Kamala Devi Dixit - jagdamba ???

[mbbhat]

Actually No.

Because I never believe so(that God is sarvavyaapi) and also consider God as just one entity and he is a point. So- how can just a point be sarvavyaapi?


Regarding- Shivohum- Baba has already said- Always feel that baba is with you.

There is a Murli point:- Shiv aur Shakti is combined like body and soul. Even drama cannot separate it.

I never say to anyone that remember Me. I always say- remember Shiv and always say I am never Shiv.
----
Of course- Bhaktimarg people may think so. Or in Bhaktimarg, it may be BKs only writing like that. Because they had experienced so (= Baba is combined). So- they may not be able to differentiate.


I had already posted some Murli points regarding this( = why God is said to be sarvavyaapi). I had mentioned three points- I believe. In those Baba has kept himself also as responsible for calling as sarvavyaapi.

If you think such remembrance is wrong and that is the cause for the Bhaktimarg yaadgaar/saying of sarvavyaapi, then -

* do people remember their lowkik relatives just at single place? For example- people think of film stars, sports stars. Their photo is kept many places. It comes in every news papers. Then why people do not consider them as sarvavyaapi? Also- please note that most of the people do not know actual homes of these stars. Still they remember!

* Why people consider even all deities as sarvavyaapi- not just God?

[shivsena]

Regarding- Shivohum- Baba has already said- Always feel that Baba is with you.

When it is said that ''Bap aur aap'' combined, it means that intellectually we should always remain combined with Father.....it does not mean that physically shiv is in every child.

There is a Murli point:- Shiv aur Shakti is combined like body and soul. Even drama cannot separate it.

If shiv and shakti are always combined then who is NO. 1 SHIV-SHAKTI ??

[mbbhat]

it means that intellectually we should always remain combined with Father.....it does not mean that physically Shiv is in every child.[/color]

Yes, correct. That is what I do. I remember him through intellect and not by anything else.

If Shiv and shakti are always combined then who is NO. 1 Shiv-SHAKTI ??

Actually it is Brahma Baba.

But practically Mama is given that place to keep mothers ahead. Hence yaadgaar is of Mama.

Even though real jagadamba is Brahma himself,practical place goes to Mama. It is because intellectually even Mama is equally combined with ShivBaba, so it does not matter if the place if given to Mama.

[shivachild]

If Shiv and shakti are always combined then who is NO. 1 Shiv-SHAKTI ??

Actually it is Brahma Baba.

But practically Mama is given that place to keep mothers ahead. Hence yaadgaar is of Mama.

Even though real jagadamba is Brahma himself,practical place goes to Mama. It is because intellectually even Mama is equally combined with ShivBaba, so it does not matter if the place if given to Mama.[/quote]

Murli DATED 25.01.2003 SAYS,"kOI BUDHDHIWAN HOGA TO PUCHEGA KI PARMATMA KO TO GOD Father KAHA JATA HAI. FIR MOTHER KAISE KAHTE HAIN? TO UNKI BUDDHI JAGATAMBA KI TARAF JAYEGI......BRAHMA KI TARAF BHI KOI KI BUDDHI NAHI JATI......TUM JANTE HO SACCHI SACCHI MATA KAYDE ANUSAR YEH BRAHMA HAI.YEH BHI SAMAJHNA HAI."
TRASLATION:,"IF ONE IS INTELLIGENT, ONE WILL ASK Supreme Soul IS ALSO KNOWN AS GOD Father. THEN, HOW (Supreme Soul) IS KNOWN AS MOTHER? AT THIS, ONE'S INTELLECT WILL MOVE TOWARDS JAGDAMBA.....NONE'S INTELLECT MOVE TOWARDS BRAHMA.....YOU KNOW THAT TRUE MOTHER IS THIS BRAHMA. THIS NEED BE UNDESTOOD.


above Murli point indicates following point about parmatma (Supreme Soul)
1. Supreme Soul is our GOD Father & MOTHER combined.
2. BRAHMA is our Father and MOTHER combined.

in other words shiv and shakti are combined.

[shivsena]

If Shiv and shakti are always combined then who is NO. 1 Shiv-SHAKTI ??
Actually it is Brahma Baba.

above Murli point indicates following point about parmatma (Supreme Soul)
1. Supreme Soul is our GOD Father & MOTHER combined.
2. Brahma is our Father and MOTHER combined.

If Brahma Baba-Lekhraj Kirpalani is no. 1 shivshakti, then did he posses all the virtues and powers of SHIV ??
Lekhraj Kirpalani did not have the power to face the children who went against Shrimat after the demise of Mama-jagdamba...so how can he be no. 1 shivshakti??

[shivachild]

If Brahma Baba-Lekhraj Kirpalani is no. 1 shivshakti, then did he posses all the virtues and powers of Shiv ??
Lekhraj Kirpalani did not have the power to face the children who went against Shrimat after the demise of Mama-jagdamba...so how can he be no. 1 shivshakti??

Murli dated 02.11.2007 says

8 paas with honour hote hain. Unmein aana chahiye. Unmein nahin to 108 mein aao. Margin to 16108 ki bhi hai.
Yeh Brahma bura padkar paas ho number one mein jata hai. Mama jawan bhi number one mein jati hai.
Translation:
8 will pass with hounour.You should be within them. If not try to be within 108. Margin is also for 16108.
This old Brahma will pass and become number one. young Mama will also become number one.

Dear brother shivsena,


Aabove Murli point was spoken in the body of Lekhraj Kirpalani. According to this Murli point,
1.Brahma-Lekhraj Kirpalani & Mama both are No. 1. (as per BK point of view)
OR
2. Brahma-Virendra Dev Dixit & soul of Mama-kamla Devi Dixit are No.1 (as per PBK point of view)
OR
3.soul in the body of Brahma-Lekhraj Kirpalani (Brahma-jagdamba) & soul in the body of Mama (again soul of jagdamba);
both are same soul. and that soul is NO. 1 SHIVSHAKTI.


your views please;

[shivsena]

Aabove Murli point was spoken in the body of Lekhraj Kirpalani. According to this Murli point,
1.Brahma-Lekhraj Kirpalani & Mama both are No. 1. (as per BK point of view)
OR
2. Brahma-Virendra Dev Dixit & soul of Mama-kamla Devi Dixit are No.1 (as per PBK point of view)
OR
3.soul in the body of Brahma-Lekhraj Kirpalani (Brahma-jagdamba) & soul in the body of Mama (again soul of jagdamba);
both are same soul. and that soul is NO. 1 SHIVSHAKTI.


your views please;

Dear brother shivachild.

Murlis says: "Brahma ko samajne mein bahut vishaal-buddhi chahiye...pyade aur ghudsawar moonj jaate hain."
(To understand about Brahma, you require a high level of intellect...soldiers and horsemen will get confused.")
Murlis are very confusing and can be interpreted in many ways...so we have to see in practical who is the real brahma( no. 1 soul) who was no.1 in all subjects (practical embodiement of Father Shiv) and that soul is Mama-jagdamba and no one else. (neither Lekhraj Kirpalani-Virendra Dev Dixit).

In Bhakti-marg, most of the pictures of brahma are that of female..you can type Trimurti-shiv on google and see the pictures.

shivsena.

[shivachild]

So my churning says that the avaykt Vanis which are being spoken through Gulzar Dadi may well be spoken by Mama Saraswati(avaykt brahma-jagdamba Saraswati-goddess of knowledge) and not by child Krishna who has to complete his 84th birth through the body of Veerendra Dev Dixit. I am just thinking about this possibility which makes more sense to me, as the BK and PBKs have completely ignored the role of Mama Saraswati after 1965 and concentrating only on the roles of Ram and Krishna.

I would definitely like to have the views of my BK and PBK Brothers on this most important topic about who is delivering the avaykt Vanis after 1969?? Is it child Krishna who is simultaneously playing a part in Veerendra Dev Dixit and going to mt abu to deliver Vanis periodically, or is it the more powerful Mama Saraswati-goddess of knowledge who is avaykt too and going to mt abu to deliver the avaykt Vanis through Dadi Gulzar.

shivsena.[/color]

Dear brother shivsena,
I also agree with this possibility that after 1969 Avyakt Vanis spoken through Gulzar Dadi may be spoken by Mama sarswati; and, soul of Jagdamba Sarswati is Avyakt Brahma.

But, I have a query that "How the combination of Dadi Gulzar and Mama Saraswati becomes 'BapDada'."?

[fluffy bunny]

I also agree with this possibility that after 1969 Avyakt Vanis spoken through Gulzar Dadi may be spoken by Mama sarswati; and, soul of Jagdamba Sarswati is Avyakt Brahma.

But, I have a query that "How the combination of Dadi Gulzar and Mama Saraswati becomes 'BapDada'."?

By error?

This is an interesting theory and one I find entirely feasible ... but have no way or knowing or proving. Radhi Pokardas Rajwani was so conditioned from an impressionable age that her mind became Lekhraj Kirpalani's. Gulzar I am told spent long times close to Lekhraj Kirpalani and separate from others. There is no room for questioning in BKism, only repetition. Om Radhe, being intelligent but lacking a paternal influence (her Father died and she adopted Lekhraj Kirpalani as a surrogate) was the perfect puppet for him, and Gulzar perhaps even moreso as she, basically, had no other education or outside influences from a young age. It does not really matter what comes out from whom, because it is all the same ... but the 'spiritual vibrations' and directions would make a difference.

There is also the possibility that other spirits are involved.

I am sorry I don't know the AK term for who or what they might be (... but they sure aren't the Supreme God). Personally, I would say Virendra Dev Dixit was just playing out Lekhraj Kirpalani's role with this girl Kamala Devi. It was all a big mistake and she should be let go to get on with her life.

Can anyone fill in any more details about the life of Gulzar?

[shivsena]

Dear Brother shivsena,
I also agree with this possibility that after 1969 Avyakt Vanis spoken through Gulzar Dadi may be spoken by Mama sarswati; and, soul of Jagdamba Sarswati is Avyakt Brahma.

Dear brother shivachild.

Not only the av. Vanis but also the Sakar Murlis are spoken by Mama-jagdamba...she(ShivBaba) is the main actor--director-creator of this Sangamyugi drama ...ShivBap is just an observer(sakshi) to the whole drama and is akarta-asochta-abhogtaa ..ShivBap cannot give Gyan in a riddle fashion in Murlis which could be the source of in-fighting and cause difference of opinion between the children....Maa Saraswati-goddess of intellect, as a teacher has set up an intellectual game in the form of Murlis to seperate out the children into 3 groups: 9 lacs--16000--108. (Murli: "Yeh buddhi ka khel hai."..."this is an intellectual game")

And avaykt Vanis are also being narrated by her as avaykt brahma, as Lekhraj Kirpalani-Krishna cannot be in avaykt stage(as Krishna is devta and not farishta) and he is baby buddhi...it has been sung Gyan ki devi(goddess of intellect) and not Gyan ka devta (god of intellect)...so there is only one devi(Maa Saraswati) who has the capability to narrate such perfect Vanis to enable the 108 souls to become avaykt farishtas.

shivsena.

[fluffy bunny]

Not only the av. Vanis but also the Sakar Murlis are spoken by Mama-jagdamba

Translation please ... are you saying Om Radhe formed or created the Sakar Murlis, and Lekhraj Kirpalani repeated them my memory?

• Or do you mean something more spiritual, that he was being used as a medium for some other spirit?
  Or that "Mama-Jagdamba" is someone else?
  Or that Lekhraj Kirpalani is "Mama-Jagdamba"?

[shivsena]

Translation please ... are you saying Om Radhe formed or created the Sakar Murlis, and Lekhraj Kirpalani repeated them my memory?

The whole basic knowledge from 1937 to 1965 was narrated only by Mama-jagdamba as the Gyan of 5000 years-broad drama emerged in her intellect...you are right when you say that shiv was hardly mentioned in bk literature before 1950 and even between 1950 to 1965 the term ShivBaba or shiv was hardly mentioned in Murlis and only the term 'parampita paramatma' was used to denote the supreme Father....and after 1965 when Mama became farishta, then the whole subtle Sangamyugi drama became clear to her and that is what she describes in Sakar Murlis of 3 1/2 years through DLR.

I recall a narration by senior Dadi(prakashmani Dadi's elder sister at our bk-center), who used to say about Mama that whenever Mama used to give knowledge Brahma-Lekhraj Kirpalani used to listen and when brahma used to give knowledge, then Mama was never in class and when Mama came during-Lekhraj Kirpalani's class, then he used to stop giving Gyan and would say that now Mama will take the class.....Lekhraj Kirpalani-Krishna was baby-buddhi and so i feel that he could not be narrating any Gyan before 1965 and only after 1965 when Mama left her body, she has been using Lekhraj Kirpalani's body to narrate Sakar Murlis(exam paper) in the form of a complex riddle.....the whole mystery about who was narrating Gyan before 1965 will be clear only as the revelation time draws near and the senior Dadis who were with Mama reveal what really happened in the beginning of the Yagya.

[fluffy bunny]

The whole basic knowledge from 1937 to 1965 ... even between 1950 to 1965 the term ShivBaba or Shiv was hardly mentioned in Murlis and only the term 'parampita paramatma

A few thoughts arise ...

• At what year or stage did the concept of a personal God, be it a thumbprint or bindi, arise?
  
  (Reason: even the terms "Paramatma" or "Param Pita Parmeshwar" are used for aspects of Brahman, or an impersonal, Universal God within Bhakti and it is clear than many of the BKs still had a Bhakti consciousness at that point ... and still do).

See also the BKs' latest historical revision mentioning many related events, here.

[shivsena]

(Reason: even the terms "Paramatma" or "Param Pita Parmeshwar" are used for aspects of Brahman, or an impersonal, Universal God within Bhakti and it is clear than many of the BKs still had a Bhakti consciousness at that point ... and still do).[/list]

Both bk-pbk philosophy are based on Bhakti...as one believes in nirakar impersonal God and the other believes in a Dehdhari God...but no one has the knowledge of yatharth roop of God.(one who had all the qualities of God Shiva.) (Murli: "There is a day and night difference between Gyan and Bhakti")

Bhakti-scriptures clearly mention about the Motherhood of GOD and Godhood of Mother.
Ramkrishna Paramhans also says: "God without form(nirakar shiv) is my Father and God with form is my mother."(Maa adi-shakti-jagdamba)

[fluffy bunny]

Both bk-pbk philosophy are based on Bhakti...as one believes in nirakar impersonal God and the other believes in a Dehdhari God ...

I cannot argue against that ... but I meant an impersonal God in the manner of the Brahman, the formless, transcendental state of oneness.

Looking at the BKWSU's new calculations, which are quite a small revolution in their history, I am still interested in when you think they first started to consider there was some other kind of being inside the Brahm and Brahma.

As to the next step or level ... I am afraid that I have not read your complete theory (or may not be at the level of the 108 yet). However, I think it is probably a good idea if both sides of BK and PBK accept and realise there is a next level above, and give up attacking and fighting each other.

I am presuming that no human person is the manifestation of it, and it is something entirely subtle/non-physical/spiritual. Is that right?

I don't think I could cope with yet another pretender to the title of medium of God. It strikes me the BK leaders have given up bothering to care and are just jostling for a position and share in the empire they have created whilst Virendra Dev Dixit collects whether spills over, is broken or pushed aside.