pro publico bono

[Sach_Khand]

To all PBKs,
I have witten about Virendra Dev Dixit as the part of Ravan. And I have given the reasons for such conclusion according to my churning. But there is no clear cut reply to my viewpoint regarding the part of Virendra Dev Dixit and about his actual biography with respect to yagnya and BKs.

Should I think that so called PBKs agree with my conclusion. Or is it that they feel my replies as unworthy to answer or is it that they are confused and do not have any answer?

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[mbbhat]

Should I think that so called PBKs agree with my conclusion. Or is it that they feel my replies as unworthy to answer or is it that they are confused and do not have any answer?

There is a Murli point :- Yah duniyaa kabristhaan hai. Murdey se koyi aaash rakhi jaatihai kyaa? = This world is graveyard. Does one can have any hope from a dead body?

So- all bodyconscious people are like dead bodies. So let us have no expectation from others.

This is just a suggestion.

[arjun]

Om Shanti. Sachkhand Bhai and mbbhat Bhai are free to make their own conclusions. Even otherwise, they won't accept anything said by the PBKs. So, I don't think it is worthwhile to give opinions on their views and argue with them. This is my personal opinion. Other PBKs are free to air their views.
OGS,
Arjun

[mbbhat]

Even otherwise, they won't accept anything said by the PBKs.

Do PBKs accept views of BKs or worldy people? How funny it is? It is like story of the fox saying grapes are sour.

But still the fox tried very hard.

[shivsena]

There is a Murli point :- Yah duniyaa kabristhaan hai. Murdey se koyi aaash rakhi jaatihai kyaa? = This world is graveyard. Does one can have any hope from a dead body?
So- all bodyconscious people are like dead bodies. So let us have no expectation from others.

So who are you brother mbbhat ???...are you soul-conscious or body-conscious !!!....if you are soul-conscious, then you have all the right to make the above statement.....and if you are still body-conscious then you do not have any right to point a finger at others....first judge yourself before writing such statements which give more information about your own self. ...(Vani says: "Apna khud ka judge bano...doosron ka vakil mat bano").

shivsena.

[mbbhat]

So who are you Brother mbbhat ???...are you soul-conscious or body-conscious !!!....if you are soul-conscious, then you have all the right to make the above statement.....and if you are still body-conscious then you do not have any right to point a finger at others....first judge yourself before writing such statements which give more information about your own self. ...(Vani says: "Apna khud ka judge bano...doosron ka vakil mat bano").

Are you upset?

Dear Sir,
FYKI, it was you who have pointed fingers at me first and I have never pointed so to you.

Of course, I am body conscious person. May be more than you. So if you are rahamdil, you are great. Else you fall in the other category.

It is upto you to decide.

I have never pointed any finger directly. But others have pointed so. But it did not hurt me even a little. And people here are BKs and Advanced BKs! And you act as if you are more advanced than BKs and PBKs. So why does it make you upset?

[shivsena]

So- all bodyconscious people are like dead bodies. So let us have no expectation from others.This is just a suggestion.

Please clarify who is this "others" you are pointing a finger at.

Also you have a habit of speaking your mind and upsetting others and then you make an attempt to apply a soothing balm on their wounds....first wound a person with your words and then say a few comforting words....this is not my habit.

Also i think that there is lot of ambiguity in what you wish to say and what you write.

shivsena.

[mbbhat]

1)Please clarify who is this "others" you are pointing a finger at.

2)Also you have a habit of speaking your mind and upsetting others and then you make an attempt to apply a soothing balm on their wounds....first wound a person with your words and then say a few comforting words....this is not my habit.

3)Also i think that there is lot of ambiguity in what you wish to say and what you write.

1) Others stands for any person in this world- except ShivBaba. Even from ShivBaba we cannot expect. Because he has already given srimath and we have not followed even to 10% (at least me).

2) I have never hurt anyone in this forum. In fact I have been attacked from some ex BKs even from PBKs here. I had not complained nor felt bad by anyone, took everything as sportsman's spirit. OK- I agree that now in recent days- My words might have been strong to some extent. But I do not feel any irrelevant talks there.

3)True to some extent. Because of two reasons. One- poor English and second due to mis understandings and mis interpretations of others. For example you may be knowing how- Satyaprakash wrote my questions as silly when he was not able to reply.

Just think- If one cannot answer, writing the question itself as silly is not correct. But it is OK to me. In such cases, my reply would be a little bit different and to some it may seem hard or irrelevant.

I do not get hurt from anyone's words and also believe that have taken full care that my words would be always lesser hard than others. I have always observed talking to issue than the person. [In special cases, I ask specifically].


If you see- from any point of view, my force was always lesser than the other person with whom I had discussions.

Except the chariots, I have not criticized anyone personally.

You might have read comments from Arjun soul that- Andrei was banned but mbbhat was not as though mbbhat should have been banned. So just see the attitudes of them (another one- for example- ak 1972. You can read his suggestions given to me as if it was an order!).

Another point to note:- Even though I had asked something in a thread with Sachkhand, new knowledge and Shivsena souls by mentioning their names-- (because PBKs did not reply) , I had no expectation. It was just an attempt to get information. And if anyone asks me- I had replied to all the things- whatever it is. [If by mistake- I had not, anyone can mail me personally. I will not feel bad]

Thank you and sorry for being with me and for mistakes if any. I also will try to be more attentive.

[arjun]

Om Shanti. Although I do support revoking the ban on Andrey Bhai, but I don't think I have ever requested Admin to ban someone. mbbhat Bhai should quote my exact words instead of spreading rumours about me. He has written all kinds of bad things about me and other PBKs and other Members of this forum (I don't think he has spared anyone). But still I would not ask anyone to ban him. Neither have I asked the Admin to ban anyone on this forum or through any personal mail/message. mbbhat can continue to do as he wishes as long as the Admins allow him to do so. He is responsible for his own actions/words.
OGS,
Arjun

[shivsena]

Thank you and sorry for being with me and for mistakes if any. I also will try to be more attentive.

Dear bhat Bhai.

Forget all these frequent "thank you's" and "sorry's" and be more attentive on the matter you have to share.....nobody on this forum delibrately wants to hurt the feelings of others.....but the persistence of irrelevant and off-tracking discussions is what i wish that all members should avoid as it leaves a bad taste in the minds of those who are reading such posts.....and the discussion should be related only to Gyan with reference to context from Murlis and Vanis and wherever possible one can try co-relate the Bhakti-scriptures with what is happening in bk-pbk family.

Also please limit your posts preferably to one paragraph instead of lengthy posts and if you have a lot to say then divide it and write short posts daily, instead of writing one lengthy post which is quite boring to read at times.... that is all i wish from members.

shivsena.

[mbbhat]

OK, alright

[shivsena]

And people here are BKs and Advanced BKs! And you act as if you are more advanced than BKs and PBKs. So why does it make you upset?

There is no reason for any ex-BK or ex-pbk to get upset in any manner, as they are not preaching or defending any philosophy on this forum.....they are just challenging the bk/pbk knowledge which is put forth as truth.....it is the BKs who get upset by ex-BK/pbk queries and it is the PBKs who get upset by ex-pbk queries, when they are not able to answer logically the queries put to them.

As regards who is more advance than BKs and PBKs, it has been said in Vanis that each one has to take his own responsibility and not rely on any Didi/Dadi or manushya guru for clarification of Murlis (which contain the truth)....each soul has to churn himself on the gems of knowledge hidden in the Murlis ("apni ghot toh nasha chade") and not rely on any borrowed churnings of Didi/Dadi(as BKs do) or any manushya guru(as PBKs do)....and those who read and churn the Murlis several times will be touched by mataa Saraswati(goddess of intellect) and be will be labelled as ''saraswat brahmins'' and those who relied on someone else will be labelled as ''pushkarni brahmins'' (two types of brahmins mentioned in Murlis.)....so let each soul decide what he wants to become and make an effort accordingly.

shivsena.

[ANU]

sachkhand wrote:
Do you think that such a thing is correct? Is it correct to write that Brahma (Dada Lekharaj) is Ravan? If such attitude of the followers of Veerendra Dev Dixit continues then it is of no use writing pages on "Anger" in this forum. We want to see it in practice by the followers of Veerendra Dev Dixit.

vartalap 984 from http://www.PBKs.info/

Timing: app 37 min.
"The Moon of Knowledge was considered to be God in the basic knowledge. When churning is done according to the advance knowledge, does he turn to be God or does he turn to be Devil-Ravan? (Students say 'Yes, he turns to be Ravan.) Will Ravan be full of deep holes, stains or not? (Students 'Yes".) These stains have been shown."

The Advance Knowledge has stated clearly that Brahma Baba, Dada Lekhraj is Ravan.

OK. Hope it is clear and helpful.

[Sach_Khand]

vartalap 984 from http://www.PBKs.info/

Timing: app 37 min.
"The Moon of Knowledge was considered to be God in the basic knowledge. When churning is done according to the Advanced Knowledge, does he turn to be God or does he turn to be Devil-Ravan? (Students say 'Yes, he turns to be Ravan.) Will Ravan be full of deep holes, stains or not? (Students 'Yes".) These stains have been shown."

The Advanced Knowledge has stated clearly that Brahma Baba, Dada Lekhraj is Ravan.

OK. Hope it is clear and helpful.

I would like to make clear who is Ravan and who is Ram.

There is no particular soul called Shiv. It is The soul of Dada Lekharaj in the bindi form that plays the part which is considered as Shiv in Murlis. Murli was spoken through Dada Lekharaj. Mama Saraswati after leaving her physical body, also spoke through Dada Lekharaj. And this combination is Bap Dada.
Bap is Dada Lekharaj's Soul.
Dada is Mama's soul.

And the whole Murli is teaching for Mama Saraswati. Mostly it is the churning of Mama. Knowledge was already given even through pictures symbolically by Dada Lekharaj. But even Mama Saraswati, who was the most intelligent of all the students, could not digest it and understand it. How can a human being be considered as GodFather! And so in the churning of Mama, shiv came into existence who is nirakar without body. But there is no such shiv. But the nirakar part is true because the soul of Dada Lekharaj plays the nirakar part in the later times. Murli is the churning of Mama after ruh rihaan with Dada Lekharaj's soul in that body. Murli is the discussion and conversation spoken in front of children where the teacher Dada Lekharaj has taught the student Mama Sraswati. Teacher too has spoken. But very little. And Mama Saraswati after churning tells the knowledge and hence it is said in Murlis "ShivBaba kahataey hai".
There are also words of Bap i.e., Dada Lekharaj's soul. And the whole Murli speaks of the coming part. And that part is Ram or Prajapita Brahma or Bhagawan Bhagawati. In that part, Dada Lekharaj acting in Bindi form is ShivBaba. And the soul of Mama acting as Prajapita Brahma.
Sukshmawatanwasi Brahma Vishnu Shankar are different souls and are subtle in Sangamyug without actual physical body.

So,
Ram is The part in which Dada Lekharaj and Mama Saraswati enter That body and play the part. I cannot tell who actually has taken birth through That body physically, whether Dada Lekharaj or Mama Saraswati. That body is The combination of Maat - Pita or Bap - Dada.

Ravan is Virendra Dev Dixit who is responsible to make fight the Bharat within, leading to downfall of the world (of Brahmins in Sangamyug). He is the Pun-dit, the knower of Shastras, but egoist body conscious one. He has mistaken the subtle Shankar as Shiv. And he is the devotee of Shankar. And hates Vihsnu. The donkey head is egoistic body conscious Virendra Dev Dixit who is ruling the so called PBK brothers and sisters of AIVV and also many BKs. The ten heads refers to five vices in PBK brothers and five vices in PBK sisters, and also in all human beings in general. Virendra Dev Dixit will become even more powerful and many more BKs will follow Ravan Virendra Dev Dixit and become Ravan sampraday. But there are real Bharatwasis too in the BKs who will remain Ram sampraday till the end when Ram is revealed. And these are the real Brahmins and the real mataelaey children of ShivBaba.

So, this is the truth. You can follow Ravan if you wish. Ravan knows Who is Ram. But will not tell openly. Virendra Dev Dixit knows the above truth. But Ravan is after all Ravan. He will play his part accordingly.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[Sach_Khand]

So now,
as The Truth is out about Who is Ram and who is Ravan, each one has to decide himself or herself as to whom they will follow. Ravan Virendra Dev Dixit or Ram ShivBaba. Children have Murli as Lathi to continue until Ram reveals Himself.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.