Is this new or old knowledge ?

[bansy]

Recent churnings from various members have made me wonder how new is the knowledge that is been put under the term "Gyan".

There are many references to Hindu characters in the Mahabharat and Gita, but we all know that these are mythical representations. Even the most recent thread somewhere, Hiranyakashap has been mentioned, is simply another demon who ordered his subjects to treat him as God but was killed by God himself. But we all know that such "killing" does not take place since God does not kill. Neither was there a Mahabharat war where so much sex and violence language is used but they are all symbolic. And about Kauravas and Pandavs, say, but no-one knows if these characters exist historically, as there is no mention of the 5 Pandavs in other scriptures other than the Mahabharat.

All the 100 or so sons cut up from the steel ball of the blind king's wife that was placed in the pots are named Duxxxxx (eg Duryodhana) because the "Du" signifies negative and evil. Are there any people living today who are called Duxxxxx ? And whilst everyone evil dies in the Mahabharat War, we know cannot be so as God would not order one of his sons to kill another one of his sons. Hence it is all symbolic.

(Please excuse me if I do not recall the names in full, some of more local Indians may have studied this more at school).

The point I am making is that if all the characters are symbolic, why would the Murli use "fake" interpretations to reveal the truth. Why use Copper or Iron age scriptures and representations within to produce Gyan ? For example, the palm of the hand represents Draupadi and each finger digit represents a Pandav so that a fist means a full fist of virtues and power, however to have 5 Pandav men marry one women is simply a symbol of sex and lust.

It is only after when Shivsena Bhai has started to suggest that the real Gyan has not yet been imparted (ie. so far it has been Bhakti Gyan being imparted in BK and PBK), and that the Vishnu Party has given a totally new but somehow slightly connected way of thinking to BK/PBK as regarding energy, that has got me to come to this crossroad.

Some of you I am sure may know more about the "history" of Hinduism but at times I wonder if, for the non Hindu, whether the Murlis are a way to learn about Hinduism given some many references to Hindu scriptures, and for the Hindu whether the Murlis are just another representation of the mythical but poetic Gita and Mahabharat.

For a simple analogy, if a friend at school has a scar at school, his nickname could be Harry Potter ? After a few years this becomes a myth. Since myths and legends get changed and changed over generations and get talked about, some people would even think dracula exists and werewolves.

So why use old symbols and characters of the old world to describe the new world. It is quite body conscious with attachment to the representations.

I hope the above is understandable and wonder if any of the more scholarly forum members have any interpretations of the way the whole study is being presented, i.e is the Murli also a myth ?