Radhe Ma controversy

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.
User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11513
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by arjun » 25 Sep 2015

mbbhat wrote:See- how much upset or bad you feel when just comments are made (truth is revealed) about your alowkik corporeal father and mother?
I am not at all upset. I replied just because you were repeatedly provoking PBKs to give reply. You can continue to defame our alokik Father and Mother if it gives you happiness and satisfaction.
So, when PBKs have been repeating bad words about Mama and B Baba, how much bad (some) BKs would have felt? Have you ever thought of that?
I cannot speak for others, but I have not used any bad word for Mama and B Baba. Please quote if you have any proof.
You say officially she has given letter that she has left Yagya. Now, whose words are to be considered more- hers or yours?
It is your choice.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3230
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by mbbhat » 26 Sep 2015

OK.

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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by fluffy bunny » 01 Oct 2015

I'd like to know more about, and even meet Kamala. I have no ill will towards her.

I've researched this "Dolly Bindra" woman and she is awful. Why on earth are the BKs getting into bed with her?

It says a lot about their spiritual level and target audience. She's the embodiment of un-Om Shanti.
Screen shot 2015-10-01 at 07.00.30.jpg
Screen shot 2015-10-01 at 07.00.30.jpg (51.93 KiB) Viewed 1549 times
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlTxbuDere0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFqFh1aY-PE

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3230
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by mbbhat » 04 Oct 2015

Baba comes in impure world to purify impure people, hence it is part of BKs service too. Baba says Brahma Baba was number one impure soul. BKs believe that they were the most impure souls. So, I do not see any surprise or wrong in meeting anyone impure.

Jaisee drushti, vaisee srushti = As is the vision, so is the world.

The only thing is- the meeting should harbour useful discussions of Gyan or good wishes (which are like seeds which may give fruit in the future).

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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by fluffy bunny » 04 Oct 2015

Mbbhat, according to you nothing is wrong, not even wrong is wrong. In fact, wrong is right.

3,000 to 6,000 children die of hunger every day in India but the BKs keep amassing properties and spend their money on 40 foot blow up Shivling (?!?) and framed pictures to chase vulgar VIPs with. How much did that cost?

If you cannot see how wrong that is, then something has died within you.

Last year they made a 12.3 feet high Largest Shivling using 3,35,000 Nogs. Bilipatra leaves (don't know what "nogs" means) and the year before a 40 feet high and 400 feet wide Rakhi that took 150 artisans one month to build. For one day's festival.

It is an absolute waste of money.

Image
Image

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3230
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by mbbhat » 04 Oct 2015

fluffy bunny wrote:Mbbhat, according to you nothing is wrong. . . .

True. Everything is perfectly in accordance with Drama and is therefore perfectly accurate; and at the very end of the Cycle, everyone is attached to bodies and materials. So, at one time or other, almost everyone is going to undergo punishment or 'karmabhog' in one form or the other, in one way or the other. This applies even to BKs, in particular.

If you believe BKs are wasting money, and if they are actually doing so, they will reap the appropriate fruit of their actions, without fail - make no mistake whatsoever. I do not feel there is need for anyone to be perturbed about same, UNLESS they also wish to partake of the portion of the consequences thereof themselves, which you seem to be having an avid affinity for, and are inexorably trapped into, without even realizing what is actually taking place. Baba has given warnings to BKs, in no uncertain terms, again and again and again. Just one is here- See Murli point No. 06 in post No. 201- here - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... ce0#p15490

Even in lowkik, it is said- "Great minds discuss IDEAs, average minds discuss EVENTs, putrid minds discuss PEOPLE". So, those who are irresistibly inclined in discussing about people, let them discuss and then face the consequences thereof THEMSELVES - so simple!

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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by fluffy bunny » 04 Oct 2015

You think I have a putrid mind?

Let's remove the insult.

It seems the Eleanor Roosevelt quote is actual, "Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people".

And by "small minds discussing people" she meant gossip.

This is not gossip, it is an ongoing discussion of the values, principles and ethics of the BKWSU which are "ideas" and therefore great things to discuss.

So let us discuss the values, principles and ethics of the BKWSU as displayed by this evidence.

Behind it all, is a great confidence trick.

Indians are indoctrinated to respond in a certain way by established religious iconography. Now, the BKs knowledge does not actually believe in Shivlings or statues of ShivShankar (also build in the park), but they know that by presenting them, they can exploit the interest and ignorance of VIPs etc.

The VIPs and non-BKs come to pray and bow in front of the BKs because they exploit the others' religious icons, sticking their branding on top of them ... like counterfeit business man who re-labelled others goods to sell them as their own.

It benefits the BKs financially, because they reap donations to offset their costs, but also socially/caste reinforcing the facade of their religious facade.

Is that ethical?

Is it even efficient in achieving their aims? Does it really lead souls to their salvation, or does it just confuse them ... does Dolly Dumpling representing what the BKs are about? Is she and her activity the highest they can aspire?

Those are the great questions (ideas) for great minds to consider.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3230
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by mbbhat » 05 Oct 2015

Now, the BKs knowledge does not actually believe in Shivlings
BKs believe that Shivling is the corporeal representation of incorporeal Supreme Father Supreme Soul, ShivBaba to facilitate remembrance/worship on the path of devotion. Baba also advises to keep giving message to devotees of Shiv and deities, in particular, as the top priority. All the lowkik festivals which BKs celebrate are from service point of view. Baba clearly says- do advertisements for service*. So, I feel your statement is more than gossip or totally invalid.

An 'event' or 'people' are also 'ideas', one being on a subtle level and the other being on a gross level.
Even on the subtlest level, an 'idea' by itself can be a corrupted one or an elevated one. Baba's function is to take souls away from their existing corrupted 'ideas' and proclivities, which trap them into the 'prostitution' of body-consciousness, and free them from this bondage, by taking them back into the awareness of their original, elevated 'ideas' of soul-consciousness. Some may choose to continue to involve themselves in the 'ideas' of 'prostitution' of body-consciousness until the appointed hour, while others may choose to involve themselves in the more elevated 'ideas' of soul-consciousness. It is evident that your current intention is to allow your intellect to be 'locked', by focusing on the 'ideas' of 'impurity' which BKs are in the process of giving-up, rather than making an attempt to free yourself from this vicious trap, by focusing on the more elevated 'ideas' of the processes of regaining 'purity' once again!

That is why other comments including the above are just twisting the points or LLU (Low Level of Understanding), as usual - nothing new. But are accurate, as per drama.

* - You may refer to the Murli point dated SM 16-11-82(2, 3) in the post dated Oct 3rd 2015 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 498#p15498

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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by fluffy bunny » 06 Oct 2015

Baba says, "go to the temples" ... not spend the money building them.

Where can I see a complete Murli of that date, preferably referenced to the original from the 1960s?

And I've asked you before to stop your toxic insults, Mbbhat - or else!

It's not a "Low Level of Understanding", it's a "Low Level of Acceptance".

There's nothing difficult to understand. It's a question of acceptance and unfortunately, without seeing the original, I cannot accept your answer.

Shiv1976
Posts: 49
Joined: 27 Jul 2013
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To discuss ShivBaba's knowledge.

Re: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by Shiv1976 » 06 Oct 2015

Mbbhat wrote
BKs believe that Shivling is the corporeal representation of incorporeal Supreme Father Supreme Soul
You(BKs) keep on repeating the same old stories saying Shivling is the corporeal representation of the incorporeal Supreme Father Supreme Soul, but Murli says something else. Baba says,"Supreme Soul can never be worshipped nor can He become a worshipper. Neither will He become a devotee, nor become a deity."[Sakar Murli 1966/05/66-Unofficial Translation].
Question here is that, whereas Shivling is worshipped everywhere, Murli point says "Supreme Soul can never be worshipped nor can He become a worshipper". So where does the BKs belief stand? Is this not against the Murli point of ShivBaba?
Could you kindly let us know the reasons for BKs belief in Shivling to be the corporeal representation of incorporeal Supreme Father Supreme Soul.
We do not expect your vague statements which you have given here. Give us some Murli proofs to substantiate BKs views.

Shiv1976.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3230
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by mbbhat » 06 Oct 2015

Already addressed at many places in the forum which shows clear misinterpretation of Murlis by PBKs or one sided arguments and double standards.

Moreover this topic is of Radhe Ma or public related issues, so better not to go off topic.

Shiv1976
Posts: 49
Joined: 27 Jul 2013
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To discuss ShivBaba's knowledge.

Re: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by Shiv1976 » 06 Oct 2015

Already addressed at many places in the forum which shows clear misinterpretation of Murlis by PBKs or one sided arguments and double standards.
Thanks a lot Bro.mbbhat. What else could we expect from you people?
Moreover this topic is of Radhe Ma or public related issues, so better not to go off topic
the sentence which I have quoted is about shivling which you had mentioned in your post. Whether is this related to Radhe Ma controversey?

Fluffy Bunny Bhai's argument was about the belief of BKs on shivling and you had replied for the post by quoting the point. This made me ask you the proof for your claim. Because you often question PBKs for Murli proofs to prove their point. So the same is applicable to you.

If you feel this to be really off topic then delete this post.

Shiv1976

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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by fluffy bunny » 06 Oct 2015

mbbhat wrote:Already addressed at many places in the forum which shows clear misinterpretation of Murlis by PBKs or one sided arguments and double standards. Moreover this topic is of Radhe Ma or public related issues, so better not to go off topic.
It's connected.

Radhe Ma is accused of expressing female sexuality, and yet the icon the BKs use is a lingum, the male aspect, set in a yoni, the female aspect. It's a phallic object about union.

The lingam is a symbol of "Shiva" for the Shaivites ... but the Shiva the Shaivites are worshiping the BKs would call Shankar.

It's not 'confused', it's utterly scrambled.

The yoni (literally the "source" or "womb), is a symbol of female energy.

So tell us how on earth it can represent bindi Shiv?

At the very least, it should have been a lingum alone but how does that represent bindi Shiv?

Let us be honest,
  • a) it is a stupid waste of money in a country were so many are starving to death,
    b) it's only encouraging Bhakti or confusing Bhakti and Gyan in the minds of the VIPs attracted and exploiting them,
    c) it's a "low level of understanding" and cheap commercialism.
I know Lekhraj Kirpalani suggested some pretty crazy service scheme like throwing leaflets out of a helicopter, but is it really according to Shrimat, and what quality of soul will it attract?
Lingodbhava ("emergence of the Linga")

Once, while the deities Vishnu and Brahma contested for superiority, Shiva appeared as a flame, and challenged them to find his source. Brahma took the form of a swan, and flew to the sky to see the top of the flame, while Vishnu became the boar Varaha, and sought its base. The scene is called Lingodbhava and is represented in the western wall at the sanctum of most Shiva temples. Neither Brahma nor Vishnu could find the source, and while Vishnu conceded his defeat, Brahma lied and said he had found the pinnacle. In punishment, Shiva ordained that Brahma would never have temples on earth in his worship.
Therefore, if the linga is a symbol of Shiva, does that also mean it's a memorial of Brahma Baba being a liar?

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3230
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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by mbbhat » 07 Oct 2015

Therefore, if the linga is a symbol of Shiva, does that also mean it's a memorial of Brahma Baba being a liar?
Baba says- in Bhakti, the truth is 'aatey may namak' = Just a pinch of salt in a handful of flour. So, it would be foolish to relate everything what is said in Bhakti to gyaan. [Hope at least now you realize that your way of understanding or questioning is LLU or say LLQ].

Also addressed here - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... 492#p15492 . Better read few earlier posts as well, if you care to understand anything at all!
Otherwise don't waste your time and the precious time of others as well!

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: Radhe Ma controversy

Post by fluffy bunny » 10 Oct 2015

Let's put a full stop to the "Low Level of Understanding" insult, Mbbhat, and the links to pages of garbage on the BK forum to sift through.

If you cannot answer straight here, then don't bother answering. It's like saying, "Your dinner is over there, in that cowpat. You might have to dig it out yourself".

As I've said often, it's not a "Low Level of Understanding", it's a "Low Level of Acceptance" ... as in zero acceptance ... based on logic and evidence.

'Not to accept something' is not the same as 'not understanding it'.

Do you understand and accept that?

The god of the BKs claim Bhakti is a memorial of this time, who decides all the exclusion clauses? In a way, one would have to accept that story ... "Lekhraj Kirpalani lied and said he had found the pinnacle. In punishment, god ordained that he would never have temples on earth to worship him."

Well, Lekhraj Kirpalani/Brahma does not have widespread temples and a religion to worship him, so would logic not suggest a cause for that?

The BKWSU habitually cherry picks a tiny selection of references to Vedanta to support or embellish their beliefs, especially the one's that are most "commercially" valuable and best advertising. They even portray themselves as being Hindu or Vedantic in nature if it suits them ... but then ignore an ocean of other material that contradicts them. Indeed, what they know about Vedanta could be written on the back of a postcard.

And as to claiming to be all the greatest deities in the pantheon. It's beyond a joke.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests