Why is drama partial to Dada Lekhraj (Krishna's soul)!!!

[shivsena]

Dear bk and pbk brothers.

Has anyone ever wondered about why drama is partial to Krishna's soul (Dada Lekhraj) in the sense that Dada Lekhraj came to know his part as Krishna by visions given to him in 1937, long before the Sakar Murlis were delivered from 1965 and all the other souls have to realise their part by reading the Murlis and avaykt Vanis and doing regular classes.

Dada Lekhraj did purusharth after he came to know his part as Krishna and all other souls are doing purusharth to know their part; why is this difference and why is this partiality to Krishna's soul embedded in drama; Why even Ram's soul(no. 1 soul) who is greater and superior to Krishna's soul has to read and study the Murlis to know his part ??? !!!

Also why should Krishna be studying RajYoga through the body of Baba Dixit(as presumed by PBKs) after leaving the body in 1969, when all other souls are studying RajYoga through their own bodies. Has anyone ever thought about the issues !!

It would be worthwhile to know the views of my brothers on the above issues.
shivsena.

[bansy]

I think I asked this query in a similar way somewhere else in the forum in that I often wondered why Father Shiva did not enter a baby soul from its birth and that baby soul would have been taught and been protected and nutured with Father Shiva's guidance; why does a Chariot and its soul need to go through any number of Kaliyug years by itself (eg Brahma Baba's soul having a family and children and thus lust, or diamond trading hence greed) and have to be retaught and undo all the bad things of the current lokik birth, and need to do purusharth. The reply I am usually given is that Father Shiva has come to teach and needs a Chariot to be able to speak and teach through, but who says a child of 2 years is not capable of teaching ? It is said that a child does not have the same mental abilities as an adult, but is purity based on mental ability ? How many people have not looked into the the eyes of the child and seen their innocence ? They speak gibberish and nonsense or is it the adults around the child who are feeding him or her nonsense stories and fairy tales and nursery rhymes ?

But again I am given the reply that Father Shiva enters an adult Chariot, because then that Chariot will be of adult mental ability to be able to realise it is Father Shiva within the Chariot, i.e "His is in me". Well, the BKWSU sort of realised this when they made Dadi Gulzar the Chariot, as it is claimed by the BKs that she knows nothing of Bap-Dada's entry, so she needs no mental capacity as her soul is asleep. So if BapDada is speaking through the Chariot of Dadi Gulzar, then all that BapDada is doing is using the listening and seeing physical faculties of the Chariot (beause BapDada is subtle/incorporeal). And for most Bhakti worship people, it will be more acceptable for an adult to appear talking "adult" religious/spiritual talk and sit on the gaddi. Who wants to listen to a child, after all ? But if the Chariot was a 2 year old, but came out with words of wisdom, you may be at first shocked, or would it not be obvious that the true God is speaking, or you are just jealous and cannot accept that ? After all, a normal 2 year old cannot make up words as given in the Murli.

I am not so familiar with Christianity, but there seems to be a gap when Jesus as a child and then he becomes an adult carpenter and begins to teach. What happened during those childhood, pubsecent, adolescent and early adult years of Jesus ? The assumption is that his Father and mother Joseph and Mary knew that he was the messiah when he was born and the story of the 3 kings and 3 wise men came to visit them to give them start-up capital. Thus he was guided from babyhood and his parents his physical bodyguards simply making sure his passage was clear when he could stand on his own two feet to expound the Christian teachings. The Buddhist teachings by Dalai Lama is similar from a seeking the Buddha from childhood.

How old was Brahma Baba (Lekhraj Kirpalani) before he knew Father Shiva was in him (thus how many years of Kaliyug did he have first and thus have to undo), and likewise how old was Virendra Dev Dixit ?
If Father Shiva entered a baby Chariot, it is not possible for that Chariot to live for 100 physical years duration of the full Confluence Age ?

The concept of the Chariot has been an interpretation of what is in the Gita. It seems that there is an over obsession for many Hindu sects to want to possess the Gita.

Okay, there will be one day the birth of Krishna as a baby, but now who will believe him tobe the one as a baby ? How old does he have to be before he is realised to be the son/first son of God ?

[andrey]

In the advanced knowledge it is believed that the soul of Krishna got clarifications about his part through some personality and not due to the visions. Many different people have had visions of many different deities on the path of Bhakti and they did not identified themselves with this deity. In the Murlis it is also said that when Brahma Baba had visions he was not able to understand anything.

In the Murli ShivBaba says about Brahma "You are my wife". This adopting like wife is some identification. There is someone higher who opens the part of the one who is lower. But there is no one higher than the No 1 soul so no one can open his part.

In the advanced knowledge it is also believed that not only the souls of Mama and Baba but of all the 4,5 lakh souls who are born in the beginning of the Golden Age like children study advanced knowledge by entering the bodies of their parents.

[shivsena]

Dear pbk brothers.

All BKs firmly believe that Brahmababa(Lekhraj Kirpalani) became karmatit in 1969 and so left his body and ascended to Subtle Regions to become avaykt Farishta.

Do PBKs believe in the same thing as the BKs !!!
Views of my brothers will be highly appreciated in this very controversial belief.

shivsena.

[arjun]

All BKs firmly believe that Brahmababa(Lekhraj Kirpalani) became karmatit in 1969 and so left his body and ascended to Subtle Regions to become avaykt Farishta.

Do PBKs believe in the same thing as the BKs !!!

No.

[arjun]

Why even Ram's soul(no. 1 soul) who is greater and superior to Krishna's soul has to read and study the Murlis to know his part ??? !!!

Having visions is not a great achievement according to the Sakar Murlis that you believe. Becoming perfect through one's own efforts makes someone greater than someone who gets name and fame due to visions.

Causing visions to Dada Lekhraj was not partiality but a scheme of the drama to make souls develop faith in the Godly task since there was not much knowledge in the beginning. So, vision was just a tool to pull souls.

Also why should Krishna be studying RajYoga through the body of Baba Dixit(as presumed by PBKs) after leaving the body in 1969, when all other souls are studying RajYoga through their own bodies. Has anyone ever thought about the issues !!

Simply because he could not complete the studies through his own body. He did not have complete faith on ShivBaba's knowledge.

[shivsena]

Dear arjun Bhai.

If PBKs do not believe that Dada Lekhraj(brahmababa) became karmatit in 1969, then what is his stage right now and who is this avaykt brahma mentioned in Murlis. If brahmababa has not become karmatit, then why is it taught in advance knowledge that we should "Follow Brahma" and what is the meaning of the Vani statement "Bap-samaan karmatit awastha". Can you please share your views.
shivsena.

[arjun]

Dear shivsena Bhai,
Om Shanti. Although all these issues have been raised by you earlier, I would still answer.
Avyakt Brahma = Dada Lekhraj's soul.
He is still studying Godly knowledge.
We have to follow the actions that Shiv performed through Brahma as 'karanhaar' (doer).
Karmatit stage like the Father refers to the present role of Father being played by Shiv through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit.
OGS,
Arjun

[shivsena]

Simply because he could not complete the studies through his own body. He did not have complete faith on ShivBaba's knowledge.

I think you are trying to say that Dada Lekhraj had faith in ShivBaba's knowledge but he could not understand the meaning of what Shiva spoke in the Murlis. If he had no complete faith in ShivBaba's knowledge, then the question arises as to why is he narrating avaykt Vanis through Gulzar Dadi.
shivsena.

[shivsena]

We have to follow the actions that Shiv performed through Brahma as 'karanhaar' (doer).
Karmatit stage like the Father refers to the present role of Father being played by Shiv through Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit.
Arjun

Dear arjun Bhai.

How can shivbindi be karanhaar(doer) through Brahma, as shiv is supposed to be akarma, asochtaa, and abhogtaa (beyond all actions).
Also how can shiv become karmatit stage farishta when he does come in any bondage of karma and when HE does not have any subtle body.

Please clarify.
shivsena.

[arjun]

If he had no complete faith in ShivBaba's knowledge, then the question arises as to why is he narrating avaykt Vanis through Gulzar Dadi.

He is narrating just points of dharana based on his experiences to sustain the children for whom he has attachment.

How can shivbindi be karanhaar(doer) through Brahma, as Shiv is supposed to be akarma, asochtaa, and abhogtaa (beyond all actions).

Akarma means that He does not get any fruits for the actions performed. That does not mean that He does not perform any action at all. Does narration of knowledge not constitute a karma? Similarly, He performed righteous actions through Brahma to set an example for Brahmin children to follow.

Also how can Shiv become karmatit stage farishta when he does come in any bondage of karma and when HE does not have any subtle body.

Shiv is forever karmateet. But He sets a practical example of becoming karmaateet through Shankar/Prajapita. He makes Shankar equal to Himself in this karmaateet stage which Brahma could not achieve.

[shivsena]

We have to follow the actions that Shiv performed through Brahma as 'karanhaar' (doer).
Arjun

Dear arjun Bhai.

Advance knowledge teaches that "karan-karavanhaar Bap" means that Shiva played the role of mother through Dada Lekhraj brahma and is playing the role of Father through Baba Dixit.

My dillemma is: why is one word "Karan-karavanhaar" split into two seperate bodily roles for Shiva, when the word "Shyam-sunder" which is meant for Krishna, is interpretated by PBKs, as being played by one same body.
Why this difference for the roles of Shiva and Krishna ???

Can you please explain this ambiguity.
shivsena.

[arjun]

My dillemma is: why is one word "Karan-karavanhaar" split into two seperate bodily roles for Shiva, when the word "Shyam-sunder" which is meant for Krishna, is interpretated by PBKs, as being played by one same body.
Why this difference for the roles of Shiva and Krishna ???

Father Shiv did play the role of a doer through Dada Lekhraj (Brahma Baba), but that does not mean that He is not performing any action through Baba Dixit that cannot be followed by PBKs. Even through Baba Dixit He is performing many such actions that can be followed by the PBKs in their practical life. I have learnt many good things from the practical life of Baba Dixit. So, in a way you can say that the part of karan-karavanhaar is being played through Baba Dixit.

[shivsena]

So, in a way you can say that the part of karan-karavanhaar is being played through Baba Dixit.

If Shiva is playing the role of karan-karavanhaar through Baba Dixit at present, then what about the role of shyam-sunder... who is playing that role at present ??? ... or was that role played by Dada Lekhraj in past ???

shivsena.