Dada Lekhraj Brahma: Karmatit or not in 1969!!

[sachkhand]

AUM Shanti.

The example has not been invented by Baba Dixit. It is given in the Sakar Murlis published by BKs. The only difference is in its interpretation. You are free to have your opinion.

Dear Arjun,
Thank you for the above information. As I had not come across this point in Murlis and had first heard this only in the audio cassettes of Virendra Dev Dixit, I came to the conclusion as written in my previous reply.
Surely, everyone is free to have their own opinion about the correct interpretation of the Murli points.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

[pbkindiana]

sachkhand wrote:
Are you interested in speaking for Shivsena? You have addressed me as Sanjeev Bhai, which you have never done before. It is the style of Shivsena to adress me as Sanjeev Bhai.

I did not address you as sanjeev Bhai and i am not interested in speaking for shivsena as he is very capable of defending himself.

Shivsena is just expressing his views and his opinion about the Murli points according to his churning. You can call it manmat if you feel it so. Anyway, is anyone else here giving Shrimat? When you give your views, is it Shrimat or manmat?
If you think imposing anything on anyone is not a sin, then it is your personal opinion. But I feel imposing or forcing or pressurising anyone to accept anything is a sin. Forcing someone to bear more than his/her bearing capacity is a sin. And this applies even to intellectual capacity and mental capacity. I do not mean that what I write or what Shivsena writes is intellectually better and/or higher than Advanced Knowledge. But mental capacity to bear the pursuance of others has a limit. And hence pursuing anyone beyond his/her capacity is a sin and therefore such an act gives bad results. And the proof for you reaching the bearing limits can be seen in the form of replies given by you to Shivsena's repeated cautions to PBKs that Advanced Knowledge is jhoothi Gita and is the cause of downfall.
Few samples of your replies to Shivsena,

12 Aug 2009, Re: Who is superior: Farishta(angels) or Devta !!!
"pbkindiana"] So that you can use this opportunity to belittle the PBKs' views. Most PBKs have disinterest in sharing their views with you as most of them are aware of your condemning mentality
15 Aug 2009, Re: Who is superior: Farishta(angels) or Devta !!!
pbkindiana"] I rather read Sakar Murli quotes to get the hidden meanings of Shiv's sermons than posting my views on repeated posts. Write to the ex- PBKs and get their views as it looks you have understood Supreme Father Shiv's sermons better than the BKs and PBKs.
17 Aug 2009, Re: Who is superior: Farishta(angels) or Devta !!!
"pbkindiana"] I have lost interest in sharing my views with you. If you are challenging and opposing advanced knowledge sincerely with Murli quotes, then dicussion would be pleasurable but nothing can be pleasurable anymore when deceit is added. I have realized that not only you have a condemning mentality but a decceitful mentality too.
26 Jul 2009, Re: Gita patshalas or Gadbad shalas ???
"pbkindiana"] All i can say is that your mind is occupied of when and how to condemn advanced knowledge to the extent that any Murli or Vani points that has caught your attention, you use it to belittle advanced knowledge. I feel so so sorry for you that you are wasting your time and tremendous efforts searching for Murli and Vani quotes just to condemn advanced knolwedge but not to benefit for yourself. By condemning advanced knowledge and pointing a finger at Baba Dixit (Ram), you are falling deeper into the gutter. You are busy searching the Maya in others but you are not able to recognise and control the Maya within you. I feel so sorry for you that you are thinking that you are doing a big favour for the PBKs by trying your utmost level to disconnect their mind from ShivBaba but you don't realize that by doing so your are falling deeper into the gutter.

It is a pity that you do not know to differentiate between sarcasm and disgusting statements. Shivsena condemned advanced knowledge and i just retaliated in a sarcastic manner. I do not have your defamatory mentality to post disgusting statements.


indie.

[sachkhand]

AUM Shanti.

I did not address you as sanjeev Bhai and i am not interested in speaking for shivsena as he is very capable of defending himself.

Dear Mr/Mrs/Miss/ single standard,
Just read your reply on 4th sept. 2009 on page 3 of this post.

It is a pity that you do not know to differentiate between sarcasm and disgusting statements. Shivsena condemned advanced knowledge and i just retaliated in a sarcastic manner. I do not have your defamatory mentality to post disgusting statements.

Congratulations for your thorough English knowledge.
You can retaliate, with your so called non-disgusting statements. But you cannot bear if someone replies you. You start accusing them for being distgusting person and person with double standards. You continue to call someone defamatory person and are thus very generous in giving names. Have you thought, what you are doing?
Cool. :cool:
Do not try to create a fuss and divert and dilute the issue raised. If you can answer to the issue raised, answer them. No need to show off your single standard and non-defamatory mentality everytime with your non-disgusting statements.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

[shivsena]

Dear pbk brothers.

Advance knowledge teaches that Brahmababa(DL) was baby buddhi and could not understand the gems of knowledge in the Murlis which were narrated through his own body....so what kind of purusharth was done by him when he did not understand the knowledge of Shiva and how can a soul who did not understand Murlis become karmatit in 1969 ????....and start narrating perfect avaykt Vanis.

Has any pbk ever thought about this simple fact and asked this query to Baba Dixit.

shivsena.

[shivsena]

To all bk-pbk brothers.

Who is this brahma(badi-Maa) jiski koi Maa nahin hai (who has no mother above her) ???
Is it DL-brahma who is always refered to as Krishna's soul(baccha Krishna) and who always thought himself to be Satyug ka prince Krishna....or is the real badi-Maa was jagdamba Saraswati adi-shakti and was titled as world mother by BKs long before Ak came into being and other mothers were introduced.

Also DL never played the role of badi-Maa till jagdamba Saraswati was there till 1965, as she was the Yagya-controller and care-taker...and after Mama's demise, DL was never respected as mother by the senior BKs....it is true that he had a soft nature, but that does not make him badi-Maa (as taught in AK)...the sherni-shakti adi-Maa depicted in pictures cannot be the role of DL as jagdamba....it has to be some other soul....nobody in the outside world will accept that a man( soft-and timid) can play the role of sherni-shakti adi-Maa who is destroyer of evil ("jagdamba hai asur-sangarni")
shivsena.

[shivsena]

Dear pbk brothers.

Ak teaches that DL (first prince--Krishna) does not figure in the 108 souls and his number comes after 4.5 lacs souls.....so i cannot understand how can DL(moon of knowledge) narrate avaykt Vanis.

Also Krishna is devta and not farishta.....so how can a devta teach the knowledge of how to become karmatit farishta (which every Vani teaches )....so imo, there is no other soul other than Mama who is narrating the Vanis as avaykt karmatit farishta.

shivsena.

[arjun]

Ak teaches that DL (first prince--Krishna) does not figure in the 108 souls and his number comes after 4.5 lacs souls.....so i cannot understand how can DL(moon of knowledge) narrate avaykt Vanis. Also Krishna is devta and not farishta.....so how can a devta teach The Knowledge of how to become karmatit farishta (which every Vani teaches )....so imo, there is no other soul other than Mama who is narrating the Vanis as avaykt karmatit farishta.

Same old question.
All the divine knowledge belongs to Shiv. Had He not come and given this knowledge nobody (including Baba Virendra Dev Dixit, Lekhraj Kirpalani, and Om Radhey) would have known.

Had Shiv or Mama narrated the AVs directly its quality would not have gone down over the years. As the years pass by, the major portion of the AV is devoted to BapDada's private versions to individual BKs and non-BKs. Shiv does not favour any particular soul and gives knowledge equally to every soul.

[shivsena]

Dear roy Bhai and pbk brothers.

It is taught in AK, that DL-brahma was not original brahma but title-dhari brahma (as shiv did not enter him in 1937 but in 1947)....so my dillemma is how can title-dhari-brahma become karmatit before the actual brahma(who is he ??) and is the title-dhari brahma-DL(whose is not even in 16000 as per AK) qualified to narrate avaykt Vanis.

And also when it is said Follow brahma Bap, does it mean that we have to follow title-dhari brahma DL or somebody else !!

Can any pbk please explain this ambiguity.
shivsena.

[arjun]

Can any PBK please explain this ambiguity.

Already discussed in past.

[Roy]

Ak teaches that DL (first prince--Krishna) does not figure in the 108 souls and his number comes after 4.5 lacs souls.....so i cannot understand how can DL(moon of knowledge) narrate avaykt Vanis.

I have yet to find clarification regarding this point(is Brahma Baba part of the 108), and so if there is absolute clarification about it, would some kindly soul point me in the right direction. Thank you!

If you think about the second part of your question Shivsena Bhai; who else but Brahma Baba, could provide continuity for Brahmin souls in the Yagya at this time(1969). After being God's Chariot for 22 years or so, his presence in some form was vital to the souls that remained, including future PBKs. It was expected that God(BapDada), would be with them until the end. Father Shiv was also able to work through Brahma Baba in this scenario, to pass on vital hints and information, about what was happening at the time. Also, this may not have even been possible with Mama, as she was a soul who had no visions or experiences from Father Shiv, and so may not have fitted the role of trance messenger. Brahma Baba was the perfect conduit for Father Shiv to use in this scenario, and the soul to hold what remained of the Brahmin family together, both in 1969, and then in 1976.

Also Krishna is devta and not farishta.....so how can a devta teach the knowledge of how to become karmatit farishta (which every Vani teaches )....so imo, there is no other soul other than Mama who is narrating the Vanis as avaykt karmatit farishta.

It's true, Brahma Baba cannot teach this, only ShivBaba Himself can; and this is why he continues to do so via Baba Dixit. Imo, any information Father Shiv passes on via Dadi Gulzar, is so that no Brahmin soul can ever say... "but we were never told!" The other point is; that had it been a karmateet Mama who was entering Dadi Gulzar, there wouldn't have been any amnesia caused to her(DG), due to Mama's subtle body; as imo, she wouldn't have one, if this was the case. It is my understanding, that the subtle body of a deceased soul, is a sign of being incomplete. We do not take subtle bodies to Paramdham, when we have become karmateet.

Roy

[shivsena]

Imo, any information Father Shiv passes on via Dadi Gulzar, is so that no Brahmin soul can ever say... "but we were never told!"
Roy

Dear roy Bhai.

If brahma-DL is passing the information through Gulzar Dadi about shiv being present in the body of Dixit, then can you quote any Vani point which proves the same.....has Brahma-DL any time mentioned in any Vani that "children should remember nirakar shiv in Sakar"(which is the conventional AK teaching)....on the contrary, it is said in Vanis that "remember nirakar in aakar(some subtle body)" and all Vanis tell us to become avaykt karmatit farishtas which is never taught in AK.....why this discrepancy !!

shivsena.

[arjun]

has Brahma-DL any time mentioned in any Vani that "children should remember nirakar Shiv in Sakar"

In one of the Avyakt Vanis of late 1970s (may be 18.1.1978) it has been clearly said that the corporeal support for you children is still available. If Shiv is not present in corporeal form, why would Avyakt BapDada say so?

[nivi]

Dear Brothers,

In my opinion Shivsena Bhai seem to have lost his mind based on his post..He refuses to see the truth and what has been so beautifully clarified in so many Murli''s. If he chooses to turn a blind eye purposely it is his great loss..Maybe it's not his part to know Father, his knowledge and get his inheritance..I feel sorry for all those new or weak souls who might be getting influenced by his made up fantasies and false theories.

Nivi

[Roy]

If brahma-DL is passing the information through Gulzar Dadi about shiv being present in the body of Dixit, then can you quote any Vani point which proves the same....

Dear Shivsena Bhai

A few points from the Avyakt Vani, that point to the fact that ShivBaba continues to meet His children in Sakar form, throughout the Confluence Age...

" Brahmin children can see both Fathers (Incorporeal God Shiva and Father of Humanity - Prajapita) in this Physical World, with these two physical eyes. To see the Incorporeal in the Corporeal Body, to speak to Him, to listen to him, to walk with Him and to dine with Him, is the greatest fortune of the Brahmin's life."(A.V. 3 - 5 - 84)

"People of the world believe that Father has left, but whenever Father desires he can meet the children. A curtain has come in front of the eyes of the people of the world." (the word "people" refers to the BK Brahmins, as the outside world has not recognized that Supreme Soul Shiva has descended on this earth to transform this world.)(A.V. 18-1-79).

"Why do you turn the indestructible relation to a destructible one, by saying that Father has left? Only the role has changed. Brahma baba also has changed his place of service." (A.V. – 18-1-76).

"When the Father is revealed, very famous people become great fools. One who cannot recognize the Father, is he not a great fool ? They do all the wrongful deeds. Father says – ‘know me’ and they say – ‘Father is non existent’. Is it not contradictory? You say Father is present and they say it is not possible at all. As such they have expanded the organization considerably, but the real thing is the benedictory meeting of Father and the Children."(A.V.-21-3-81)

has Brahma-DL any time mentioned in any Vani that "children should remember nirakar shiv in Sakar"(which is the conventional AK teaching)....on the contrary, it is said in Vanis that "remember nirakar in aakar(some subtle body)" and all Vanis tell us to become avaykt karmatit farishtas which is never taught in AK.....why this discrepancy !!

Well certainly for the second part, there is no discrepancy imo; as i believe becoming Avyakt karmatit farishtas, is the aim of AK; that is, to become nirakar, but whilst in Sakar(jeevanmukti). We have to become angels(farishtas), before we become deities! As for the other point, of nirakar in aakar... BKs believe that Brahma Baba is complete(karmateet) after 1969; so this would most likely stop them remembering ShivBaba altogether, due to their attachment to him(DL-translights etc.). By instructing the children to remember Father Shiv(nirakar), in Brahma's subtle body; there is at least a connection of sorts with Father Shiv; where as to only remember Brahma baba's subtle(Avyakt) form via translights, has no value at all.

Roy

[shivsena]

... BKs believe that Brahma Baba is complete(karmateet) after 1969;
Roy

Dear roy Bhai.

Do you also believe that DL-brahma became karmatit farishta in 1969.
This is the biggest stumbling block for me to understand, how can someone who could not understand the Sakar Murlis, who could not control the Yagya after Mama's death, who succumbed to a heart attack and died a broken man, who never thought of himself becoming a farishta (he always knew he was going to become Krishna in Golden Age), whose part was that of temporary Chariot, who was just title-dhari prajapita brahma(according to AK)....how can such a soul be instrumental in narrating perfect Vanis....this is what i cannot understand.

Also Murlis always say that Krishna is 16* pure devta, and is never mentioned that Krishna is farishta...so first we have to understand who is farishta and who are devtas as per the Vani dated 29-3-81 which clearly differentiates between farishta and devta. ("Devtaein app sab farishton ke liye varmala lekar ke intezar kar rahe hain farishton ko varne ke liye.") (meaning:" Deities are waiting for farishtas with garland, to wed them.')....so first it has to be clear who are farishta souls and who are Deity souls.

It would also be interesting to know Baba dixit's interpretations about the above point, as AK has never clarified the difference between farishtas and devtas.

shivsena.