BKWSU asking for Virendra Dev Dixit's proof he is ShivBaba

[fluffy bunny]

• a) I don't "support the PBKs", and
  b) There are plenty of other people who criticise the BKs

I am trying to pick the objective truth of of this unholy mess and I am for reason, responsibility and ethics.

I think you are capable of much better and more objective thought, and so I am encouraging you to do so. So much of the tit for tat argument BKs employ against the PBKs is weak, pathetic and illogical.

Do I think the BKs have a problem with pride and vanity ..." Sure. It's not a personal criticism. It's a statement of fact. It always disappointed me about them. They even admit it themselves but in more subtle language.

Criticism, or making critiques, is a very necessary service to perform. Especially to Silver Age BKs.

Do you know the story of the "The Emperor's New Clothes"?

It is a remembrance of Confluence Age.

Yes, it is true ... I will go to the Golden Age, most of the BK leadership will come at the end of the Silver Age, and a few will have their best time in the Copper Age. Who wants to be Silver Aged Emperor? It's far better to be a cremator in the first generation of Sat Yuga.

[mbbhat]

I think you are capable of much better and more objective thought, and so I am encouraging you to do so.

Thank you. but, you see- there is no higher power than Baba and drama.Even God says- I am bound in drama.

Baba says= Maya is also almighty. It rules for the whole of half Kalpa. So- what can I do?
and Baba says- be in sakshi stage and unlimited dis interest.

Even Christ was hanged.

If you see Christians, you cannot love Christ. [You will have to see just Christ or those good saints in Christianism].

Similarly- if you see BKs, you cannot love God of BKs. You need to see only God or those who have done very good effort.

That is why Baba says- "see Father, follow Father. Do not see brothers."
Even Dadis stand at brothers' place.

We can see just Brahma and Mama. But at present they are not there. so how to see them?

To have faith in incorporeal only is the way to see them. [Like we need to see (love and have faith in) govt and not govt employees].

[arjun]

We can see just Brahma and Mama. But at present they are not there. so how to see them?

Even they were imperfect. Mama was better in imbibing knowledge, but Brahma Baba laid the foundation for Bhakti rituals like rakhi, Bhog, personal photographs, tolis, wearing deity-like dresses, etc. He even openly declared himself to be the Chariot of God thus acting against Shrimat.

[mbbhat]

1)Brahma Baba laid the foundation for Bhakti rituals like rakhi, Bhog, personal photographs, tolis, wearing deity-like dresses, etc. 2)He even openly declared himself to be the Chariot of God thus acting against Shrimat.

1)This has no proof,because Murli says- one should offer Bhog, can take photo with deity dress, can tie rakhi, toli, etc.

You may please list all the yaadgaars of BKs and PBKs in Bhaktimarg- if not here, in another topic or here-

http://bk-pbk.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t= ... 738#p41738


2)I do not think so. Where is the proof that he had declared so? BKs might have declared so-like what PBKs are doing now= claiming Mr. Dixit as Prajapita!

But- Have you heard of Murli point- Prajapita kaa alag photo honaa chaahiye- There should be a separate photo of Prajapita- When I get, I will put here.

Where does Murli point say- the Chariot should not declare that it is Chariot?

[arjun]

1)This has no proof,because Murli says- one should offer Bhog, can take photo with deity dress, can tie rakhi, toli, etc.

You may please list all the yaadgaars of BKs and PBKs in Bhaktimarg- if not here, in another topic or here-

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2099&p=41738#p41738

All these topics already discussed. U r free to continue with Bhakti.

2)I do not think so. Where is the proof that he had declared so? BKs might have declared so-like what PBKs are doing now= claiming Mr. Dixit as Prajapita!

But- Have you heard of Murli point- Prajapita kaa alag photo honaa chaahiye- There should be a separate photo of Prajapita- When I get, I will put here.

Where does Murli point say- the Chariot should not declare that it is Chariot?

There are numerous lines in Murlis which show that Dada Lekhraj declared himself as the Chariot of Shiv.
Anyway, u r free to think that it is good for Chariot to declare himself as God's medium.

[fluffy bunny]

There are numerous lines in Murlis which show that Dada Lekhraj declared himself as the Chariot of Shiv.

And let us all remember, that until sometime around 1950, there was no Shiva Baba mentioned and so for 14 or more years, Lekhraj Kirpalani considered himself to be Krishna and god or ... literally ... "greater than god". Those are the exact words and these were declared by Mama (Om Radhe), number two soul in the world.

For the period when the yugya was at it most pure, Lekhraj Kirpalani was living the life of a Krishna surrounded by his gopies.

This is a fact.

[mbbhat]

There are numerous lines in Murlis which show that Dada Lekhraj declared himself as the Chariot of Shiv.

.
Hope PBKs may succeed in putting them here and prove theirself.

[fluffy bunny]

There is proof that Lekhraj Kirpalani declared himself to be God, Prajapati God Brahma, and "greater than god" for the first 15 years or so until around 1950.

There was no mention of Shiva at all.

[arjun]

Hope PBKs may succeed in putting them here and prove theirself

"बाबा ने हमारा रथ लोन पर लिया है। बाबा तो इस रथ की खातिरी करेंगे। पहले तो समझता था मैं आत्मा इस रथ को खिलाता हूँ। अब कहेंगे इनको खिलाने वाला वह है। बाबा भी हमको खिलाते हैं। हम भी उनको खिलाते हैं। बाबा खुद कहते हैं मैं बहुत जन्मों के अन्त के जन्म में प्रवेश करता हूँ। यह अपने जन्मों को नहीं जानते हैं। मैं जानता हूँ।" (ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक ८.११.०७, पृ.३)

“Baba has taken my Chariot on loan. Baba will extend hospitality to this Chariot. Earlier I used to think that I, a soul, feed this Chariot. Now it will be said that it is He who feeds this one. Baba also feeds me. I too feed Him. Baba Himself says - I enter at the end of many births. This one does not know about his births. I know."(Revised Sakar Murli dated 08.11.07, pg 3 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

“बाप को याद कर बहुत खुशी में रहना है। मात-पिता से हमको बहुत सुख घनेरे मिलते हैं। यह ब्रह्मा कहेंगे ना – बाबा से हमें वर्सा मिलता है। बाबा ने हमारा रथ लोन लिया है। अब बाबा तो इस रथ की खातिरी करेंगे। पहले तो समझता था – मैं आत्मा इस रथ को खिलाता हूँ। यह भी रथ है ना। अब कहेंगे इनको वही खिलाने वाला है। इस रथ की सम्भाल करनी है। घोड़े पर साहेब लोग चढ़ते हैं तो घोड़े को हाथ से खिलायेंगे, कभी पीठ पर हाथ फेरेंगे। बहुत खातिरी करते हैं क्योंकि उन पर सवारी करते हैं। बाबा इस पर सवारी करते हैं तो क्या बाबा खातिरी नहीं करते होंगे? बाबा जब स्नान करते हैं तो समझते हैं हम भी स्नान करते हैं, बाबा को भी कराना है क्योंकि उसने भी इस रथ का लोन लिया है। शिवबाबा कहते हैं मैं भी तुम्हारे शरीर को स्नान कराता हूँ, खिलाता हूँ। मैं नहीं खाता हूँ, शरीर को खिलाता हूँ। बाबा खिलाते हैं, खाते नहीं हैं। यह सब किस्म-किस्म के ख्यालात चलते हैं – स्नान के समय, घूमने के समय। यह तो अनुभव की बात है ना।“ (ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक २२.११.०८, पृ. ३)

“You should remain happy in the remembrance of the Father. We get a lot of happiness from the mother and the Father. This Brahma will say, will he not that – I get inheritance from Baba. Baba has taken my Chariot on loan. Well Baba will serve this Chariot. Earlier I used to think – I, a soul, feed this Chariot. This is also a Chariot, isn’t it? Now I will say – He is the one who feeds it. I have to take care of this Chariot. When Officers mount a horse, they feed it with their own hands; sometimes they feel its back with their hands. They take care (of the horse) a lot because they ride on them. Baba rides on this one; so doesn’t Baba take care (of this one)? When Baba takes bath, he feels – I also take bath and I have to bathe Baba as well because He has also taken this Chariot on loan. ShivBaba says – I also bathe your body, I feed it. I do not eat (myself), I feed the body. Baba feeds; He does not eat. These are the different kinds of thoughts that come to my mind while bathing, while taking a stroll. This is a matter of experience, isn’t it?”(Revised Sakar Murli dated 22.11.08, pg 3 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

[mbbhat]

1)There is proof that Lekhraj Kirpalani declared himself to be God, Prajapati God Brahma, and "greater than god" for the first 15 years or so until around 1950.

2)There was no mention of Shiva at all.

I do not think that Lekhraj declared so. It is that others said so. Because they got such visions.

2)This does not prove that he declared so. only point is- real knowledge was not given at that time. see the Murli point below.

SM 4-9-82(2):- IS DRAMA KO BADAA YUKTI SE SAMAJHNAA HOTAA HAI. Nayi duniyaa may sab kuch nayaa hotaa hai. YAH KITNI SAHAJ BAATEIN HAIN. ACHCHAA, YAH BHI SAMAJH MAY NAA AAYE, TOH BAAP KO BADE PYAAR SE Yaad KARO. ISLIYE YAH SAB MAHEEN BAATEIN BABA NE DER (= DERI = LATER) SE SAMJHAAYI HAIN. SHURU MAY BAHUT SAHAJ THOTHLI BAATEIN SUNAATE THAY. AISEY THODE HI KAHENGE BABA NE YAH SAB PAHLEY KYON NAHIN SUNAAYA KI AATMAA ITNI CHOTI HAI. Drama may jo kuch paas huvaa, kalp pahley maafik. Jaise samjhaayaa thaa, vaise samjhaa rahe hain. Manushy is drama ke bandhan may baandhaa huvaa hai. Kalp baad phir bhi aisey hi sunaavoongaa.

= With a great yukti, the knowledge of drama is to be understood. ... Hence all these deep points , Baba taught later. In the beginning, he used to explain simple things. You cannot say- why Baba did not say initially itself that soul is such a small point ....

[mbbhat]

That is good that Arjun soul supplied the Murli points. but where it is said that Brahma baba was wrong in that or he did it with ego?

SM 4-9-82(1):- Baap kitnaa nirahankaari rahte hain. JISMAY PRAVESH KARTE THAIN, VAH BHI KITNAA NIRAHANKAARI HAIN. PRAJAPITA BRAHMA KE KITNEY DHER BACHCHE HAIN. CHALAN KITNI SAADHAARAN HAI. JAISE GHAR MAY BADAA BABA CHALTE HAIN. NIRAAKAAR KE LIYE BHI KAHTE HAIN NIRAHANKAARI. GUPT HAI NA. INKO YAH NAHIN RAHTAA KI HUMAARAA SHOW HOVE, BHABHKEY SE SABKO PATAA PADEY. Bhabhke se naam toh hotaa hai na. Baap kahte hain yah sab rasam yah Kaliyugi deh abhimaaniyon ki hai. Yahaan toh shaanth may aate jaate hain. BABA TOH HUMESHAA KAHTE STATION PAR KOYI NA AAVE. KOYI HUNGAAMAA NAHIN.

= How egoless is the Father. in whom he enters, how much ego free even he is. .... How he walks. Like the eldest Father in a house. ... He does not have any expectation to be showed/projected. ... even when Baba used to travel, Baba says to children not even to come to station....

Even when God Father certifies brahma Baba, I do not know how PBKs give such a judgment?

[fluffy bunny]

2)This does not prove that he declared so. only point is- real knowledge was not given at that time.

It is too great a distraction from discussing why Lekhraj Kirpalani did not mention Shiva until after 1950 to discussing the form of the soul.


Had Lekhraj Kirpalani mentioned Shiva in the 1930s and 1940s, then I am sure we would see some evidence of it.

There is none. He did not. In the 1930s and 1940s, they believed God was omnipresent, and that they became "greater than God".

To quote Om Radhe on behalf of the yugya, "Aham Brahma Asmi" ... I am Brahman. The story in Adi Dev etc is utterly false.


You need to look at the evidence, have you seen the old posters the BKs have kept hidden?

Top BKs write that Lekhraj Kirpalani checked all the posters and advised on their creation many times during their creation before they were published ... and that state Prajapati God Brahma. Also in the official books sent to kings and queens and so on from Om Mandli, it says the same thing. Why would he allow them to be sent out?

Why did he let them make and publish them?

What should interest us all the most is the meeting at which it was formally decided to change the religion from omnipresence and Prajapati God Brahma, to Shiva bindi ... how and when it happened, and who was there.

[mbbhat]

I have seen the picture - Prajapati Brahma (instead of Prajapita). That picture was lying there till 2010 and I think it is there still now.

I do not know whether it is Brahma Baba let children to publish or ShivBaba inside his body directed.

You may be interested in evidence. You may try. but, Bba says in Murli- the knowledge will change, old points will not come into use later.

Initially, i had said god(I) am akahnd jyoti, then ling, then angusht (thumb like) , then star, then point.

As a company progresses, the older technology totally becomes obsolete. those who are interested in PRODUCTIVITY will not be interested in it. but others may be.

so- it is upto individual to search, comment and criticize.

[fluffy bunny]

I am sorry but ... initially, they said "we are god" and "god is omnipresent ... Braham". That is a *BIG* difference.

It was not until around 1950 that they started to say Shiva and then determined his form. I am very interested to find out how and when and who was involved in this revolution of faith. It must have happened after they went to Abu.

No BK so far has explained this. It still remains one of the big secrets in the Yugya. And I believe they still sell books with false information like Adi Dev etc.


Unfortunately, the Murlis have been so doctored they are no longer trustworthy or reliable. Until the BKWSU releases the original copies we are all in the dark, so there is little point in discussion them. You are using something for evidence that has been changed time and time again by human beings.

The BKs lose an argument with Virendra Dev Dixit ... or another one of their God's prediction fails ... so they run back to Abu and someone re-writes the Murli .. then they come back to say, "God says this now! It was only Lekhraj Kirpalani making a mistake!". And yet they still claim Lekhraj Kirpalani is perfect? For me, being perfect is not making mistakes.

One cannot hold a discussion with such people or use their "evidence" for proof. In the law they would be called "unreliable witness".

[mbbhat]

I did not read your post fully in detail. but, got its essence since i had read your similar posts before and also have replied there itself according to my capacity. Those who are interested to find proof, it is up to them. All the best.