Flaws in PBK Philosophy

[sita]

Are PBKs not interested in knowing the accurate biography of THEIR 'ShivBaba', in corporeal, and sharing the same with others? Or do they consider that this aspect does not form part of the so-called 'unlimited clarifications' of knowledge, and is therefore insignificant?

Just because I don't want to make loose connections it does not mean I'm not interested in the history of the Yagya.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 445) PBKs inadvertently imply- Saraswati = Brahma!

1) PBKs believe sister Vedanti is real Saraswati, Om Radhe is just title holder Saraswati.
But- PBKs believe - real Brahma is DLR (or sometimes KD, or sometimes DLR in KD).
HOW COME then they pair REAL Brahma(DLR) with TITLE HOLDER Saraswati (Om Radhe)?

2) If PBKs believe real Brahma is KD (and not DLR), then what all they criticize about Brahma - would automatically be applicable to their own Jagadamba KD. - :laugh:

3) Further- "in PBK view"- - Mr Dixit, DLR, KD, sister Vedanti, Om Radhe - all are Brahmas- of which the last two are the Saraswatis.

So- "in PBK view"- All/both the Saraswatis are Brahmas!

* - Mr. Dixit usually gives title Brahma just to either DLR or KD.
Mr Dixit hesitates to take title Brahma/mother- all these already put in this topic. He wishes to take titles just Prajapita and Shankar.

# Flaw No. 446) How come PBKs say- "title-holder Saraswati"?

4) PBKs quote the Murli point (in twisted way- which is already proved here) which says- "Many have name Brahma" to claim that there are more Brahmas.

5) But, NO Murli POINT says- "Many have name Saraswati". So- how come PBKs use the concept of title holder Saraswati?
Their double-standard arguments are visible here- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=52351#p52351

6) Again- if PBKs like to say- there are 4/5 Brahmas, why only two Saraswatis- why not 4/5 Sarawatis too? - Is it that other Brahmas have no Saraswatis? - :laugh:

7) In PBK view- both the Saraswatis can have name Brahma even when they clearly state Shiv does not enter in them.
PBKs believe God does not enter either sister Vedanti or Om Radhe. Still they give them title Brahma. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE???

8) One one hand PBKs claim God enters only in TWO- but they openly say- God enters in THREE (Dixit, DLR and KD)!.

# Flaw No. 447) PBKs inadvertently imply- Mr Dixit (in his present birth itself) marries his child's daughter!

9) PBKs even say- Brahma(as well as KD) is/are the senior mother- who have no other mother. So- even sister Vedanti is child of both Lekhraj Kirpalani and KD.
So- "in PBK view"- Mr. Dixit marries his child's daughter! (PBKs believe DLR is child of Mr. Dixit, and DLR is mother of all the rest.

PBKs even believe- DLR is wife of Mr. Dixit (in case of Ardh Naareeshwar).

In the present birth itself Mr. Dixit gives Parvati/Lakshmi/Sita to sister Vedanti and he himself takes title Shankar/Narayan/Ram.

So- how much vyabheechaari Mr Dixit is- PBKs have to think about their own leader!

PBKs inadvertently imply- Mr Dixit gives birth to his own mother/s (KD and DLR)** too!

**- Since in PBK view- these two are the Big mothers, all the rest are children of them (including Mr. Dixit).


# Flaw No. 448) Mr Dixit and KD inadvertently have given divorce to each other:-

10) If we see practically, Mr. Dixit has kept his Jagadamba (KD) in total darkness. He cannot say- who is her couple bead. He even used her as scapegoat as already put here.
In fact,- logically- Jagadamba should be couple bead of Jagatpita- so obviously KD should be couple bead of Mr Dixit. But, he did not give that seat to her. He gave that seat to sister Vedanti. Practically, we can see that KD left AIVV in 1998.

PBKs have fallen into such a deep pit of spiritual suicides.

[sita]

I thought that Sarasvati in the advance knowledge - this name is given to Jagadamba. Please, check.

Their double-standard arguments are visible here- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2552&p=52351#p52351

There is not even a single argument there. It is only one Murli point quoted. How can a single Murli point without any interpretation be a double-standard argument. Now I will give a comment, so you can discuss.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 449) In PBK view- Saraswati is not a virgin:-

I thought that Sarasvati in the Advanced Knowledge - this name is given to Jagadamba. Please, check.

1) Sorry, it was my mistake, due to erroneous PBK philosophy. Because PBK philosophy is just a mixture. Murli point says- Jagadamba is Saraswati, who will become Lakshmi in next birth. But, nowhere PBK philosophy tallies.

2) But- whatever, PBKs may say- If they like to place their KD instead of sister Vedanti at the place of Saraswati, then PBKs are inadvertently implying that- DLR and KD are going to be a pair in the next birth. - :laugh: [since Murli point says- BS become LN]

Moreover, the PBK Saraswati is a mother (since she had married in lowkik way in 1998 and has two kukhvamshavali children. So- PBK Saraswati is not a virgin.
-------

There is not even a single argument there. It is only one Murli point quoted. How can a single Murli point without any interpretation be a double-standard argument.

I have taken many Murli points into consideration. We have written many posts here, have we not? On that basis only I have written. Either the frustration or ignorance of PBKs is clearly seen here. - :cool:

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 450) Murli almost certifies- PBKs remember only/mainly bodies-

1)SM 25-11-70(2):- Baap bigar aur koyi Baap kaa parichay de nahin saktaa. Kyonki Baap ko jaante hi nahin. YAHAAN BHI BAHUT HAIN JINKO BUDHI MAY NAHIN AATAA KI BAAP KO KAISE Yaad KAREY. MOONJHTE HAIN ITNI CHOTI BINDI, USKO KAISE Yaad KAREY. SHARIR TOH BADAA HAI NA. UNKO HI Yaad KARTE RAHTE HAIN. -1- [Yaad]

= Except Father, no one else can give introduction of the Father. Because they do not know the Father. Even here also, it does not sit in many children’s intellects, how to remember the Father. THEY GET CONFUSED, HE IS SUCH A SMALL POINT, HOW TO REMEMBER. BODY IS BIG. THEY ONLY REMEMBER BODY.

It is PBKs who usually get doubt and keep on asking- how to remember a point, etc, etc. -

2) SM 17-5-81(2):- Brahma samaaj math_vaale jyoti ko Paramatma kahte hain. Duniya may yah kisko bhi pata nahin hai ki Parampita Paramatma bindi hai. To moonjh padte hain. Bachche bhi kahte hain Baba kisko Yaad karen? Humney sunaa thaa vah badaa ling hai. Unko Yaad kiya jata hai. Ab bindi ko kaise Yaad kare? -26-

= Brahm samaaj people consider light as God. No one in this world knows that Supreme Father Supreme Soul is a point. Hence they get confused. Even children say, "Baba, whom should we remember? We had heard that He is a big ling. That can be remembered. Now, how to remember a Point?"

# Flaw No. 451) PBK bifurcation of "ParamPita and ParamAtma" is nothing but blatant violation of srimath:-

3) The Murli point No. 2) clearly says- Parampita Paramatma (Supreme Father Supreme Soul) is a Point. But, Mr Dixit bifurcated it, and took one of the titles (mostly Param Atma) to apply to himself, by his USUAL act of HK Hood.
----------
# Flaw No. 452) The PBK argument - "TITLE GOES TO BODY/CORPOREAL" fully fails:-

Discussed here in - Error No. 41) - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2593&p=52358#p52358

[sita]

Sorry, it was my mistake, due to erroneous PBK philosophy. Because PBK philosophy is just a mixture.

No, it is your mistake. You had misunderstood.

I have taken many Murli points into consideration. We have written many posts here, have we not? On that basis only I have written. Either the frustration or ignorance of PBKs is clearly seen here. - :cool:

No one knows what points you are taking into consideration. You are giving a link to a single point and expect people to know what you mean.

[mbbhat]

No, it is your mistake. You had misunderstood.

I had admitted that I had misunderstood it. But, then I had addressed even the other side (KD as Saraswati) as well. You did not try to reply to that at all. Instead you just took the opportunity to make a comment about someone, even after he had successfully addressed the issue. That is OK.
--------
# Flaw No. 453) PBK concept of "STRICTNESS of Father" fails by default itself:-

1) PBKs like to take example of Kaliyugi people and claim- "Mother is loveful, Father is strict". They claim that B baba was fully loveful, but Mr. Dixit would be strict.

2) But, PBKs believe B baba still controls the so-called, strict father of PBKs, since 1969 till date!

3) PBKs also believe LOVEFUL B baba commits atrocity on his own mother very badly! Nothing tallies.
[These are discussed in flaw No. 229 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&start=630#p51313 and 402]. But, now- let us see the direction of BapDada.

4) 14th Trance Message (soon after 18th January 1969) Pg 14 and 15 of the Hindi Book:- Aaj jab vatan may gayi, toh Baap aur Dada donon saamney khadey thay. Aur jaatey hee nayanon kee mulaakaath se sabhee kee jo Yaad-pyaar le gayi thi, vah de dee. Jaise hee main Yaad de rahee thi, toh Sakar Baba ne meraa haath pakadaa. Us haath pakadney may na maaool kyaa jaadoo thaa- aisey anubhav huvaa jaise sagar may koyi snaan karthaa hai toh aisey thode samay ke liye prem ke sagar may leen ho gayi. Uskay baad humney almighty Baba ki taraf dekhaa. Toh Baba ne kahaa bachchee, Baap may mukhy do (=2) gunn jo hain vah bachchon ne Sakar roop may anubhav kiyaa hai. VAH DO GUNN KOUNSEY HAIN? JITNAA HEE Gyan SWAROOP, UTNAA HEE PREM SWAROOP. TOH BACHCHON KO BHEE YAH DO GUNN APNEY HAR CHALAN MAY DHAARAN KARNEY HAIN. Phir mainey baba se poochaa ki pahley jo vatan may gaye huye bachchon kaa itnaa sanghatan thaa iskaa rahasy kyaa thaa? Baba ne kahaa pooraa raaz toh baad may chalkar sunaayenge.

= ....Then I turned towards the ALMIGHTY BABA. So, Baba said- child- Father had mainly two virtues- which children had experienced in Sakar. Which are the two virtues? To the extent he was 'Gyaan Swaroop' (knowledgeful), to the same extent he was 'Prem Swaroop' (loveful). So- children should also inculcate these two virtues in their conduct...

But, one of the most important matter in PBk philosophy is "One controlling the other- and committing atrocity on the other". Like - one Chariot controlling the other, child controlling the mother, etc, etc.

[sita]

I had admitted that I had misunderstood it.

You wanted to put the blame on the AK.

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 454) PBKs themselves are confused/unsure who is Saraswati:-

You wanted to put the blame on the AK.

1) When PBKs believe Om radhe enters sister Vedanti, and believe Om Radhe is also a 'Saraswati', then OBVIOUSLY, as per PBK theory, one would logically conclude that PBKs would give title 'Saraswati' to sister Vedanti as well (as their usual statement is- "title goes to the body".)

2) So, to say- "AIVV theory is erroneous and a mixture" was not a mistake. Even if it is a mistake, it is very small. You are just again trying to make unnecessary issues out of NOTHING.

3) PBK theory is nothing but mixtures-already proved. PBK mixtures are visible everywhere- flaw No. 353 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51906&hilit=mixture#p51906

Flaw No. 326 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=51788&hilit ... ted#p51788

4) PBKs trying to hide, and accuse others, is again visible here- flaw No. 121 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&p=50898&hilit=advocate#p50898

flaw No. 121 - viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&hilit=advocat ... 480#p50885

You can see how conveniently PBk arjun put the allegation on me and called me as advocate minded- when in fact, it was he who had done so. Even after that- he did not accept it.

-----------

viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2099&hilit=Jagadam ... 855#p51894 - Mostly PBKs believe Kamala Devi is Jagadamba and Sister Vedanti is Saraswathi (correct me if I am wrong) -

5) You DID NOT say anything there*. But, now, you are saying-

I thought** that Sarasvati in the Advanced Knowledge - this name is given to Jagadamba. Please, check**.

6) So- you yourself are not sure??? This is another clear evidence that-PBKs have absolutely no hesitation to speak lies, just like their leader and trying to manipulate the things.
You kept on manipulating the things, by saying this one is Sarawati, that one is Saraswati, then finally you yourself got confused about - what you have said!

7) This is the result when PBKs try to invent two subtle Brahmas, two Gitas, two Krishnas, two or three Saraswatis, 4/5 Brahmas, etc. - :laugh:

* - When you did not say anything there, what is wrong if I had taken it as right?
**- But, now it is clear, as the thief himself has spoken the truth.

8) When PBKs have committed so many blunders, what is the need to blame them? I am just showing a mirror.

9) So- I think- you have proved, more than anyone else on the forum, that you are the highest manipulator on this forum (till this date). You may check your own posts. [This is not a personal comment, but a clear observation]. So- I believe - we have got enough evidence to say/declare

# Flaw No. 455) PBKs prove themselves as the highest liars and manipulators:-

10) But, still it is drama, so not your fault, in THAT CONTEXT.
So, even my comments are not much significant. You may use their your intellect properly, and try to become master creator instead of being just bound in drama.

11) Murli Point:- Tum pahley drama ke vash may thay. Jab baap ke baney, tab drama ko jaan gaye ho = Initially, you had been bound in drama. When you have come to (belong to) Father, you have understood drama.

So- by making TRUE ShivBaba (instead of the fake one), you may understand drama, else you could end up just bonded in drama.

So- let us not limit our position just to be bound in drama. Let us be master creators as well- is it not?

[shiva]

One more MAJOR flaw is that, AIVV insists affidavit is written and signed by a lawyer/advocate of Kaurav Govt, in the fashion of willingness for members who attend bhatti with Virendra Dev Dixit. Whereas AIVV was not registered with the Kaurav Govt, by the argument that, this govt is patit or impure, and AIVV was not interested to register with patit or impure govt, which has been conveniently OVERRULED in the case for above affidavits.
Their CROOKEDNESS is CLEARLY EVIDENT in their PRACTICAL ACTIONS!

[sita]

One more MAJOR flaw is that, AIVV insists affidavit is written and signed by a lawyer/advocate of Kaurav Govt, in the fashion of willingness for members who attend bhatti with Virendra Dev Dixit. Whereas AIVV was not registered with the Kaurav Govt, by the argument that, this govt is patit or impure, and AIVV was not interested to register with patit or impure govt, which has been conveniently OVERRULED in the case for above affidavits.
Their CROOKEDNESS is CLEARLY EVIDENT in their PRACTICAL ACTIONS!

There is instruction in the Murli that if one has faith in the Father he has to give it in writing, he has to give name, address everything. And this was followed in the Advanced knowledge. But since there were some legal procedures and there was an attempt to use this writings in court, but the advocate dismissed them as they were not notary, so this is done now for that purpose. Earlier it was not like this. But because there were cases where today one gives it in writing that this is my spiritual Father and tomorrow he denies and goes to court and such cases are also expected to happen in future, so this is done just for the purpose of defending oneself in court, because there they will accept it only on court stamp paper and before notary.

- When you did not say anything there, what is wrong if I had taken it as right? 

If you are not being corrected it does not mean you are right. The responsibility to correct you does not lie with anyone. You are free to make any claim.

So- I think- you have proved more than anyone else in the forum that you are the highest manipulator in the forum (till this date). You may check your own posts. [This is not a personal comment, but a clear observation]. So- I believe - we have got enough evidence to say/declare

I had said that if personal comments are tolerated on the forum I will discontinue my inputs, so I will have to keep my word.

[mbbhat]

[quote=""sita"]If you are not being corrected it does not mean you are right. [/quote]
You failed to understand. What I meant was- where is room to complain from your side?
BTW- since I had addressed to both the cases- your following comment is futile.

The responsibility to correct you does not lie with anyone. You are free to make any claim.

I had said that if personal comments are tolerated on the forum I will discontinue my inputs, so I will have to keep my word.

It was not a direct personal comment. It was you who first did by saying -

You wanted to put blame on AK

which was incorrect. For other comments* I have given enough evidence. So- I thought to empty the pot of manipulations and lies of PBKs.

Do not worry. You will not see any personal comments further until the next pot is filled. :cool:

* - You even tried to make it an issue unnecessarily even when there was no fault from my side.

[sita]

Do not worry. You will not see any personal comments further until the next pot is filled

No, I won't be posting here anymore. If you like to discuss you can do so on the brahmakumarisforum.net.
I post with the name saligram. The admin there has always been observing the proper conduct.

[mbbhat]

No, I won't be posting here anymore. If you like to discuss you can do so on the brahmakumarisforum.net.

It is entirely your choice, whether you wish to follow REAL ShivBaba or your bodily guru, MASQUERADING as ShivBaba!

# Flaw No. 456) Can PBKs ever call Mr. Dixit as Heroine?

1) SM 6-8-83(2):- Saaraa chakr buddhi may hai. SAARE DRAMA MAY HERO, HEROINE KA PART HAI ShivBaba KA. ShivBaba ke saath partdhaari koun2 hain? Pahley janm dete hain BVS ko. Phir tum bachchon ko. -113 [ShivBaba, cp]

= ... IN THE WHOLE DRAMA, HERO, HEROINE PART is of ShivBaba. Who all are the actors with ShivBaba? First (He) gives birth to BVS. Then to you children.

2) BK view is simple. ShivBaba is the HIGHEST/first/INCORPOREAL Maatpita (Mother and Father, so He is both Spiritual Hero and Heroine.

3) But, in PBK view- ShivBaba is applicable for "God in/plus Chariot", or just/mainly "the Chariot itself"*.
PBKs believe their Chariot Mr. Dixit plays role of father only, and also believe he can never be unlimited/first/senior mother.

So- how can they say- Mr Dixit plays role of heroine?

4) The Murli point also says/implies BVS are different from or next to ShivBaba, hence cannot be part of ShivBaba. But, in PBK view- "Shankar is (included within) ShivBaba!"

* - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=53&p=39393&hilit=appointed#p39393

5) In PBK view- who is heroine? KD or sister Vedanti?
Mostly they may say it for sister Vedanti- as they like to give names Shankar- Parvati, Ram-Sita, Lakshmi-Narayan in Conf. Age itself.

And- PBKs believe God never enters sister Vedanti. So- she can never get the title ShivBaba. So- who is heroine ShivBaba in PBK view?

[mbbhat]

# Flaw No. 457) Mr. Dixit himself says- you can take srimath DIRECTLY from Avyakt- without need of corporeal!:-

- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=632&p=46467&hilit=appointed#p46467

वार्तालाप-598, पोखरा (नेपाल), दिनांक 07.07.08 उद्धरण-भाग- 3 CD No. 598- Pokhra (Nepal) - 07-07-08

Student: No. Letters are certainly sent. Suppose they wish to seek advice, they wish to seek advice just now; they seek it from the Brothers who are instrument.
Baba: What do they wish to seek?
Student: If they want to take any advice…
Baba: It has been said in the Murli that the solution for every problem can be obtained from Murli. Do not spread more ignorance.
Student: [But] they seek advice from the Brothers.
Baba: Why do they seek [advice from them] when advice on everything is received through Murli? If you do not read the daily Murli carefully, you don’t tally (compare) it carefully with your life, then you are unable to get the solution to any problem.
Student: Everything is definitely there [in the Murli] but there are Brothers who are instrument; they give the course, the message, do the bhatti. [So, everyone thinks], all is fine.
Baba: Here [in the Advance Party] no Brother is instrument at all. They are appointed by Brahmakumaris. They are not appointed by Baba.
Student: So, they tell them everything. They ask them.
Baba: So, why do they tell them when Baba has said in the Murli…?
Student: It is happening like that. It is happening like that everywhere.
Baba: Baba has prohibited* in the Murlis that Brothers should not be made instrument? Whom has Baba made in charge of the Gitapathshalas ?
Student: They should tell Baba clearly. When the Father is present in corporeal form they should tell Him.
Baba: What?
Student: If they wish to ask anything or seek advice...
Baba: Do you sit in remembrance at Amrit Vela ?
Student: Now regarding this...
Baba: Now regarding this ... What does ‘regarding this’ mean? Sit in remembrance at Amrit Vela. Baba has said to become Avyakt (subtle). Become Avyakt and talk to Baba DIRECTLY. You will get the reply directly. The reply that is taken while sitting in remembrance is correct too. But you don’t sit in remembrance at all. The Amrit Vela itself is completely ruined.

1)Usually, PBKs say- Inspiration/Yaad (to get suggestions/directions) does not work, and one should take srimath/suggestions directly/only from the corporeal Chariot, and none other.

Mr. Dixit also says- Brothers cannot be made as nimitt/instruments.

2)But- Mr. Dixit himself also says- There is no need of Sakar/Chariot to take suggestions, one can get srimath directly from Avyakt ShivBaba or Murli!

And- PBKs themselves say- in AIVV many/considerable suggestions are received from brothers!

3) So- even though the PBKs claim they follow(or at least receive) srimath properly, and take maths(directions) only from ONE, and claim sisters are kept in front in AIVV, but mostly PBKs would be taking more (man) maths from the brothers as well, as brothers are kept ahead of sisters, and the sisters are like rubber stamp only.

4) Even when I had visited a PBK Gitapathashala, the sister incharge there said to a brother student- "Better you give the course as you explain better". And- I had it from the brother even when the sister was there!

*5)I have not heard Murli point saying- "Brothers are prohibited". But, sisters's place should be more at the front. Brothers are behind.