
Baba has said leaf stands for Bharat. That is, deity Kingdom would be in just a small place in Bharat. So, nature is necessary for the soul to come. That is the platform on which the actor soul of Krishna and the other deities play.
BKWSU SM, Revised 25.07.2015 wrote: निश्चय बुद्धि जो होंगे उनको जोर से कशिश होगी आगे चलकर। अभी इतनी कशिश कोई को होती नहीं है, क्योंकि याद नहीं करते हैं।
Those whose intellects have faith will feel a strong pull as they make further progress. As yet, none of you has that much pull, because you don’t stay in (ACCURATE) remembrance.
The subject of the Spiritual Seed, Spiritual (first) Leaf & Spiritual Tree is rather too subtle, to be expressed in words, and can only be EXPERIENCED by souls who stay in ACCURATE remembrance of ShivBaba at Amrit Vela - again NUMBERWISE, according to effort and respective roles in the Cycle.

An analogy may be used with the Egg (Seed - Womb), Chicken (Leaf - Child) & Hen (Tree - Adult body).
"Which came first, the Egg or the Hen?" is very renowned in the outer world! If the Chicken has to be Pure, the Chicken has to emerge from a Pure Egg, then what about the Hen who produced the Pure Egg?

And who/which can be considered to be FIRST or the HIGHEST, the Egg which produces the Hen or the Hen which produces the Egg in the first place?

A gross intellect cannot grasp these subtle aspects, until the intellect also becomes subtle with ACCURATE remembrance of ShivBaba.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 03 Aug 2015

Error No. 19) Misunderstanding of the word "Baba"

PBKs believe that the word "Baba" is meant only for the combination of 'incorporeal and corporeal', even though most of the Murli points go against their claim. They believe just the incorporeal can never be called or addressed as "Baba". They show just one Murli point, but wrong interpretation of same can clearly be detected therein. This has already been discussed earlier, somewhere on the forum. I will provide the link, if I get same. But there is better clarity in the point below:

SM 5-2-88(3):- Ram ko Baba naheen kahenge. BABA EK SHAREERDHAARI KO, DOOSRAA ASHAREERI KO KAHTHAY HAIN. Pahley2 hain ashareeri, phir shareeri banthay hain. Pahley hum baba ke saath rahthay, phir part bajaaney ke liye lowkik dehdhaari Baap ke paas aate hain. Yah sab hain ruhaani baatein. US LOWKIK JISMAANI PADHAAYI KO BHOOL JAANAA HAI. Chakr saaraa buddhi may hai. Abhee hai Sangamyug. -17- [Yaad, ShivBaba ]

= "Ram (of Silver Age) cannot be called "Baba". "Baba" is said - one for corporeal or embodied being, and another for the incorporeal. First of all everyone is bodiless (in the Soul World), then they become a bodily being (on this corporeal sphere). First we (all human souls) stay with "Baba" (ShivBaba in the Soul World), then we come to the corporeal bodily father, in order to play our roles. All these are spiritual matters. You must forget that corporeal physical study. The entire Cycle is (now) in your intellect. Now it is the Confluence Age." SM 5-2-88

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: Some errors:-

Post by sita » 03 Aug 2015

Baba certainly refers to the incorporeal one. All souls are incorporeal. When they adopt a body the name applies to the body. The name of Shiv is of the soul. Baba refers to the corporeal one - that is Brahma Baba because he is an old man. Then Baba is about the incorporeal soul in him that is the second soul that has entered. Again it refers to the time the Supreme Soul is in a corporeal body. Due to the fact that all the souls are points of lights alike, we cannot call a point of light as Baba, as we don't know which point it is. Only after it enters a body it manifests with its knowledge.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 03 Aug 2015

sita wrote:Baba certainly refers to the incorporeal one. All souls are incorporeal. When they adopt a body the name applies to the body.
Baba is not a name. It is a relation, that is Father.

Baba clearly says, till I incarnate, (during Bhaktimarg), I am just Father (baba). I become maatpita (Father and mother) when I enter a body and begin to play role of creation.

So, even if Shiv enters a body or not, he is definitely a Baba(Father).
Again it refers to the time the Supreme Soul is in a corporeal body. Due to the fact that all the souls are points of lights alike, we cannot call a point of light as Baba, as we don't know which point it is. Only after it enters a body it manifests with its knowledge.
No Murli point says this. Logically also, it does not fit. Because baba clearly says, I do not ride the Chariot whole day. Baba also says, there is no need to remember the Chariot.

But, I agree that during Bhakti, the feeling of Father was limited. Now, it is in unlimited.

I am not against saying the corporeal as baba or incorporeal in corporeal as baba, but against only the claiming that "the incorporeal alone cannot be called as Baba". Baba also says- "just souls are brothers. When they come in body, they become brothers and sisters". Similarly, till ShivBaba incarnates he is just Father. When he incarnates, he comes Father and mother.

But, yes it is true that we realize baba fully only when he comes in a body (incarnates). Like even when we are in Paramdham, we are like brothers, and Shiv/ShivBaba is Father, but we are not knowing him fully. But, there is still property of mukti.

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: Some errors:-

Post by sita » 03 Aug 2015

Baba clearly says, till I incarnate, (during Bhaktimarg), I am just Father (Baba).
In what way is he Father during Bhaktimarg? As you have said, it is a matter of a relationship that means it is about the time he is manifested, relationships are there in corporeal. We don't have any relationship with God in Bhaktimarg.
I am not against saying the corporeal as Baba or incorporeal in corporeal as Baba, but against only the claiming that "the incorporeal alone cannot be called as Baba". Baba also says- "just souls are Brothers. When they come in body, they become Brothers and Sisters". Similarly, till ShivBaba incarnates he is just Father. When he incarnates, he comes Father and mother.
Souls being brothers is the same. We become brothers when our vision changes. If we see the soul we are brothers. If we see the body we become brother & sister. In the brother & sister relationship vice can enter, not in the brother & brother relationship.

It is also said you children will bring Paramdham down to this world. When we develop atmic stage like brothers, atmosphere of peace and silence will spread.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 03 Aug 2015

sita wrote:In what way is he Father during Bhaktimarg? As you have said, it is a matter of a relationship that means it is about the time he is manifested, relationships are there in corporeal. We don't have any relationship with God in Bhaktimarg.
Baba clearly says- In heaven, you have just one father, in hell you have two (including God), in Confluence Age, three fathers.

baba also says, during Bhaktimarg, whenever people say - O God, O Ram, O Shiv, etc, their intellect goes to the incorporeal. Baba also says, Gyan is the fruit of 63 births of Bhakti. If there is no relation (at least indirectly), how can it be called as Bhakti? So, in limited way, he was our Father. The whole world bows head (at least internally) to one God Father, is it not?

Baba has used the word ShivBaba here in the Murli points for the period of Bhaktimarg:-

1)SM 17-12-72(2):- Bhaktimarg may mehnat bahut karte hain. Milte hain bhugude(chane). ShivBaba par bhal Sharir bhi hom dete hain to bhi bhugude milti hai. Varsa to mil nahin sakta. Kashi kalvat khaate samay vikarm karke vinaash honge. Phir shuru ho jayenge. Toh bhaavanaa ke bhugude huye na.

= "They make a lot of efforts on the path of Devotion. They only receive groundnuts. Even if they sacrifice their body to ShivBaba, they will get just groundnuts. They cannot receive the inheritance. When they sacrifice themselves on the sword of Kashi sins would get incinerated, but will commence again (in the next birth). So this would be (like receiving only) groundnuts of just feelings, is it not?"

2)SM 4-5-79(1):-Har cheez satopradhan hoti hai. Bhakti bhi pahle satopradhan thi jab ShivBaba ko Yaad karte thay.

3)SM 1-5-79(2):- Bhaktimarg may bhi samajhte hain hum ShivBaba ke baney, isliye kaashi kalvat khate hain. Bhaktimarg MAY JAB KAASHI KALVAT KHAAYE SHARIR CHOD DETE TO UNKEY PAAP SAB KAT JATE HAIN. Phir bhi vaapis to koyi jaa nahin saktaa. Oopar se sab aa jaavenge, tab vinaash hoga. -57 [WOT, LM, PM,CP]

=Even in Bhaktimarg, people think let us belong to ShivBaba. Hence they do kashi kalvat(sacrificing body in the name of shiv). .....

4)SM 1-5-79(3):- Bhaktimarg may bhi ShivBaba daataa hai. -57

5)SM 8-1-81(1):- Om Shanti. Bachchon se baap poochte hain, aatmaavon se parmatma poochte hain. Yah to jante ho hum parampita parmatma ke saamney baithey hain. Unko apnaa rath to nahin hai. Yah to nishchay hai na. Is bhrukuti ke beech may Baap ka nivaas sthaan hota hai. Baap khud kahte hain main inkey bhrukuti ke beech may baith_taa hun. Inkaa sharir loan par leta hun. Atma bhrukuti ke beech hai to Baap bhi vahaan baith_te hain. BRAHMA HAI TO ShivBaba BHI HAI. BRAHMA NAHIN HOTA TO ShivBaba KO HEE Yaad KARTE. BRAHMA HAI NAHIN TO ShivBaba BOLENGE KAISE? OOPAR MAY ShivBaba KO TO SADIAV Yaad KARTE AAYE. Ab tum bachchon ko pata hai hum Baap ke paas yahaan baithe hain. Aise nahin ki (ab=now)ShivBaba oopar may hain. JAISE Bhaktimarg MAY KAHTE THAY ShivBaba OOPAR MAY HAIN, UNKI PRATIMA YAHAAN POOJI JATI HAI. Yah baatein bahut samajney ki hain. Tum to jaante ho Baap gyaan ka sagar hai. Gyaan kahaan se sunate hain? Kyaa oopar se sunate hain? Yahaan neeche aayaa hai. Brahma tan se sunate hain. Kayi kahte hum brahma ko nahin maante. Parantu ShivBaba khud Brahma tan dwara kahte hain ki mujhe Yaad karo. Samajh ki baath hai na. Lekin Maya badi jabardast hai. Ekdum muh phiraakar pichaadi kar deti hai. Ab tumhaaraa kaandh ShivBaba ne saamney kiyaa hai. Sammukh baithe ho. Phir jo aise samajhte hain brahma to kuch nahin, unki kyaa gati hogi. Durgati ko pa lete hain. Kuch bhi gyaan nahin. Manushy pukarte hain Oh Godfather. Phir yah Godfather suntaa hai kyaa? Unko kahte hain na liberator aavo? yaa vahaan baith liberate karenge? Kalp2 purushottam Sangamyug par hee Baap aate hain. JISMEY AATE HAIN UNKO HEE AGAR UDAA DE TO KYAA KAHENGE? NUMBER ONE TAMPOPRADHAAN. Nishchay hote huye bhi Maya muh phira deti hai. Itnaa usmey bal hai jo ekdum worth not a penny bana deti hai. Ekdum mahamoorkh bana deti hai. AISE BHI KOYI NA KOYI CENTRES PAR HAI. ISLIYE BAAP KAHTE HAIN KHABARDAAR RAHNAA. -11- [rath, ShivBaba,prediction_PBKs]

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: Some errors:-

Post by sita » 03 Aug 2015

The world has bowed down to what human beings have thought about God.

God does not respond to souls to their search for God and to their devotion in 63 births. If he does respond, it would be to the one in whom he enters. And then the fruit of knowledge he gives, he gives equally to all, so it is not that he watches people in 63 birth who has done what and gives more to some and less to others. He gives everything to all and children take numberwise, because of their predisposition in 63 births. If one has done less Bhakti it means his interest in God is less, so he will naturally imbibe less.

If during 63 births, when the name of God is uttered ones attention goes to the incorporeal, or upwards, then in what way the knowledge in the Confluence Age is any different to that. We have the idea about the soul as a point of light there in the Gita. God is incorporeal. There is the idea about Brahm element. So why was not Yoga possible in 63 births? It has to be Yaad. We remember what we experience through the body.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3265
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Some errors:-

Post by mbbhat » 03 Aug 2015

sita wrote:We have the idea about the soul as a point of light there in the Gita. God is incorporeal. There is the idea about Brahm element. So why was not Yoga possible in 63 births? It has to be Yaad. We remember what we experience through the body.
That is why it was Bhakti. When corporeal Krishna was put as God of Gita, how can people understand the point of light concept? BTW, it is not mentioned point of light in Gita. It is said I am smaller than atom. Again in other places, it is said I am Vishwaroop, etc, etc.

First of all, dear soul, I have quoted Murli points which say ShivBaba for the period of Bhaktimarg. Read the Murli points fully. From the Murli points, I believe Baba can also be said for the incorporeal, even when we do not understand fully. The fruit will be lesser. We cannot deny the relation as we would be trying to think of him with some faith.
The world has bowed down to what human beings have thought about God.
But, they bow down to the Supreme. Baba says, even Bhakti was satopradhaan during initial stages.

Does not baba say, I give fruit of your 'bhavna' in Bhakti.

It is up to you however to interpret the Murli points according to your own personal understanding.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests