Flaws in PBK Philosophy

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
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 24 Apr 2016

whenever they wish to defame the Sakar Murlis and the Chariot through whom they were spoken, they will never hesitate to do so.
The only time when we wish to defame the Murlis or the Chariot through which they are spoken is when you invent pretexts to make false accusations against the PBKs.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 24 Apr 2016

# Flaw No. 234) PBKs inadvertently give all the deities title "GOAT":-

See where misinterpretations and the juggling exercises of Mr Dixit leads to.

[quote=""sita"]- If Sanskars are the horse, the intellect rides over them, but it is the sanskars who ride over the mind. It is not wrong to say goat for Shankar. They put a goat head on Prajapita. Goat means one who says "me, me, me*". We sacrifice that goat.
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2180&p=51343#p51343[/quote]
--That is fine. It is OK to call Prajapita as goat, because Prajapita (initially has a high) impure stage. Or the goat may be applicable to the state before getting the Knowledge as well.
--But, PBKs believe Mr Dixit is PRACTICALLY Prajapita only after 1976 (or actually in 1980s), when clarifications started in AIVV.
--But, from 1976 itself, PBKs give Mr. Dixit the title Conf. Aged Narayan, and all other titles Shankar, Ram, Krishna, etc., as well.
--So, PBKs are INADVERTENTLY implying that all these deity titles (refer flaw No. 221 and 224) - would imply that even ShivBaba is "GOAT".
--So- by inventing the so called Conf. Aged deities, Mr Dixit not only defamed all the deities, but also committed spiritual suicides.

--But, if we see practically, Mr. Dixit is PERFECTLY acting the role of goat by saying (implying in his teachings) - "me, me, me" = I am ShivBaba, I am Ram, I am Krishna, I am Narayan, I am Vishnu, I am Prajapita...."

# Flaw No. 235) Why PBKs accuse there is no temple of Brahma?

--PBKs have already fallen into their own trap, as already put in flaw No. 47. Now, adding one more point.
--When PBKs give title Krishna to DLR in Conf. Age itself, where is the room to accuse there are no temples of Brahma? There are enough temples of Krishna, is it not?
--But, when it is questioned are there temples of Prajapita, they point to temples of Shankar. How silly, ignorant, twisting or double standards?

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 25 Apr 2016

--That is fine. It is OK to call Prajapita as goat, because Prajapita (initially has a high) impure stage. Or the goat may be applicable to the state before getting the Knowledge as well.
--But, PBKs believe Mr Dixit is PRACTICALLY Prajapita only after 1976 (or actually in 1980s), when clarifications started in AIVV.
--But, from 1976 itself, PBKs give Mr. Dixit the title Conf. Aged Narayan, and all other titles Shankar, Ram, Krishna, etc., as well.
--So, PBKs are INADVERTENTLY implying that all these deity titles (refer flaw No. 221 and 224) - would imply that even ShivBaba is "GOAT".
--So- by inventing the so called Conf. Aged deities, Mr Dixit not only defamed all the deities, but also committed spiritual suicides.
No. Prajapita is there still from the beginning.

Have we invented the Confluence aged deities? The fact you deny that, does not change what is said in the Murli.
--PBKs have already fallen into their own trap, as already put in flaw No. 47. Now, adding one more point.
--When PBKs give title Krishna to DLR in Conf. Age itself, where is the room to accuse there are no temples of Brahma? There are enough temples of Krishna, is it not?
--But, when it is questioned are there temples of Prajapita, they point to temples of Shankar. How silly, ignorant, twisting or double standards?
No. Brahma Baba is Krishna, only in the Golden Age. In the Confluence Age, he is Brahma. Even after discussing the matter you are twisting what we say, so that it seems ridiculous. You make it ridiculous by changing what we say. You don't have arguments and invent ways to continue your propaganda.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 25 Apr 2016

sita wrote:No. Prajapita is there still from the beginning.
That is OK. It does not make any difference about the point of discussion - "GOAT".

----------------

# Flaw No. 236) Mr. Dixit cannot be the first Conf. Aged deity -
"in PBK view" -

Have we invented the Confluence aged deities?
Definitely. No Murli point says so. Murli points clearly say - "Deities would be fully pure. Also- when there is Brahma, there cannot be Krishna". Anyway, PBKs may have that belief. But, they are seeing the consequences.
No. Brahma Baba is Krishna, only in the Golden Age. In the Confluence Age, he is Brahma. Even after discussing the matter you are twisting what we say, so that it seems ridiculous. You make it ridiculous by changing what we say. You don't have arguments and invent ways to continue your propaganda.
Sorry. PBK propaganda regarding the above is already put here- flaw No. 172 and near to it -
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51147&hilit=honour#p51147

1)You are speaking lies and lies. The Murli point saying- "Gitamata se Krishn bachchaa paidaa huvaa". = Child Krishn took birth from Mother Gita". Mr. Dixit interprets it as Krishn took birth through their Gitamata alias so called Adi Brahma in 1936.
[More details- error no. 29 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=50566#p50566 ] *

2)Moreover, PBKs also interpret the coming of subtle Brahma (actually there is Father Shiv also, but PBKs do not agree with it, let it be) in Dadi Gulzar, as relating to the Murli point - "Krishn kee aaney ki ghadi dikhaate hain = Entrance of coming of Krishna is shown".

3)Again you yourself have said- it is OK to call a person by that name any time. See here- viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&start=630

But, NOW you say- Mr Dixit only (and few PBKs) can have any name in Conf. Age, including deities', but Brahma Baba cannot. It is double standard again and again.

*4) Note that the Murli point does not say- "Brahma or Brahma bachchaa paidaa huvaa". It says Krishn bachchaa paidaa huvaa. So, if PBKs believe Mr. Dixit is eligible to get title Conf. Aged Narayan in 1976 itself, then they will have to agree to the extent of 100% that DLR is eligible to get title Krishna in 1936 itself. Now, automatically, the first Conf. Aged deity (if any) becomes DLR only.

In BK view, there is no Conf. Aged deities. But, if PBKs like to give title deity to Conf. Aged personalities, even then Mr Dixit would get only later, after 40 yrs of Conf. Age.

5)By the way, if PBKs wish to give just title Brahma to DLR, and title Narayan for Mr Dixit, even then they fail. Because then it becomes

--"Braahmin/Brahma/Ghost rides on Deities:
--or Brahma rides on Conf Aged Narayan
--or Brahma rides on Shankar, etc, etc.

6)It then implies a braahmin soul (Brahma) rides on deities and even misuses body of deities! PBKs may try to enact the role of HK Hood, by taking all the titles on themselves, but it will lead only to spiritual suicides. It is left to them. Let them believe so. It is their part in drama, so cannot be considered as fully wrong.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 25 Apr 2016

It then implies a braahmin soul (Brahma) rides on deities and even misuses body of deities! PBKs may try to act the role of HK Hood, by taking all the titles on themselves, but it will lead only to spiritual suicides. It is left to them. Let them believe so. It is their part in drama, so not really/fully wrong
No, Brahma is a deity, one of the 3 deities. And when he does service through the children, the children are brahmins, not deities, they are impure.
That is OK. It does not make any difference about the point of discussion - "GOAT".
This is from the scriptures. Prajapita becomes arrogant.
1)Sorry. You are speaking lies and lies. The Murli point saying- "Gitamata se Krishn bachchaa paidaa huvaa". = Child Krishn took birth from Mother Gita". Mr. Dixit interprets it as Krishn took birth through their Gitamata alias so called Adi Brahma in 1936. [More details- error no. 29 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=50566#p50566 ]
We discussed that.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 25 Apr 2016

sita wrote:No, Brahma is a deity, one of the 3 deities. And when he does service through the children, the children are Brahmins, not deities, they are impure.
Are you saying Brahma Baba is pure? Since when? 1969?
Are all the 4/5 Brahmas eligible to be called as (Conf. Aged) deities? Or only DLR or only Mr. Dixit?
This is from the scriptures. Prajapita becomes arrogant.
Does Mr. Dixit become arrogant even now, or is that role completed? If so, when? 1976?

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 25 Apr 2016

Are you saying Brahma Baba is pure? Since when? 1969?
Yes.
Are all the 4/5 Brahmas can be called as (Conf. Aged) deities? Or only DLR or only Mr. Dixit?
I know only about 3 deities.
Does Mr. Dixit become arrogant even now or is that role completed? If so, when? 1976?
This is a story from the scriptures. In the Murli, there is no such story.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 25 Apr 2016

# Flaw No. 237) No proper replies, only garbage:-
sita wrote:Yes.
Sometimes PBKs say B Baba is pure, but then they also say- he creates eclipse, and even misuses body of Mr. Dixit, etc., etc., etc. Total ILLOGICAL replies with NO PROPER comprehension of either the head or the tail ...
I know only about 3 deities.
Still believe that they get clarification for each and every word!
This is a story from the scriptures. In the Murli, there is no such story.
PBKs believe each word of either Murli, or Bhakti has some meaning, even the newspapers! And, it is PBKs only who are bothered about lion, goat, and horse. But, now..??

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 27 Apr 2016

# Flaw No. 238) Are LN of AIVV intelligent or fools?
Brother, I cannot give clarifications, because I am not ShivBaba. The points about LN as fools, and as intelligent, I was not able to resolve it on my own. I study the Advanced Knowledge and get clarifications there.... - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51193&hilit=fools#p51193
PBKs believe their Conf. Aged LN took birth/were revealed in 1976, and are intelligent.
--But, we can see countless failures of Mr. Dixit in explaining the knowledge.
--BTW, no clarifications had come out from Mr Dixit until almost 1980s.
--Also- Mr. Dixit first gave chance to Sister Premkanta for the post of Jagadamba. When she failed, then it was given to Kamala Devi. - viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1041
-- Can his decision be called as intelligent? [Now, even she is out of Yagya. OK, let it be.]

--Mr. Dixit even dozes while giving drushti.
--His body is misused by a 'ghost', who has a 'child intellect', as per PBKs. So, when even a 'child intellect' personality can control the Narayan of AIVV, how can the intellect of Narayan of AIVV be intelligent?

--In PBK view itself their 'Lakshmi' is yet to take birth! They themselves say- She is yet to understand the role of their Chariot and the so called advanced knowledge. How can she be called as intelligent? - "in PBK view"
--Also- PBKs certify almost all the mothers as cowardice. So, by default, Lakshmi of AIVV can never be intelligent, is it not?

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 02 May 2016

# Flaw No. 239) PBKs inadvertently imply- Avyakt Murlis also contain gems of knowledge:-

On one hand, PBKs say- the Avyakt Murlis/Vanis do not contain any knowledge, except dharna points.
But Mr. Dixit gives his so called extra-ordinary clarifications even for the Avyakt Murlis points almost in the same way as he uses the Sakar Murlis to target BKs in proving their philosophy. This is another example of spiritual suicide of PBKs.

From BK point of view- the knowledge for putting effort is already completed(given) in Sakar Murlis.
Of course, Avyakt Murlis give extra teachings which will help in giving extra blessings which will act as catalyst. Also- as per the time, BapDada gives necessary directions in Avyakt Murlis.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 12 May 2016

# Flaw No. 240) Can PBKs use the word "Subtle Region Resident Brahma" ?

1) PBKs believe Subtle Region does not exist at all. Then why do they use the word "Subtle Region Resident Brahma"?

2) Murli says - 'Subtle Region resident Brahma' is complete. But, PBKs do not believe so. Instead they believe him to be a 'ghost'.

3) For PBKs, the real 'Shantidham and Sukhdham' are body of Mr. Dixit*. Do PBKs believe - even Subtle Region is body of Mr. Dixit?

*4) Here Mr. Dixit has committed another spiritual suicide which leads to -

# Flaw No. 241) PBKs inadvertently imply "A 'ghost' resides in(and misuses) their 'Shantidham' (World of Peace) and 'Sukhdham' (World of Happiness)"

5) Their 'Shantidham and Sukhdham' even dozes while doing 'Yaad'. Their 'Shantidham and Sukhdham' is misused by a 'ghost'.

6) Moreover- their 'Shantidham and Sukhdham' is never a perfect, stable 'world', but is the abode of an effort-maker.

7)Their Shantidham and Sukhdham wanders gali2 like a donkey, and was even put in jail for six months, so even controlled by laws of kourav or lowkik/Iron Aged Govt.s.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 14 May 2016

# Flaw No. 242) PBKs are not sure about whether Mr Dixit is fit for title "Narayan" from 1976:-

We can see PBKs sometimes saying- Mr Dixit is Narayan "now", and sometimes "not now". From here- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51423#p51423
sita wrote:Who has said that he is Narayan now or he has become Narayan in 76. In 76 Lakshmi and Narayan were born. To sit on the throne means that at least some souls must accept him as their Father like King. So even if he is Narayan and there is no one who accepts it it is as good as nothing.
1)See how ridiculous it is. On one hand, PBKs keep on quoting the Murli point about birth of LN in 1976 to prove their claims. But, now they say- No, he is not Narayan from 1976 itself!

2) PBKs believe - direct nar to Narayan. So, Mr Dixit should sit on throne at that instant itself, assuming full powers, is it not?
[From Bk point of view- it is baby/child Krishna who takes birth, and physically he has to grow to take power.]

3) By saying Krishna jayanti took place in 1936 itself, but Shiv Jayanti and Gita jayanti will take place only in 2016/18, Mr Dixit committed multiple spiritual suicides. Some PBKs are now, not sure- whether to give title Narayan to Mr Dixit from 1976 or not. But, still they do not hesitate to write "birth of Narayan took place in 1976 itself"! What a mutual contradiction and pitiable state of PBKs!

4) Now- PBKs accept Mr Dixit as Father. So, for them birth of Narayan took place in 1976 itself.
PBK Arjun soul had replied in the forum- "for me, he (Mr Dixit) is Narayan even now". So, for PBKs like arjun, even sister Vedanti would have been Lakshmi "from 1976 itself, is it not?". They may realize/believe sister Vedanti as their mother from now or 1976 itself.

But, does sister Vedanti realize herself as (Conf. Aged) Lakshmi even now, or from 1976? So, is it that- some children realize their mother, but mother is not EVEN aware of her children?

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 14 May 2016

# Flaw No. 243) PBKs inadvertently imply- their present body cannot get transformed:-

According to PBKs, those PBKs who have Bhakti sanskaars will have to leave their bodies.
sita wrote:Not with body consciousness and not with the same body, but we have to leave the body consciousness and to change our body, to purify it. It is said that in the impure world no one is pure and in the pure world no one is impure, but also that I give the inheritance of heaven in hell. In the transition we go from the impure world to the pure world, first with our mind and then with our body. How could it happen otherwise. How and in which second will hell turn into heaven and is it possible that at this second all souls would have left their bodies, then where will the bodies come from later. Obviously when this second where the hell changes to heaven comes it will find some souls within their bodies. It is a matter of qualifying. Those who have sanskars of Bhakti, who have not purified themselves with the power of Yoga will have to leave their bodies. If you have changed from man to Narayan, if you have completed your effort and reached your stage, why should you leave the body. It is a matter of leaving the body consciousness, no one likes to leave the body and die. We make effort only now, there is no effort in the Golden Age. - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=51425#p51425
PBKs believe except the top 8 souls- all the rest get punishment. So, definitely, except them, all the rest will have some sanskaars of Bhakti, is it not?

Not only that- PBKs believe all the female parts are 'cowardice'. So, obviously, they too will have something similar to Bhakti sanskaars.

Both of the above, prove that the effort of all their 4.5 lakh souls (except the top 8 who play male roles) are incomplete.

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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by sita » 14 May 2016

PBKs believe except the top 8 souls- all the rest get punishment. So, definitely, except them, all the rest will have some sanskaars of Bhakti, is it not?
No, one can receive punishment without leaving the body.
Not only that- PBKs believe all the female parts are cowardice. So, obviously, they too will have something similar to Bhakti sanskaars.
Do they believe so? Is this why they believe Mahakali to destroy all the demons. Do you need to be a coward to do that? It is also said that the small kumaris will shoot arrows of knowledge to the big sanyasis. It is these sanyasis who are the cowards and a ShivShakti can never be a coward. Baba has put the responsibility on the mothers.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3258
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: Flaws in PBK Philosophy

Post by mbbhat » 14 May 2016

sita wrote:No, one can receive punishment without leaving the body.
1)Again, silly argument. Whatever it is- if one receives punishment, it means he will have Bhakti sanskaar till the end. So, how come the first explanation becomes valid? Are you able to understand what you are saying/implying?

2)OK, let us accept it. So, do you mean to say- some PBKs even if they have Bhakti sanskaars, will get chance to experience punishment in the same body, but some will not? Why? Is that not partiality?

3)After all- what greatness is there- in getting same body transformed- if/as except the top 8 all the rest get punishment?

Baba clearly says- one who gets punishment, his status would be lower.
Do they believe so?
Already proof is given to you. Arjun soul himself had given statement that- purity of sister Vedanti is also 'cowardice'. Already shown even to you.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests