Shankar's Part ?

[arjun]

So- role of Prajapita is twice? then why not it is mentioned in Murli that it is twice?

Murli states that ShivBaba gives birth and then also gives inheritance through Prajapita Brahma. BKs may believe that they got birth through Brahma Baba, but they did not get inheritance through Brahma. So, definitely there is another personality through whom Shiv gives birth to Brahmins and then gives inheritance when they become worthy of the same. Baba always speaks about the own children and step children, unworthy children and worthy children.

1)This does not fit. Because- there are many souls whose faith had been so accurate in braahmin family, either in BKs or PBKs who have already left bodies. And, even in lowkik people, there are some who have/had full faith in their religion/belief.

I was not talking about physical birth or death, but about unlimited birth and death, i.e. faith and faithlessness.

2)but the Murli point says- both Brahma and Vishnu take rebirths. so- does it imply faith of Vishnu also changes?

Yes, the souls playing the role of Brahma and Vishnu in this Confluence Age pass through the cycle of faith and faithlessness during Copper Age.

[mbbhat]

Murli states that ShivBaba gives birth and then also gives inheritance through Prajapita Brahma. BKs may believe that they got birth through Brahma Baba, but they did not get inheritance through Brahma. So, definitely there is another personality through whom Shiv gives birth to Brahmins and then gives inheritance when they become worthy of the same. Baba always speaks about the own children and step children, unworthy children and worthy children.

I think you did not understand the question. i asked about those who had got birth through Sevakram till 1942 and those who had got from Mr. dixit after 1976. That is- why not in Murli it is not mentioned as role of Prajapita is played two times? [If you add the role of DL also as title holder then it should be three times, is it not?]

Yes, the souls playing the role of Brahma and Vishnu in this Confluence Age pass through The Cycle of faith and faithlessness during Copper Age.

Do you think souls of brahma baba and Mama also had passed through faith and faithlessness in their mind/intellects till 1969 or 1965?

Do you think all the bandhelis whom baba praises in Murli also had pass through cycle of faith and faithlessness in their mind/intellects during Confluence Age?

Also- the soul of Sevakram left the Yagya in 1942. Is this not loss of faith?

[arjun]

I think you did not understand the question. i asked about those who had got birth through Sevakram till 1942 and those who had got from Mr. dixit after 1976. That is- why not in Murli it is not mentioned as role of Prajapita is played two times? [If you add the role of DL also as title holder then it should be three times, is it not?]

There are clear hints about the three roles in the Murlis which I have already stated. Baba says that hints are enough for the deities.

Do you think souls of Brahma Baba and Mama also had passed through faith and faithlessness in their mind/intellects till 1969 or 1965?

Do you think all the bandhelis whom Baba praises in Murli also had pass through cycle of faith and faithlessness in their mind/intellects during Confluence Age?

Everyone except the number one soul passes through the cycle of faith and faithlessness. This is why Shankar alone is shown sitting on the globe at the time of destruction while all other souls are going back. Shankar is shown on the globe placed above Shankar. This means that the role of Shankar is played till the end.

Also- the soul of Sevakram left the Yagya in 1942. Is this not loss of faith?

Yes, that was definitely loss of faith. But it was because of the lack of complete knowledge. It is mentioned in the Murlis that the knowledge was rudimentary in the beginning. The same soul of partner of Brahma takes rebirth and re-enters the Yagya and makes efforts with the help of bow and arrows of knowledge.

[mbbhat]

Yes, that was definitely loss of faith. But it was because of the lack of complete knowledge.

But, point to be noted is- God is called as dilaram (God of heart) and not deemaag_Ram.

fine. thank you

[arjun]

But, point to be noted is- God is called as dilaram (God of heart) and not deemaag_Ram (brain-Ram).

That is the reason why we have recognized God from our heart while you continue to make efforts to realize Him through your brain by arguing day and night. :D

[mbbhat]

That is the reason why we have recognized God from our heart while you continue to make efforts to realize Him through your brain by arguing day and night. :D

Then why do PBKs need Murli points to give knowledge to others - and point mistakes in BKWSU?

Forget about me- I am just one Bk who is arguing with you. by pointing my arguments- it does not prove BKs do not recognize from heart. This shows how weak PBKs are ! Is their aim just to win mbbhat or BKWSU?

[mbbhat]

Shiv ne Shankar me pravesh kiya tho Shiv Shankar ko mila dete hai. (SM 16-2-73)

Harikrishna soul wrote the above in his post dated 19th September 2012 (pg no. 9 ) of this topic.

Do PBKs have seen the adjacent sentences of this Murli point? If they wish, they may provide here. [better if scanned copy is put, because such points are highly critical ].

[harikrishna]

Shankar na hota tho hamko(Shiva baba ko) Shankar ke saath milte bhi nahi.chitr banaya hai tho mujhe bhi Shankar saath mila diya hai.Shiv Shankar mahadev kahadete tho mahadev bada ho jata (SM 26.6.70)

Shankar kya karte hai?unka part esa wonderful hai jo thum vishvas kar na sako.(SM 14.5.70)

Kumarika, batao shiv baba ko kitne bacche hai?Koi kahate hai 500 karod,koi kahate hai ek baccha brahma hai.kya Shankar baccha nahi hai?tab Shankar kiska baccha hai?
yah bhi gunjayish hai.me kahata hu shiv baba ko do bacche hai.kyomki bhahma vah to Vishnu ban jate hai.baki raha Shankar, to do huye na.thum Shankar ko kyom chod deti ho?bhal trimurthi kahate hai...parantu accupation alag alag hai na?....parantu rightous bacche do huye...brahma aur Shankar.(SM 14.5.72)

[mbbhat]

1)Shankar na hota tho hamko(Shiva Baba ko) Shankar ke saath milte bhi nahi.chitr banaya hai tho mujhe bhi Shankar saath mila diya hai.Shiv Shankar mahadev kahadete tho mahadev bada ho jata (SM 26.6.70)

2)Shankar kya karte hai?unka part esa wonderful hai jo thum vishvas kar na sako.(SM 14.5.70)

3)Kumarika, batao Shiv Baba ko kitne bacche hai?Koi kahate hai 500 karod,koi kahate hai ek baccha Brahma hai.kya Shankar baccha nahi hai?tab Shankar kiska baccha hai?
yah bhi gunjayish hai.me kahata hu Shiv Baba ko do bacche hai.kyomki bhahma vah to Vishnu ban jate hai.baki raha Shankar, to do huye na.thum Shankar ko kyom chod deti ho?bhal trimurthi kahate hai...parantu accupation alag alag hai na?....parantu rightous bacche do huye...Brahma aur Shankar.(SM 14.5.72)

1) Translation is= If there is no (concept of Shankar in Bhaktimarg) , Shankar would not have been mixed with me. Since there is picture, they have mixed me with Shankar. ...

2) Does not prove that part of shankr is played by AIVV, dixit.

3) already discussed.
------------
In Murli point 01, the second sentence clearly says - that due to the picture of Shankar in Bhaktimarg, people have mixed both of them. It can be- since in picture, both of them is shown together (Shankar meditating shiv), they might have mixed together later. It does not say more than that. [just one possibility]

Now- If Mama after 1969 is the real Shankar, even then all the Murli points apply better than Mr. Dixit.

We will have to wait and see.
------
Does Harikrishna soul has the photocopy or soft copy of the page of the above Murli points? Or just have put them from AIVV literature?

The first two - i am more interested.

[harikrishna]

Dear Mbbhat Bhai

1)Shankar na hota tho hamko(Shiva Baba ko) Shankar ke saath milte bhi nahi.chitr banaya hai tho mujhe bhi Shankar saath mila diya hai.Shiv Shankar mahadev kahadete tho mahadev bada ho jata (SM 26.6.70)


Picture(chitr) tells history.How picture made without any act?Many places we see Shankar's nude(No body conciousness) pictures start from harappa and mohanjadaro culture.Many times baba had said in muralis that Shankar ko mahadev kaha jata hai.This mean Shankar is the greatest(bada) of all the deities.No other deity is called as mahadev.No other diety is mixed shiv other than Shankar.In the above point also baba said in the third line that if shiv+Shankar tells then mahadev(combined form) is highest.Decide yourself that shiv is trimurthi as baba said or dvimurthi as your manmat said...it would clear your query well.

2)Shankar kya karte hai?unka part esa wonderful hai jo thum vishvas kar na sako.(SM 14.5.70)

Here baba said Shankar has wonderful part which you could not believe.Such great part no one can be play in the drama.so it is wonderful part.This also clearly shows there is Shankar who can act wonderful part in the drama.

[mbbhat]

thank you dear soul for your faith.

I am not objecting that. But expressed my belief that- if majority of BKs do not know who is Shankar, it does not prove Mr. Dixit is Shankar.

I am still on research on this.

when Baba says- the righetous children are two, it is easy to come to conclusion that Mama is shankr, because her no. is next to Brahma Baba (as per BKWSU).

But, according to AIVV, Brahma Baba has no place in the rosary of 8. then how can he be righteous child? [according to PBKs, Brahma Baba is foolish or childish, has attachment, etc- then how can he be righteous].


So- if PBKs try to claim something on the basis of Murli point, then some other point does not fit their philosophy.
--------
One expereince heard by a BK brother:-

Avyakt BapDada had once asked Dadi :-Mama yahaan aayi thi. Pataa padaa? = Mama had come here (to Madhuban). Did you know? [but, no one was aware of that]

So- the point is- even Dadis could not realize Mama when she had visited Madhuban . more surprising is- How she managed to come to Madhuban. That is- through which centre she came?

i am not sure whether this incident is true. You may ask this from others whenever you get opportunity.

If the above incident is true, then it supports the second Murli point that Mama could play the role of Shankar.

[harikrishna]

4)Vishnu ko, Shankar ko bhi deh ka ahankar ho sakta hai. (SM 8.3.76)

5)Shankar ko dev dev mahadev kahate hain.kyom ki shiv ke baad hai Shankar.Bhahma aur Vishnu punarjanm me aate hain,(Nischay aur anischay chakr) baki Shankar nahi aata.(Amarnath) Jayse ShivBaba sukshm hai vaise Shankar bhi sukshm hai.(mana suksma buddhi hai) (SM 29.9.77)

[arjun]

Harikrishna Bhai, thanks for quoting the Murli point. But what can we do if someone deliberately closes his eyes to such Murli points and says that there is no existence of Shankar at all?

[mbbhat]

4)Vishnu ko, Shankar ko bhi deh ka ahankar ho sakta hai. (SM 8.3.76)

5)Shankar ko dev dev mahadev kahate hain.kyom ki Shiv ke baad hai Shankar.Bhahma aur Vishnu punarjanm me aate hain,(Nischay aur anischay chakr) baki Shankar nahi aata.(Amarnath) Jayse ShivBaba sukshm hai vaise Shankar bhi sukshm hai.(mana suksma buddhi hai) (SM 29.9.77)

4) Of course, except ShivBaba, all can/will have body conscious. [It also can mean- Vishnu and Shankar will not have gyaan, hence likely to have body conscious. ]

5) thank you dear. i have heard this point. no any surprise in that. there are lot of Murli points- where sometimes Baba keeps Shankar next to him. sometimes brahma, sometimes Krishna. sometimes Mama.

[harikrishna]

5)Shankar dwara vinash hona hai.vah bhi apana kartavy kar rahe hai.Jarur Shankar bhi hai tab tho sakshatkar hota hai (Mu 26.2.73)

6)Vah tho sirf teen hai.unme bhi brahma tho stul hi hai.Vishnu bhi stul hai. Sirf Shankar hi sukshm hai (Mu 10.12 83)