Queries by brother satyaprakash.

[satyaprakash]

In the 'Wonderful Biography' there is no mention of marriage of Baba. When did he marry? Is Kamala his wife? What is the status of Vedanti? Is she also married to him? Then he cannot have two wives as per Indian law. Has the baba divirced Kamala? Currently it is reported that Kamala has left this organisation. Is it true? If so who will be Lakshmi and Narayan in the Satya Yuga? Why is there so much mystery on all this ordinary things? Is there something to be hidden in all this? Does any one know the true answers?
Satya

[sachkhand]

In the 'Wonderful Biography' there is no mention of marriage of Baba. When did he marry? Is Kamala his wife? What is the status of Vedanti? Is she also married to him? Then he cannot have two wives as per Indian law. Has the Baba divirced Kamala? Currently it is reported that Kamala has left this organisation. Is it true? If so who will be Lakshmi and Narayan in the Satya Yuga? Why is there so much mystery on all this ordinary things? Is there something to be hidden in all this? Does any one know the trtue answers?
Satya

PBKs are totally busy in highlighting the mysteries of the beginning history of the yagnya and the mistakes of the BK organisation. And hence V>D> and his followers do not have time to give attention to these ordinary things and their misdoings. I find no other reason for them to be mum about their present actual history of their so called yagnya in their literature.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[arjun]

In the 'Wonderful Biography' there is no mention of marriage of Baba. When did he marry? Is Kamala his wife?

He never got married. Kamala Devi Dixit was never his official wife but was/is considered to be Jagdamba.

What is the status of Vedanti? Is she also married to him?

She is a Brahmakumari. She is not married to him.

Then he cannot have two wives as per Indian law. Has the Baba divirced Kamala?

Question does not arise.

Currently it is reported that Kamala has left this organisation. Is it true?

Yes.

If so who will be Lakshmi and Narayan in the Satya Yuga?

The Lakshmi and Narayan in the Golden Age will be Saraswati and Brahma respectively. But the Confluence-Aged Lakshmi and Narayan would be the head of vijaymala (believed to be BK Vedanti by PBKs) and the head of Rudramala (believed to be Baba Virendra Dev Dixit by PBKs).

Why is there so much mystery on all this ordinary things? Is there something to be hidden in all this? Does any one know the trtue answers?

There is no mystery. All these things have already been discussed several times on this forum. It is unfortunate that people like to spread rumours without verifying the facts.

[sachkhand]

There is no mystery. All these things have already been discussed several times on this forum. It is unfortunate that people like to spread rumours without verifying the facts.

I would like to make clear that when clarification about Kamala Devi was asked about in this forum for the first time, the answer given by Virendra Dev Dixit said that it was none of their business to question about her ( not exact words), and it was evil to write about her life in the forum.
And when I asked about the Father of the child of Kama la Devi (because I had doubt that it was Virendra Dev Dixit), " viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1800 "there were very aggressive responses from many in the forum. And I was thought to be very cheap person.

Why cannot the so called PBKs or Virendra Dev Dixit and AIVV members give all the facts in their literature. Why cannot children know about their God Mother? Very strange logic of Virendra Dev Dixit. Is God Mother bad? Never. Then why cannot AIVV give the life History of the so called Jagadamba? It is only through Mother that the children will receive inheritence. Is that not said in Murlis that inheritence will be given to Jagatpita by ShivBaba and from Jagatpita to Jagadamba and Jagadama will give it to children. So where is the knowledge about Jagadamba in the literature of AIVV? Why are they hiding the true present history?
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[RudraPutra]

I would like to make clear that when clarification about Kamala Devi was asked about in this forum for the first time, the answer given by Veerendra Dev Dixit said that it was none of their business to question about her ( not exact words), and it was evil to write about her life in the forum.

...why are you so keen for the life story of a particular individual.....even in Murli it has been said that "Is mata ko chodo aur sabhi dehdhariyon ko bhi chodo.Sirf ShivBaba ko hi Yaad karna hai"....about the jeevan kahani....sivay ShivBaba ke kisi ki jeevan kahani nahi banani chahiye....i would try to quote the exact words of the Murli,once i get....

And when I asked about the Father of the child of Kama la Devi (because I had doubt that it was Veerendra Dev Dixit), " viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1800 "there were very aggressive responses from many in the forum. And I was thought to be very cheap person.

that is the most characterless thing to do.....no one has the right to finger on any one's character that too without any evidences....

Why cannot the so called PBKs or Veerendra Dev Dixit and AIVV members give all the facts in their literature. Why cannot children know about their God Mother? Very strange logic of Veerendra Dev Dixit. Is God Mother bad? Never. Then why cannot AIVV give the life History of the so called Jagadamba? It is only through Mother that the children will receive inheritence. Is that not said in Murlis that inheritence will be given to Jagatpita by ShivBaba and from Jagatpita to Jagadamba and Jagadama will give it to children. So where is The Knowledge about Jagadamba in the literature of AIVV? Why are they hiding the true present history?

....what all we have has been kept in front of everyone.....arey you first try to know who Father is,then we will tell you who mother is.....if you don't trust us,then it's useless to answer you for any of your baseless questions.....coz you are here not to understand or to get satisfied by others views but to put mud on one's character....
everything is open brother,nothing is kept hidden.....write from the history to Murli cassettes,which is kept open in internet....(unlike bk's who are keeping not only mum but pressurizing the sites like this to get banned,)instead of appreciating the brave and honest work of pbk's, you are just trying to make nude of a character....

[sachkhand]

...why are you so keen for the life story of a particular individual.....even in Murli it has been said that "Is mata ko chodo aur sabhi dehdhariyon ko bhi chodo.Sirf ShivBaba ko hi Yaad karna hai"....about the jeevan kahani....sivay ShivBaba ke kisi ki jeevan kahani nahi banani chahiye....i would try to quote the exact words of the Murli,once i get....

So, why is Virendra Dev Dixit and his followers so keen about life history of Dada Lekharaj? And why are you so interested in yagnya history which you all too know that it is impossible to get the actual true history. In the Murli itself it is said that when Father comes then the True history will be revealed or get clear. If you think Virendra Dev Dixit is that actual Father, then why are you people asking for proofs. Is there any greater proof than what Father tells. Father cannot be proved on the basis of proofs provided by the human beings.
Let the so called Father i.e., Virendra Dev Dixit make clear the yagnya history. But he has been changing the persoanlities. At present who is Jagadamba according to Virendra Dev Dixit and his followers?

that is the most characterless thing to do.....no one has the right to finger on any one's character that too without any evidences....

It might be according to you. Because there is filth in your mind, what can I do? You people can call any Dadi for decades as Maya and kami etc., but you cannot bear if anyone asks the facts about the GodMother. Strange.

....what all we have has been kept in front of everyone.....arey you first try to know who Father is,then we will tell you who mother is.....if you don't trust us,then it's useless to answer you for any of your baseless questions.....coz you are here not to understand or to get satisfied by others views but to put mud on one's character....
everything is open Brother,nothing is kept hidden.....write from the history to Murli cassettes,which is kept open in internet....(unlike BK's who are keeping not only mum but pressurizing the sites like this to get banned,)instead of appreciating the brave and honest work of PBK's, you are just trying to make nude of a character....

That same Father had said that Kamala Devi is your Mother. But what has happenned to that Mother? Why did the Mother leave Father and marry someone else? It is not that I have disrespect for Kamala Devi. I respect her as a women and as a Purusharthi. But what is the truth about Jagadamba? If you do not know just tell that you do not know. It is not a shamefull thing to be innocent. But it is shamefull to lie.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[satyaprakash]

PBKs are telling that Hindi will be the language of ShivBaba/Golden Age etc.
They also say that Bagavad Gita is not told by Krishna; It is only by Siva; Gita is all wrong and full of false insertions; so it has to be discarded and only Dixit Baba's words are the Gita.
Both the above points are not explained properly by them. The PBKs only say that it is told so in the Murlis. I do not know if the original BKs also have similar views or different.

Hindi: It is a fairly new language getting its grammar etc only about 800 years back. It is spoken in many parts of North India. But in south India and in many parts of India like West Bengal, Gujarat, Assam, Orissa, NE states etc it is not at all spoken and only a few of them know Hindi. Then why are they insisting on propping up this language? In which Murli is it told that Hindi will be the only language? Does it mean that all those who do not know it will go to some hell? They also are rejecting a 10000 year old language like sanskrit calling it as unapproved by Murli. Is it an attempt to denigrate all of Hindu scriptures? Does it mean that you are no more a Hindu if you follow BK/PBK? Are vedic practices and Upanishad philosophy are a waste as they are in sanscrit? Is siva so powerless that he will know only Hindi and cannot understand any other language?

Bagavad Gita: Which Murli says it is false? What is wrong with Bagavad Gita? which chapters are wrong? Why are BKs or PBKs calling their classes as Gita classes? They never teach Gita there. Only Dixit Baba's talks are played in those classes.

As Virendra Dev Dixit does not know (other than some few words) sanscrit or English or any language other than Hindi, he has made it the only Godly language?

Satya

[arjun]

PBKs are telling that Hindi will be the language of ShivBaba/Golden Age etc.

BKs also believe the same. Murlis say that the language of Golden Age will be a language similar to Hindi or the language of gestures (ishaaron ki bhasha).

They also say that Bagavad Gita is not told by Krishna; It is only by Siva; Gita is all wrong and full of false insertions; so it has to be discarded

BKs also believe that Bhagwad Gita has not been narrated by Krishna but by Shiva.
Neither BKs nor PBKs say that Sanskrit Gita is completely wrong. But it contains very little truth. Still it is a gem and mother of all scriptures.

only Dixit Baba's words are the Gita.

PBKs never said that the words of Baba Dixit are the Gita. It is the words spoken by Shiva through Baba Dixit (believed to be Prajapita/ soul of Confluence-Age Ram/Krishna) which are believed by PBKs to be the true Gita.

Hindi: It is a fairly new language getting its grammar etc only about 800 years back. It is spoken in many parts of North India. But in south India and in many parts of India like West Bengal, Gujarat, Assam, Orissa, NE states etc it is not at all spoken and only a few of them know Hindi. Then why are they insisting on propping up this language? In which Murli is it told that Hindi will be the only language?

Hindi is the language that most of the Indians can speak or understand. It is a language of communication for a common man in India, just as English is understood by most/many people in the world. I have already said that the language of Golden Age will be somewhat similar to Hindi. There will be one language and one rule.

Does it mean that all those who do not know it will go to some hell?

No. This is your imagination.

They also are rejecting a 10000 year old language like sanskrit calling it as unapproved by Murli. Is it an attempt to denigrate all of Hindu scriptures?

No. As far as I know Sanskrit was never the language of the common man even in the past. It was a language of only the Brahmins or the Kshatriyas. Had it been the language of the common man, it would have been alive till date. But except for a handful of people in a remote village in South India nobody speaks Sanskrit. God comes in the end of the Iron Age and chooses to speak in the language of the common man, not in a language that is almost dead and so difficult to understand.

Does it mean that you are no more a Hindu if you follow BK/PBK?

BKs/PBKs believe that they belong to the Aadi Sanatan Devi-Devta Dharma.

Are vedic practices and Upanishad philosophy are a waste as they are in sanscrit?

No. But God is now narrating the essence of those Vedas and Upanishads.

Is siva so powerless that he will know only Hindi and cannot understand any other language?

God comes in a common man and acts like one. He does not show miracles like speaking a hundred languages through the same body. He speaks in the language of his (appointed) Chariot.

What is wrong with Bagavad Gita?

The basic fault with the Sanskrit Gita is that the name of the son (i.e. Krishna) has been inserted in place of the Father (i.e.Shiv Shankar Bholeynath) as the narrator of Gita.

As Veerendra Dev Dixit does not know (other than some few words) sanscrit or English or any language other than Hindi, he has made it the only Godly language?

I have already told the reason why Hindi has been chosen by God as His language.

[arjun]

Murli points related to Hindi language published by the BKs in Hindi:

"Abhi Hindi kay akshar Yaad kar lo – thodo-thoda toh Hindi seekhengey na. Jab yahaan thodey bahut sanskar daalengey tab toh Satyug may bhi bol sakengey. Vahaan toh yah aapki gitpit kee bhaasha hogi nahee. Hindi na samajhney kaaran direct toh Baap ka nahee suntey ho na. Agar seekh jaayengey toh direct sunengey. BapDada samajhtey hain- bachhey direct sunein, direct sun-ney say aur mazaa aayega." (Brahmakumariyon dwara prakaashit Avyakt Vani, dinaank 1.3.84, pg 184, German group say baat kartey huay)

“Now remember (some of) the words of Hindi – you would learn a little Hindi, won’t you? Only when you imbibe little bit of this sanskar here, will you be able to speak in the Golden Age also. There won’t be your complicated languages there. Because of not being able to understand Hindi, you are not listening to the Father directly, isn’t it? If you learn (to speak Hindi) then you would listen directly. BapDada feels that – the children should listen directly; you would enjoy more by listening directly.” (English translation of the above mentioned extracts of Avyakt Vani dated 1.3.84 in Hindi rendered by PBKs)

---------------------------------------------------------

"ड्रामा अनुसार कोई निकलेंगे जो चित्र आदि बनायेंगे। आगे चलकर ऐसे बुद्धिवान निकलेंगे जो देखते दिल खुश हो जाये। अग्रेजी तो सब तरफ फैली हुई है। भाषायें कितनी ढ़ेर हैं। सब देशों में अंग्रेजी वाले जरूर होंगे। इसलिए बाबा भी अंग्रेजी हिन्दी उठाते हैं। आखरीन सब भाषाओं में निकलेगा। किसको भी समझाना है बहुत सहज। परन्तु देखा जाता है किसकी बुद्धि में नहीं बैठता तो वह क्या काम करेंगे। धन है और दान नहीं करते हैं तो उनको मनहूस कहा जाता है। एक कान से सुनते हैं, दूसरे से निकाल देते हैं।" (ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक ०१.१२.०७, पृ.३ एवं ४)

“As per drama someone will emerge who will prepare pictures, etc. In future such intelligent ones would emerge that one will become happy just by seeing them. English is popular everywhere. There are so many languages. There will be people knowing English in all the countries. That is why Baba also promotes/uses English and Hindi. Ultimately it will come out in all the languages. It is very easy to explain to anyone. But it is observed that if it does not fit into anybody’s intellect then what kind of a task will they accomplish? If someone possesses wealth, and does not donate it, then they would be called ominous. They listen through one ear and leave it through the other." (Revised Sakar Murli dated 01.12.07, pg 3&4 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

-------------------------------------------------------------

“अभी तो देखो अनेक भाषाएं हैं। अगर संस्कृत भाषा शुरू करें तो इतने यह सब कैसे समझें। आजकल गीता संस्कृत में कण्ठ करा देते हैं। बहुत अच्छी गीता गाते हैं संस्कृत में। अब अहिल्यायें, कुब्जायें, अबलायें....संस्कृत कहाँ जानती। हिन्दी भाषा तो कॉमन है। हिन्दी का प्रचार जास्ती है। भगवान भी हिन्दी में सुना रहे हैं। वह तो गीता के अध्याय बतलाते हैं, इनके अध्याय कैसे बना सकेंगे। यह तो शुरू से लेकर मुरली चलती रहती है।” (ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक २२.०२.०८, पृ.२)

“Look, now there are so many languages. If we start using Sanskrit language, then how can all these (people) understand? Now a days they learn Sanskrit Gita by heart. They sing Gita very nicely in Sanskrit. Well, do the Ahilyas, Kubjas, Ablaas....know Sanskrit? Hindi language is common. Hindi is very popular. God is also narrating in Hindi. They mention about the chapters of Gita, (but) how can we make chapters of this one (i.e. the Godly knowledge)? The Murlis are being narrated since the beginning.” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 22.02.08, pg.2 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

-------------------------------------------------------------

“अब बैंगलोर, मद्रास के बच्चे बैठे हैं, उन्हों को फिर मद्रासी भाषा में कोई बैठ समझाये। हमारी भाषा तो हिन्दी है। कल्प पहले भी ऐसे समझाया होगा। कहेंगे भगवान सब भाषायें क्यों नहीं जानते। परन्तु ड्रामा में है नहीं। ड्रामा में होता तो मैं सब भाषाओं में भाषण करता। समझो भिन्न-भिन्न भाषाओं वाले बैठे हों तो क्या हम सब भाषाओं में बैठ बोलूंगा क्या? यह तो हो नहीं सकता। एक-दो को भी कहाँ तक सुनायेंगे। घमासान हो जाये। तो समझाना चाहिए बाबा ने कल्प पहले जिस भाषा में समझाया था उसी भाषा में ही समझाते हैं, इसलिए हिन्दी का जोर है। अंग्रेजी भी जरूरी है क्योंकि इन्हों का कनेक्शन अंग्रेजों से जास्ती है। रशिया, अमेरिका आदि की भाषा अपनी-अपनी है। हैं एक ही धर्म वाले क्रिश्चियन। परन्तु भाषायें बहुत हैं। यहाँ भी हैं सब भारतवासी आदि सनातन देवी-देवता धर्म वाले परन्तु अपने धर्म को भूल गये हैं। भाषायें कितनी हो गई हैं। सब मिक्सचर हैं। जिसकी जो भाषा है उसमें फिर उनको सुनाना है।“ (ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक १२.०७.०८, पृ. ३)

“Now children from Bangalore, Madras are sitting. Someone will be required to explain to them in Madrasi language. Our language is Hindi. It must have been explained like this in the previous Kalpa too. They will say – Why doesn’t God know all the languages? But it is not fixed/included in the drama. Had it been included in the drama, then I would have delivered lectures in all the languages. Suppose, people who speak different languages are sitting, then will I sit and speak in all the languages? This cannot be possible. How far can I narrate to one or two persons? It will lead to a fight. So, it must be explained – Baba explains in the same language in which He had explained Kalpa ago. That is why Hindi is preferred. English is also necessary because these people have more connection with the Englishmen. Russia, America, etc. have their own languages. The Christian belong to the same religion. But their languages are many. Even here all the Indians belong to the Aadi Sanaatan Devi Devtaa Dharma (deity religion), but they have forgotten their religion. So many languages have emerged. All are mixtures. We should narrate to every person in his own language.”(Revised Sakar Murli dated 12.07.08, pg 3 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

---------------------------------------------

“हिन्दी बहुत जगह चलती है, तो बच्चों को हिन्दी भाषा में समझाना पड़ेगा। परमपिता परमात्मा भी हिन्दी भाषा में ही समझाते हैं। आजकल जहाँ-तहाँ इसका प्रचार करते रहते हैं। एक भाषा होना तो मुश्किल है। कई समझते हैं परमपिता परमात्मा तो सब भाषायें जानते होंगे। परन्तु ऐसे तो हो न सके। अथाह, अनेकानेक भाषायें हैं। वह तो सीखनी पड़ती है। परमपिता परमात्मा को तो कुछ सीखना नहीं है। उन्होंने कल्प पहले जिस भाषा में समझाया है, उसमें ही समझाते हैं। बाकी भाषायें तो हरेक को पढ़नी होती है। बाप को पढ़नी होती है क्या? तुम देखते हो शुरू से हिन्दी चली है। सब हिन्दी सीखते जाते हैं। भारत में हिन्दी का प्रचार है। बाप भी हिन्दी में समझाते हैं फिर हर एक को अपनी भाषा में ट्रांसलेशन कर औरों को समझाने पड़े।“(ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक १२.०९.०८, पृ. २)

“Hindi is spoken at many places. So, children will have to explain in Hindi language. The Supreme Father Supreme Soul also explains in Hindi only. Now-a-days it is being propagated everywhere. It is difficult to have one language. Many people feel that the Supreme Father Supreme Soul must be aware of all the languages. But this cannot be possible. There are innumerable, numerous languages. They have to be learnt. The Supreme Father Supreme Teacher does not have to learn anything. He explains in the same language that He had explained Kalpa ago. As regards languages, everyone has to study (the languages). Does God require to learn? You see that Hindi has been in vogue since the beginning. Everyone is learning Hindi. Hindi is common in India. The Father also explains in Hindi. Then, everyone has to translate and explain to others in his/her language.”(Revised Sakar Murli dated 12.09.08, pg 2 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

[satyaprakash]

You say:
Neither BKs nor PBKs say that Sanskrit Gita is completely wrong. But it contains very little truth. Still it is a gem and mother of all scriptures.
Can you list the truth and untruths in Bagavad Gita(BG)? Or is it found in some Vani or Murli? Or atleast can you give some 2 or 3 examples of untruths in BG? IS IT NOT MAKING UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS WITHOUT ANY PROOF? Or are you simply repeating something which you heard from others? If it is full of untruth then why you are calling it a gem and mother of all scriptures? PLEASE DO NOT ABUSE A RESPECTED Hindu SCRIPTURE ON HEARSAY!

Let us assume Siva wrote BG and not Krishna. But the philosophy is same? Why do they (BK/PBK) not teach the BG after substituting all Krishna name with Siva?

Regarding Hindi: Have you ever travelled inthe interiors of Tamilnadu, Karnataka, AP or Orissa? There, not even a single persons knows Hindi. Hindi IS NOT A LINK LANGUAGE FOR PEOPLE. It is only for govt. Babus. Now it appears that it is so for Babas also! So all these illiterate villagers have to learn Hindi as it is the only Godly language? Do you have one million BK/PBK teachers to teach Hindi to all these crores of people?

Regarding English: Please note that no one in Europe other than UK speaks English. No one in China or Vietnam or Afrika or S.America. So English is also not an internationally well known popular language. So telling that Hindi is for all India and English is for all world is not correct. Babas and Murlis may talk about it. But it is not a fact.

Hence my question still need an answer.

Satya.

[arjun]

Can you list the truth and untruths in Bagavad Gita(BG)? Or is it found in some Vani or Murli? Or atleast can you give some 2 or 3 examples of untruths in BG? IS IT NOT MAKING UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS WITHOUT ANY PROOF? Or are you simply repeating something which you heard from others? If it is full of untruth then why you are calling it a gem and mother of all scriptures? PLEASE DO NOT ABUSE A RESPECTED Hindu SCRIPTURE ON HEARSAY!

Long ago an article was written on this topic to cater to the queries of both non-BKs and BKs. It is part of a book published by AIVV. I don't know how far it will satisfy you, but please go through it and questions, if any, are welcome:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incorporeal God of Gita - Shiv Shankar Bholenath or the soul of corporeal Sri Krishna alias Dada Lekhraj?

There is no doubt that Gita, which has been guiding the Indians since the last two and a half thousand years is a gem among all the scriptures. But there would not be as many commentaries by scholars and learned persons on any other scripture as on Gita, which proves that this scripture is so unique that the different kinds of clarifications on Gita given by human beings have never satisfied all the human beings. Someone has rightly said, " Kai jaaney kavi, ya kai jaaney ravi". The poet only or the Sun of Knowledge can give the correct clarification of a poem. Rest of the clarifications given by the human beings will be incomplete from one point of view or the other.

It has been fed in the minds of the general public that the Sermonizer of Gita was Shri Krishna, who gave the discourse of Gita to Arjuna sitting on a Chariot in the war field of Kurukshetra. But if we look from a spiritual and historical angle then all the questions such as who, when, whom and where was Gita narrated are disputable. The story of Gita and Satyanarayana prove that God reveals himself in the form of an ordinary, old and experienced human being. It has been written in Gita:
Avjaanaanti maam moodha manurshee tanumashritam I
Param bhaavamjaananto mam bhootmaheshwaram II (Gita 9/11)

Further it has been written in Gita that God is ajanma (eternal), abhokta (one who does not enjyoy any pleasures) and Avyakt (imperceptible).
Ajo S pi sannvyayatma bhootanamishraro S pi san I
Prakriti swamdhishthaay sambhavamyatmamaayayaa II (Gita 4/6)

Yo maamjamanaadim cha veti lokmaheshwaram I
Asam-moodhah Silver Age martyeshu sarvapapaih pramuchyatey II

In the Shrimad Bhagwatgita that aadi-anadi purush (eternal being) has been praised – (tamev chadhyam purusham prapdhye yatah pravrittih prasoota puraani I Gita 15/4), i.e., I bow to that aadi-anaadi purush, who has first of all created this world-like tree. That eternal being (aadi purush) is telling himself-(Ahamadirhi devanam maharshinaam cha sarvashah-Gita 10/2), i.e., I am only the beginning of all the deities and sages. He only had propagated that famous principle of karmayoga (remembering God while performing actions) in the ancient times, due to which India got the name of karmabhoomi (land of the actions of God) as per the Jaina tradition also (nishtha pura prokta mayanagh…karmayogen yoginaam-Gita 3/3)

Here it may be recalled that the knowledge of Gita was not given by Shri Krishna, but by that aadi-anaadi purush (eternal being) to the householder Arjuna in order to teach the religion of household (grihastha-dharma) and to teach him easy RajYoga. In this connection, some of the quotes of famous historians are given below, without going into the details:

Hopkins said, “The present Krishna-dominated form (of Gita) was earlier a Vishnu-dominated poem and prior to that it was a non-communal writing.” Religions of India (1608) Page 386 (Radhakrishnan Gita, Page 17). Farkuhar has written in Religious literature of India (1620) page 12-14, “This (Gita) is an ancient prose Upnishad, which was probably written after shwetashwataropanishad and which has been moulded into the present form after the death of Christ to support the Krishnaism by some poet.” As per Garvey, “Bhagwatgita was earlier a scripture related to Sankhya-Yoga, in which the methods of worship of Krishna Vasudev got included and it was adjusted as per the Vedic traditions by considering Krishna to be a form of Vishnu in the 3rd Century B.C. Holtzman considers Gita to be a later Vishnu-dominated form of a sarveshwarwadi poem. Keith also believes that originally Gita was a Shwetashwatar form of Upanishad, but later it was moulded in the form of Krishna worship. (An extract from the introduction to Radhakrishnan ‘Gita’, page 17)

Shri Krishna was born from the womb of a mother. He enjyoyed all the pleasures of life and had obtained knowledge from Guru Sandipani. He has mostly been depicted in childhood form. That is why the entire world cannot accept him as a Father. Secondly, it is famous in mythological stories that Shri Krishna narrated Gita only to one Arjuna while sitting on a Chariot in the Copper Age (Dwapar Yug), but it is also famous that Sage Vyaas had written the scripture Mahabharata, which reached the general public in Sanskrit. From the historical point of view these points are disputable.

Actually, Gita is the highest among all the scriptures (sarva shastra shiromani), but it was narrated in the Confluence Age of the 5000 years old world drama wheel consisting of four ages, i.e. at the confluence of the Iron Age and the Golden Age, which is being repeated now. Had Gita been narrated only in the Copper Age then how did the sinful Iron Age arrive? After the incarnation of God, it should have resulted in the commencement of Golden Age and not the most sinful Iron Age. And Gita is narrated in the Confluence Age, when all the religions, the religious followers and the religious fathers of those religions are present in their last birth. It is because of this only it has been said in Gita, “Renounce all the religions and come into my asylum, the asylum of one Supreme Soul.”
Sarvadharmanparityajya Mamekam Sharanam Vraj.
Aham twa sarvapapebhyo mokshayami Maa shuchah. (Gita 18/66)

From the point of view of Hindus, when Gita was narrated in the Copper Age, then the religions like Islam, Sikhism etc. were not present. Then how did the above hymn (shloka) come in Gita? And the Gita was not narrated in a complex language like Sanskrit, but is being narrated in language like Hindi, which can be understood by the common public. Even from a historical point of view, Sanskrit was never the language of the general public. Then how can God, who has entered in a very ordinary human being, use such a complex language? Apart from this, Gita was not narrated by a corporeal prince Shri Krishna, who had an attractive name and form and who comes in the cycle of life and death, but by incorporeal God Shiva, who is ajanma (beyond worldly births), abhokta (beyond pleasures) at the end of the Iron Age through an ordinary human body (Prajapita Brahma) not just to one Arjuna, but it is being narrated to many other householders like Arjuna. It is written in Gita, “O Arjuna, you do not know your births (i.e. past lives). I narrate to you the story of your past lives.”
Bahooni mein vyateetani janmaani tav charjun.
Taanyaham ved sarvaani na twa vettha parantap. (Gita 4/5)

But how can Krishna, who passes through the cycle of life and death himself, give the inheritance of true mukti (liberation) and jeevanmukti (living a liberated life), and narrate the story of many births to other human souls? This proves that the story of many births, which is famous as Gita or Amarkatha (the story of becoming imperishable) is not narrated through corporeal Shri Krishna, but through the Supreme Soul Shiva, who is beyond life and death.

The above view about Gita, which is completely different from the common view, is a view of not just the Brahmakumari Organization but also of Adhyatmik Ishwariya Vishwavidyalaya based in Kampila, Uttar Pradesh that the Godly knowledge called Murli, which was narrated through a very ordinary corporeal human Chariot, is the true Gita, on the basis of which the Sanskrit Gita will be written in the Copper Age, which is going to commence 2500 years henceforth. Although the Brahmakumari Organization believes that the incorporeal Shiva is the God mentioned in Gita, but they are spreading the name and form of Dada Lekhraj alias the soul of Krishna in the world as the corporeal medium of God, whereas it is known to everyone that Dada Lekhraj had expired in 1969 itself. Then how can he be called the Father of the entire world, i.e. Prajapita Brahma? In the flute of knowledge (Murlis) narrated by incorporeal Supreme Soul Shiva regarding Gita and its narrator, He has said the following points:
• This is a new knowledge for the new world. The giver is only one. Krishna does not give this knowledge. Krishna is not called the purifier of the sinful. The purifier of the sinful is only one Supreme Father Supreme Soul, who is beyond the cycle of rebirths, whereas the name of Krishna, who takes 84 births, has been added in Gita. (Murli dated 28.10.87)
• Now, who has given birth to Gita. This is the topic. When they say Jayanti (Birthday of Gita) then certainly Gita was also born, isn’t it? When it is named Shrimat Bhagwat Gita Jayanti, then there must also be someone who gave birth to Gita, isn’t it? Everyone says Shri Krishna Bhagwaanuvach (God Shri Krishna speaks), then Shri Krishna comes first and then Gita. Now the creator of Gita is certainly required. But Shri Krishna was a small child. He cannot narrate Gita. It will have to be proved who gives birth to Gita. This is a deep matter. Whatever dispute is there in India is only on this point. Krishna takes birth through mother’s womb. He is a prince of Golden Age. (Murli dated 24.11.88)
• Shri Krishna cannot be called Vrikshapati (master of the world tree). The Supreme Father Supreme Soul is the seed-like creator of the human world. Krishna cannot be called the creator. He is always a human being with deity-like virtues. (Murli dated 22.2.98)
• Krishna is not the Father of everyone. (Murli dated 30.9.98)
• Krishna cannot be called the Father of all the souls. The Father of souls, i.e. Supreme Father Supreme Soul says, “Remember none but me.”

In the picture of Trinity Shiva published by the Brahmakumaris organization Dada Lekhraj has been picturised as Brahma, but they are unaware of the human souls, who will play the roles of Shankar and Vishnu after the death of Dada Lekhraj in 1969. That is why, in place of Shankar and Vishnu, the pictures from the path of worship (Bhaktimarg) have been shown. On the basis of the Murlis and Avyakt Vanis narrated from Mt. Abu, AIVV believes that after 1969 the incorporeal Supreme Soul Shiva is giving the true knowledge of Gita and teaching easy RajYoga to all the human souls through another corporeal human Chariot called Shiv Shankar Bholenath, through which all the Arjuna-like souls can get transformed from human beings to deities. The proofs for this fact are present in the various flutes of knowledge (i.e. gyaan Murlis) narrated through Dada Lekhraj, which the administrators of Brahmakumari Organization are unwilling to accept in fear of losing the throne.

The Brahmakumari Organization and AIVV believe that the soul of Dada Lekhraj will take birth in the coming Golden Age as Shri Krishna. But the publicity of Dada Lekhraj as the medium of Gita Sermonizer Shiva by the Brahmakumari Organization is like denying the knowledge given in the Murlis that were narrated through Dada Lekhraj himself. Dada Lekhraj became the temporary medium of God Shiva from 1951 to 1969, during which he gave motherly love to the Brahmakumar-kumaris and the versions of God Shiva uttered through his body became famous as the true Gita amongst the Brahmakumar-kumaris. But prior to 1951 and after his death in 1969, the responsibility of this huge Godly task was carried by the soul of his business partner, who is playing the role of the corporeal medium of incorporeal Shiva, i.e. Mahadev Shiv Shankar, and will play the role of Satya Narayan in the Golden Age in the near future and the role of Shri Ram in the Silver Age, which will begin after 1250 years.

God Shiva certainly narrated the knowledge of Gita, i.e the Murlis through Dada Lekhraj, but he is revealing the deep secrets of those Murlis through his present human Chariot. Just as the Hindus in general have accepted attractive looking Shri Krishna as the Gita Sermonizer instead of Bholenath Shiv-Shankar out of ignorance, similarly the Brahmakumari Organization has accepted attractive looking Dada Lekhraj, i.e. the soul of Krishna as the Gita Sermonizer instead of the soul of Shankar or Ram. Even in the Murlis of knowledge published by the Brahmakumaris organization, the name of Dada Lekhraj (Pitashri) has been added before ShivBaba. This is the only mistake because of which the name of Shri Krishna has been added in the Sanskrit Gita as its creator instead of Shiv-Shankar in the path of worship in the world drama cycle from Copper Age onwards. The qualities of God given in Gita, like Avyakt, Ajanma, Abhokta etc. actually apply on Shiv Shankar both in limited and unlimited sense and not on Shri Krishna.
• Father says that I am the God of Gita. It was ShivBaba who created Mother Gita. Krishna took birth. Along with him Radha and others are also included. First there are Brahmins. Father says, “Who is the foolish person, who has removed my name completely? Then, I only have to come and reveal that I, the Supreme Soul Shiva am the God mentioned in Gita. I have created Gita. The child Krishna took birth from Gita. You have then added the name of child instead of Father. This is the biggest mistake. – (Murli dated 13.12.88)
• Child Krishna was born from Rudra (another name of Shiv-Shankar). So the name of child has been added instead of Father in it (i.e. in Gita). (Murli dated 29.3.88)
• Gita is the mother and Father. Gita is called mother. No other book is called mother. Its name is mother Gita. OK, who created it? First of all a man adopts a woman, isn’t it? –(Murli dated 28.9.88) (So in the beginning of the Godly family, i.e. Yagya also Shiv Shankar must have certainly adopted Dada Lekhraj Brahma as the 18 chaptered mother Gita after the demise of Mother Gita)
• Everything is based on correcting Gita. Because of amending Gita the personality of God has vanished. (Murli dated 9.3.88)
• Bharat (India) gets the cream through the God of Shrimat Bhagwat Gita. Shrimat Bhagwat Gita has also been amended to the extent that Gita has been reduced to the level of buttermilk by adding the name of Shri Krishna instead of the ocean of knowledge, purifier of the sinful incorporeal Supreme Father Supreme Soul. (Murli dated 31.10.78)
• Gita is the mother and Father of all the scriptures. It is not true that it is only the mother and Father of only the scriptures of India. No. It is the mother and Father of all the biggest scriptures that are present in the world. (Murli dated 5.2.83)
• He is the creator of heaven – he is helpful to everyone. Krishna is a creation himself. He is the first class flower of the garden. (Murli dated 5.2.83)

This is the only mistake, which has caused the degradation of India, and has condemned Gita, and in spite of being the mother of all the scriptures, Gita is not accepted by the followers of other religions. This is the reason why scholars have clarified Gita in different ways. Shankaracharya has proved the soul and the Supreme Soul to be one and the same (advaita) on the basis of the same Gita, whereas Madhvacharya proved the soul and Supreme Soul to be different entities (dwaita). Sex-lust has been termed as the biggest enemy in Gita. The people of the world do not accept this fact only because it is famous in the scriptures that the so-called creator of Gita, i.e., Shri Krishna had 8 wives and 16,108 Gopikas. If Mahadev Shiv Shankar’s name had appeared in Gita as the Gita Sermonizer then the world would have readily accepted the point of Sex-lust being the greatest enemy, because Shankar is famous in the scriptures as the one who had only one wife and the one who destroyed sex-lust. If we take the example of the scriptures only then just as God was not recognized when he appeared in an ordinary, old human being in the story of Satyanarayana, similarly seeing the graveyard dweller-like ordinary form of Shankar, his Father-in-law Daksh Prajapati did not recognize him and insulted him. So “As the King, so are the subjects.”

In India Gita is also considered to be a mother. But in the Godly knowledge being given by God Shiva presently, it is also being clarified that Gita is not just a symbol of knowledge, i.e. a book, but it is also a symbol of a living human soul, who is playing the role of world mother (Jagdamba) along with Prajapita to sustain the Godly family in the present Confluence Age. Both of them are only known as Aadi Dev- Aadi Devi by the Hindus, as Aadam-Havva by the Muslims, as Adam-Eve by the Christians and as Aadinath-Aadinathini by the Jains.

Hence, keeping in view the above points, if Father Shiv-Shankar is presented as the God mentioned in Gita instead of the child Shri Krishna, then Gita will be accepted by the souls of the entire world as a Godly version.
• When did God narrate Gita? Certainly all the religions must be present. Actually, Gita is the main scripture for all the religions. People of all the religions must accept it….Father has come to cause the true salvation of people belonging to all the religions through Gita. Gita has been narrated by Father. This matter has been made complicated by putting the name of child instead of Father. (Murli dated 21.2.93)

[arjun]

Let us assume Siva wrote BG and not Krishna. But the philosophy is same? Why do they (BK/PBK) not teach the BG after substituting all Krishna name with Siva?

Just because BKs/PBKs believe that the Sanskrit Gita has been written by a human being, while the true Gita is being spoken by God now in the Confluence Age (Purushottam Sangamyug).

Regarding Hindi: Have you ever travelled inthe interiors of Tamilnadu, Karnataka, AP or Orissa? There, not even a single persons knows Hindi. Hindi IS NOT A LINK LANGUAGE FOR PEOPLE. It is only for govt. Babus. Now it appears that it is so for Babas also! So all these illiterate villagers have to learn Hindi as it is the only Godly language? Do you have one million BK/PBK teachers to teach Hindi to all these crores of people?

I have travelled in all the four states of South India and I can definitely refute your statement that not even a single person knows Hindi. Yes, there may be many remote villages in south India where nobody speaks/understands Hindi, but there will be persons in most villages or towns who can understand/speak Hindi (not like a north Indian, but at least a few words needed for basic communication).

As far as I know BKs do not actively encourage south Indian BKs to learn Hindi as they provide them translation of the printed Hindi Murlis in the regional languages. But as far as PBKs are concerned, they are actively encouraged to learn Hindi and I have practically seen many south Indians who could not speak a single Hindi word as a BK/non-BK are now speaking fluent or at least minimum Hindi. You can find proofs of the same in the hundreds of discussion CDs uploaded on the official website of the PBKs (www.PBKs.info).

[arjun]

Regarding English: Please note that no one in Europe other than UK speaks English. No one in China or Vietnam or Afrika or S.America. So English is also not an internationally well known popular language. So telling that Hindi is for all India and English is for all world is not correct. Babas and Murlis may talk about it. But it is not a fact.

I never said that English is spoken in every country. I said it is the international link language. You can approach any English newspaper and they will provide you the proofs for my statement.

[new knowledge]

Dear brother Satyaprakash,
* What do you think about Sanskrit language?
* According to you, what should be the language of God when He incarnates on earth & why?
* Could the Absolute Truth be put on paper, in the form of Murlis or Avyakt Vanis or any spiritual scriptures like Vedas, or can it be expressed in terms of any language? Or, is it that the Absolute Truth be realized only in the complete Sweet Silence stage in Paramdham?

[satyaprakash]

Dear 'new knowledge'

* What do you think about Sanskrit language?
It is the language in which all ancient Indian scriptures are found. It is the root of our civilisation

* According to you, what should be the language of God when He incarnates on earth & why?
It is for the God to decide.

* Could the Absolute Truth be put on paper, in the form of Murlis or Avyakt Vanis or any spiritual scriptures like Vedas, or can it be expressed in terms of any language? Or, is it that the Absolute Truth be realized only in the complete Sweet Silence stage in Paramdham?
May be you are right. The original Guru Dakshinamurthy taught by silence only!

Satya.