Shankar's Part ?

[ANU]

Please, explain to me more about flawlessness and following Ram as Brahma. I find the topic really interesting and feel that my knowledge about it is full of gaps.

Baba called Ram Shankar. He used 'Shankar' in two ways - as combination of Ram, Krishna and Shiva and as another name for Ram. How exactly we should follow Ram as Brahma and not follow him as Shankar, when this is one and the same person? The person is the same and personality is the same, so there is one and the same model to be followed and not followed.

PersonallyI do not know Baba Virendra Dev Dixit or Ram. I know nothing about his life, past and present and I don't know what kind of practices that he does I should follow. I know him from classes - narrations and discussions. In some classes Baba behaves in the way which I personally cannot call flawless when I compare his behavior with the code of conduct that for example I should follow in my professional life. He repeatedly violates those rules and ethics that I am obliged to follow in my work. This observation leads me sometimes to a strange feeling of disonance.

I also know, as I was instructed, that Baba lives hidden from the world, meaning no one knows where he lives, where he is registered as a citizen, where and when he goes. For years I haven't been able to digest and understand why an innocent person (here flawless person) who has good positive intention and aims at benefit of the world choses the path of hiding; why he boldly criticises the world and openly clashes with many in his classes and then he hides and doesn't face the cosequences himself, but has children or students to face them?

[arjun]

And what about the full-of-flaws Advanced Knowledge....are they to be ignored and accepted without questioning....or they are to be fought with weapons of points from Murlis and Vanis !!!!!!

Everyone has a right to question the basic or advance knowledge if they feel it is flawed.

Please, explain to me more about flawlessness and following Ram as Brahma. I find the topic really interesting and feel that my knowledge about it is full of gaps.

I was only reacting to what shivsena wrote. I agree with you that there on many occasions his behaviour does not appear to be in accordance with Shrimat. But for that it is said that it has to be attributed to the soul of Krishna. I personally asked him this question on someone's behalf and he gave the same answer. But ultimately as you said the body is one, so the practical consequences have to be faced by the soul which owns the body.

As regards following the Brahma through the soul of Ram is concerned I just wish to say that we should follow whatever positive things we find in his words and actions and leave the rest. If you do not like any aspect, you can bring it to his notice or to the notice of others through this forum or any other forum if you wish.

PersonallyI do not know Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit or Ram. I know nothing about his life, past and present

But your writings on this forum speak otherwise. It appears as if you have been very close to Baba and have toured with him extensively which is why you could observe that he consumes garlic as medicine. Moreover, whenever I quoted any discussion CD you said that you were aware of it. It goes to show that you have been a pukka PBK. Anyway, I have to believe whatever you say as truth.

[ANU]

But your writings on this forum speak otherwise. It appears as if you have been very close to Baba and have toured with him extensively which is why you could observe that he consumes garlic as medicine. Moreover, whenever I quoted any discussion CD you said that you were aware of it. It goes to show that you have been a pukka PBK. Anyway, I have to believe whatever you say as truth.

Too many assumptions and too few questions :) - in my opinion
I know Baba only from recordings and those few classes in which I directly participated. I saw Baba eating mixed garlic during an unofficial meeting after a class, when the mother who travels with him herself said that she gave Baba garlic especially prepared for him by doctors to decrease his BP.

Regarding quoted CDS - yes, for many years I studied very diligently - I listened each class few times, took notes, compared, gathered points; I dedicated all my life, every second to understand AK. I skipped all descrepancies, ambiguities, no matter how Baba bahaved and what he said and how illogical explanations seemed to me. I felt something strange when I learned that what is suppossed to be the basis of AK - a part of the explanation of the Trimurti, meaning the story of Sevakram and his wife who was Dada's elder sister and the story of Nirmalshanta Dadi who was supposed to be Sevakram's wife - is completely contradictory to what Nirmalshanta Dadi herself writes about her story and what is also confirmed by Om Radhe i her accounts from 1938. It was one of my friends from the west who asked me to go through the Trimurti Class 975 and compare it with the set of documents gathered by that person. That person asked me to share my opinion. I did it and discovered supprising discrepancies at the very basis of Baba's explanations - Sevakram was not the husband of Dada's sister, Nirmalshanta was not their adopted daughter and many other things.

I agree with you that there on many occasions his behaviour does not appear to be in accordance with Shrimat. But for that it is said that it has to be attributed to the soul of Krishna.I personally asked him this question on someone's behalf and he gave the same answer. But ultimately as you said the body is one, so the practical consequences have to be faced by the soul which owns the body.

I personally don't find this issue easy. First of all we were istructed that we should think that it is only Shiva who speaks. Then, when something arises our doubts we are instructed that it is Krishna. Don't you notice that these two intructions are contradictory. We are instructed that Krishna does something bad, yet we are said not to think that this is Krishna, but Shiva himself. The above mentioned instructions seem to be illogical and inconsistent. (I like logical thinking and consistency - I may not be able to be logic and consistent all the time; I aim at them.) Second, Baba is supposed to play the role of the teacher. The teacher sets examples; Baba himself said at least few times that the teacher who doesn't follow the directions he teaches and who does not do in practice what he teaches, is not a good teacher. Finally, I do not understand why we are given instructions about the presence of three souls in one body and we are taught that all of them act through that body, but we are not supposed to use that knowledge and we are supposed to think that Shiva does and speaks everything. And at the very end, we say that AK is a product of churning; only human souls churn; Shiva doesn't churn, so logically the AK comes from the human soul, yet we are instructed to think that Shiva narrates this knowledge. We are supposed to become blind and deaf at everything; just accept everything as the word of Shiva.

Brother arjuna, all these instructions sound to me illogical and inconsistent and remind me of brain washing. At this moment I feel afraid of this. Honestly. Either there is something wrong in my mind and intellect and I simply have gone crazy or mad; or there is something wrong in those above mentioned directions which I received in AK

As regards following the Brahma through the soul of Ram is concerned I just wish to say that we should follow whatever positive things we find in his words and actions and leave the rest. If you do not like any aspect, you can bring it to his notice or to the notice of others through this forum or any other forum if you wish.

Brother, my doubt about this is 'why should I follow what is imperfect and what is human?'. I ask myself repeatedly:'Why should I follow a human soul? What indeed means: 'Follow Brahma'? One Brahma died and was a doubled faced bagula (Baba's words); another Brahma (Jagadamba, meaning the one who is supposed to be revealed at the end) left the Yagya and according to Baba's explanations will bring about killing the children. The third Brahma - Brahma-Ram - plays the role of amaryada (Baba's words). The fourth Brahma Om Radhe - died; the fifth Brahma - Vaishnavi - is not present. So, all this appears to me as unclear.

You say that we are to follow whatever positive things we find and leave the rest. It doesn't convince me. If I was to do like this, I would have to judge "this and this and good, that and that is bad; this comes from this soul, that comes from that soul" and obviously I would not follow the instructions mentioned above to think that everything comes from Shiva himself.

For me 'follow Brahma' means now "be contructive, be creative, be positive". To do this I do not need to follow any human soul; I need to discover my inner potential for being constructiove, creative and positive and use it.

[arjun]

It was one of my friends from the west who asked me to go through the Trimurti Class 975 and compare it with the set of documents gathered by that person. That person asked me to share my opinion. I did it and discovered supprising discrepancies at the very basis of Baba's explanations - Sevakram was not the husband of Dada's Sister, Nirmalshanta was not their adopted daughter and many other things.

I agree that the Yagya history is still unclear and some PBKs (both in India and abroad) are tying to find the truth. But we need to be patient in this regard.

We are supposed to become blind and deaf at everything

I don't think so. And the hundreds of discussion CDs are a proof for this. May be you or others may not agree with the replies given by Baba, but the process of discussion and research is on. One can ask any question to Baba.

You say that we are to follow whatever positive things we find and leave the rest. It doesn't convince me. If I was to do like this, I would have to judge "this and this and good, that and that is bad; this comes from this soul, that comes from that soul" and obviously I would not follow the instructions mentioned above to think that everything comes from Shiva himself.

I respect your decision.
OGS,
Arjun

[ANU]

I agree that the Yagya history is still unclear and some PBKs (both in India and abroad) are tying to find the truth. But we need to be patient in this regard.

Brother, if something is unclear and it not based on hard facts, we are not supposed to spread it as the truth and we are not supposed to say that this is knowledge. It should be called 'assumtion' or 'hypothesis'. The practice of AK aprears to be different from what common sense says. We (in AK) often spread assumtions and informations as facts and later on we are trying to find proofs and explain the reality in such the way which will fit to those information which we spread.

Who is the one who narrates the history of the Yagya? Baba or students? Whi is the teacher who is supposed to clarify the histroy and set it on proofs? Baba or students? If the students are supposed to find out the history of the Yagya, what is the role of the teacher? Does he rely on facts or on imagination?

I came to AK to know the Truth. Baba told me that AK is the Truth. Now, I learn that PBKs (not even the teacher but students) are only trying to find the truth. So, I understand that neither they know nor does the teacher. They may know in the future, but nothing can be sure. Then, why do students in AK say that they know the truth and boast saying that they are better than bhagats in BK or bhagats in the world? The situation seems to me hilarious, indeed. I feel surprised that things look like this. Never mind...

I don't think so. And the hundreds of discussion CDs are a proof for this. May be you or others may not agree with the replies given by Baba, but the process of discussion and research is on. One can ask any question to Baba.

Those who ask questions have been called devils/assuras by Baba. Moreover, Baba often doesn't respond clearly to questions. Sometimes he responds in the way which creates even more ambiguities and raises more questions. And, people ask those questions. Then, Baba says that those who repeatedly ask questions play the role of catching God by his mouth.

There are also numerous vital questions to which he simply doesn't respond.


I don't think we need to be patient. Over 70 years passed and we are in a greater darkness than the world outside, in my opinion. What we need is logical thinking and clear and accurate language, honest way of communication and 100% specified information (not general and abstract, but specified). So far we have relied on the absract and general information which leaves students with a huge margin of interpretation; so huge that statemets may mean almost everything, depending on what we what to say or proof.

[arjun]

Who is the one who narrates the history of the Yagya? Baba or students? Whi is the teacher who is supposed to clarify the histroy and set it on proofs? Baba or students? If the students are supposed to find out the history of the Yagya, what is the role of the teacher? Does he rely on facts or on imagination?

Baba gives the general (basic and advance) knowledge of the beginning, middle and end of the world cycle. He cannot be expected to give a datewise history of the Yagya like a historian. Doing research on the Yagya's history is children's job. Yes, Baba can verify/certify the research work. He cannot and does not rely on imagination.

Those who ask questions have been called devils/assuras by Baba. Moreover, Baba often doesn't respond clearly to questions. Sometimes he responds in the way which creates even more ambiguities and raises more questions. And, people ask those questions. Then, Baba says that those who repeatedly ask questions play the role of catching God by his mouth.

You have chosen to quote only the negative aspects of question answer sessions. Baba has enumerated so many positive aspects of these discussions too. It is upto each individual to decide whether he wants to clear his doubts and become tension-free or to live with the stress of doubts in the mind.

I have personally asked hundreds of questions to Baba through emails, phone calls and personal meetings, but I never felt as if I am a demon or that Baba is looking at me as a devil.

[ANU]

Baba gives the general (basic and advance) knowledge of the beginning, middle and end of the world cycle. He cannot be expected to give a datewise history of the Yagya like a historian. Doing research on the Yagya's history is children's job. Yes, Baba can verify/certify the research work. He cannot and does not rely on imagination.

Dear Brother

Let's rely on facts. Please, go through the VCD 975 which is dedicated to a detailed explanation of the history of Sevakram. Please go through some other classes dedicated to the story of the Yagya and the Trimurti. Baba is the narrator. Sevakram was introduced as the husband of Dada's sister and both Sevakram and his wife were introduced as the adopted parents of Nirmalshanta Dadi - these facts were introduced as the basis of the Trimurti, the concept of Vishnu and the history of the Yagya? This is completely contradictory to what we know about Dada's sister and Nirmalshanta Dadi. Baba refused to clarify the issue, despite the fact children presented him the results of research.

On what did Baba rely when he narrated the class in which he said that Dada's sister was the wife of Sevakram?
How can a professional teacher who is supposed to be the teacher of the teachers teach like this? How can someone who cannot refer to dates ad provide with accurate facts teach the true history?
On the basis of what do you know that he doesn't rely on imagination?

Dear borther, I think that something is wrong. Where in the Sakar Murli you found the point that the children are responsible for doing what is the teacher's duty? Have you ever met a teacher in the worldwho teaches some ideas and tells his students to find proofs for his ideas? I haven't. Never mind, still when children provide Baba with results of their research and those results are contradictory to his theory, Baba tells them that they should chose only what is in accordance to his theory and reject the rest. These are facts and I may contact you with those students who faced this. Sevakram was not the husband of Dada's sister and Baba refused to clarify why he taught that Sevakram was her husband.

You have chosen to quote only the negative aspects of question answer sessions. Baba has enumerated so many positive aspects of these discussions too. It is upto each individual to decide whether he wants to clear his doubts and become tension-free or to live with the stress of doubts in the mind.

I find what you decribed as a proof of double standards. I personally have asked Baba to help me understand few very important aspects of knowlegde which don't allow me to go ahead. One of them is the issue of Sevakram story. I asked him many times. He didn't answer at all.

[pbkindiana]

shivsena wrote:
If ardh-nari-ishwar is the combined form of Rambap+Brahma Maa, then why define Bap(jagatpita) and Maa(jagatmata) seperately in nischay-patra.

If Rambap and Brahma Maa are combined in one body, then where is the need of a third seperate personality(kamla devi) to be labelled as jagdamba....Does it not create more confusion !!!!

When it is said as mother - Father, then both of them should be in corporeal bodies. If they are not in corporeal forms, then how will the rudramala be created?

As Brahma alias Krishna does not have his own body, then he enters the appointed Chariot of Shiva to play the mother's part in the pbk family as in ardhanareeshwar.

[ANU]

As Brahma alias Krishna does not have his own body, then he enters the appointed Chariot of Shiva to play the mother's part in the PBK family as in ardhanareeshwar.

Dear Indie, how do you experience this part of Krishna as the mother in PBKs? Will the mother interfere in what the Father says and disturb him instead of supportig him and speak the same language at least in front of the children? This is what Krishna is doing acc to AK. Moreover, AK students have been instructed that since Jagadamba left, now Yogini is their mother. Finally who plays the role of ardhanarishvar. In classes have heard that ardhanarishvar is: 1. Jagadamba + Jagatpita 2> Ram + Krishna 3. Shankar + Yogini....

I would love to finally know who is ardhanarishvar. Baba hasn't answer to this question for over 2 years.

[shivsena]

When it is said as mother - Father, then both of them should be in corporeal bodies.

If both mother and Father are in corporeal bodies, then why in Bhakti ardh-nari-ishwar is depicted as one single body as shown below.

ardh-nari-ishwar.jpg (15.47 KiB) Viewed 7039 times

If they are not in corporeal forms, then how will the rudramala be created?

Rudramala is not saakari mala... souls who have attained the nirakari stage through aakari farishta stage(karmatit stage) are called rudramala.

[pbkindiana]

Anu wrote:
Dear Indie, how do you experience this part of Krishna as the mother in PBKs?

By actions, by the way he speaks and times when i receive answers. Observe him, when he plays the soft role, then it is Brahma(mother) playing her role. When i first entered in AIVV, he feeds me few times, doesn't a mother feeds her children.

I know sometimes when Rambap is interacting with me, ie. when Rambap gives superb explanation to my questions, when Rambap can catch my thoughts and asked me to do accordingly ,and when i was told of his strict nature to the children in the Yagya.

Will the mother interfere in what the Father says and disturb him instead of supportig him and speak the same language at least in front of the children?

becoz mother's purity level is higher than the Father's and when the Father's purity level is higher, than Father is able to control mother. Baba always say that purity is the basis for everything just for eg in Bhakti-marg, the conflict between Vishwamitra and Vashishta. Vishwamitra (Ram) has so many weapons (knowledge) and Vashishta (Krishna) has the stick of purity; Vishwamitra lost to Vashishta in the beginning and after Vishwamitra did penance, he gained victory.

Also the establishment of the 9 groups of brahmins have to take place in sangam yug only and it takes place only in AK otherwise how will the 9 religions surface fr Copper Age onwards. Filteration takes place and souls go automatically to their own clan and when revelation takes place, then these 9 groups will form into one universal brotherhood. Sangan yug is a school or university where shooting is performed for the broad drama of 5000 years to commence.

It is so important to know what is AK all about so that you will never leave Father's hand. The biggest question paper is of realising the Father. Maya creates obstacles in the path of complete recognition of the Father. Know Ram first, then only you will recognize Shiva.

This is what Krishna is doing acc to AK. Moreover, AK students have been instructed that since Jagadamba left, now Yogini is their mother.

In hinduism, it is said that when mother has left, then the elder sister becomes the mother. She plays the role of mother only but she does not become the Father's wife. Yogini is a bead of the rudramala, so her relationship with Ram is of brother to brother as the beads of the rudramala will attain the stage of brotherhood irrespective of males or females. I am so shocked you being an Indian and the other indians who had posted negative comments of yogini are not aware of this simple fact.

Finally who plays the role of ardhanarishvar. In classes have heard that ardhanarishvar is: 1. Jagadamba + Jagatpita 2> Ram + Krishna 3. Shankar + Yogini....

I would love to finally know who is ardhanarishvar. Baba hasn't answer to this question for over 2 years.

Baba has explained few times that ardhanareeshwar part is of Ram and Krishna. Baba says that mother Brahma enters into Father and plays her part, so we receive sustenance fr both mother and Father.. Both lawful and loveful souls work through the same body and when they attain the perfect stage, then it is 'Brahma so Vishnu'.

indie.

[pbkindiana]

shivsena wrote:
If both mother and Father are in corporeal bodies, then why in Bhakti ardh-nari-ishwar is depicted as one single body as shown below.

It is depicted becoz Brahma/Krishna doesn't have his own corporeal body to play the mother's role. If there is no mother's role in AIVV, then children will run away fr the Yagya as there is no loveful role. No one can tolerate too much strictness as Ram has a strict nature.

Rudramala is not saakari mala... souls who have attained the nirakari stage through aakari farishta stage(karmatit stage) are called rudramala.

Rudramala is a gathering of 108 brahmins who have attained their nirakari stage whilst being in their bodies and never after their demise. Farishta stage is not the karmateet stage as farishtas are not worshipped in hinduism. Go to the Hindu temples in your country and see for yourself whether farishtas or deities are being worshipped.

I am so sick and tired of your views regarding of the bodiless godmother when you still have not produce any SM to support your views that ShivBaba is a combination of Shiva + Ram + Shakti. It is simple logic that when we are in bodies, then we should have a bodily Father with an incorporeal stage to guide us to attain the nirakari stage too. How to view the nirakari stage without the body. People say, you look like an angel-- do they say to human beings or to souls without bodies. If you expect SM or AV fr others to support their views, then i expect it fr you too.

indie.

[ANU]

Dear Indie

I appreciate your post and explanations. I am sorry, I do not find them useful. For me they sound illogical and sometimes even contrary to what Baba in AK teaches. I understood from your explanation that your are trying hard to prove that there is no ambiguities in the issue of ardhanarishwar in AK. I find lots of ambiguities and i would like to remind you of a simple fact that it is Baba himself who teaches that ardhanarishwar is 1. Ram + Krishna; 2. Shankar and Yogini 3. Jagatpita + Jagadamba; 4. Shiva + Shakti. It is not true that Baba teaches that only Ram+Krishna form ardhanarishwar.

Refering generally to what you wrote I would like to say, neither God is supposed to establish Hinduism nor we are following it. So, there is no reason to show Kaliyugi customs in Hinduism of adopting numerous mothers. The idea that there is one Father and numerous mothers is a reflection of degraded Iron Aged custom of polygamy established by humans in India long before Muslims came. Are we to teach it and to follow it?

becoz mother's purity level is higher than the Father's and when the Father's purity level is higher, than Father is able to control mother.

Dear Indie - this statement is nonsense. If you focus on Ram and Krishna as arhanarishwar, you will need also to accept what Baba teaches about the total degradation of Krishna who is totally shyam (dirty, dark); so logically thinking he cannot be pure at this time at all. After all who can be purer than teh Father Shiva?

Also the establishment of the 9 groups of Brahmins have to take place in sangam yug only and it takes place only in AK otherwise how will the 9 religions surface fr Copper Age onwards.

What is the connection between 9 groups of Brahmins and ardhanarishwar? Indie, please stick to the topic.

Baba says that mother Brahma enters into Father and plays her part, so we receive sustenance fr both mother and Father.

Indie, this is Shiva who enters the body and then the body is called Brahma; not the other way round. This is one of the main points in Gyan. However, if we rely on what you are saying, why shall we need Yogini for sustenance as a mother? Why shall we need more mothers? The sustenance would be received from mother and Father when Brahma is in the Father. Please, think how illogical and mutually contradictory your explanations are.

FInally, where in SM was it taught that we should have numerous mothers?

[arjun]

why shall we need Yogini for sustenance as a mother? Why shall we need more mothers?

• In front of whom are you sitting here? Double Father and Mother. There it is not so. You know that here there is a Father, mother and junior mother (choti Mama) also in an unlimited sense. There are so many relationships. (Mu.8.3.99, pg.1, beginning)
• Yahaan tum kiske saamney baithey ho? Double Baap aur Maa. Vahaan toh aisey nahi hai. Tum jaantey ho yahaan behad ka Baap bhi hai, Mama bhi hai, choti Mama bhi hai. Itney sambandh ho jaatey hain. (Mu.8.3.99, pg.1, aadi)

[shivsena]

If there is no mother's role in AIVV, then children will run away fr the Yagya as there is no loveful role. No one can tolerate too much strictness as Ram has a strict nature.

Rambap has a strict nature....so why does he allow Krishna to interfere in his narration of advance knowledge....or there is partiality in his strictness...he will allow Krishna to intervene, but if any soul asks him a query from Murlis then he does not like it and gives an ambigious answer.

It is now an accepted fact by PBKs that Krishna is interfering with advance knowledge....what I have still not understood is his motive behind the interference and the casual attitude of Rambap just observing his interference, and the supreme teacher not doing anything about it.

Can any pbk please give his views about the above and also what is the aim and objective of inventing advance knowledge by either Shiv or Ram .
shivsena.