Is Shiv a separate soul?

[sita]

Dear sita.

I have answered this question elsewhere in forum, but i will not mind repeating it again.

First of all, i do not believe that Shiv is any independent entity (point of light) staying in some distant Paramdham for 4900 years and then coming on earth in 1937 to redeem the world.....it has been said in Vanis that the whole drama is a play of merging and emerging the sanskars of the soul at the right time in the drama...so what i feel that the role of paramatma(Mama) is always combined with Shiv(parampita) and the two never get seperated in the drama....in Bhakti it is always said: "Shiv ke bina shakti nahin aur shakti ke bina Shiv nahin." and also that "Shiv hi shakti hai aur shakti hi Shiv hai"...so i believe that Shiv(powerhouse) never gets seperated from shakti(electricity) and the power of expression of Shiv(parampita) always remeins in HIS shakti(paramatma)....without the power of expression shakti, Shiv is nothing but shav(corpse)....the two are always to be considered as one entity as it is said in Murlis: "ShivBaba hamesha pravritti-marg wala hai, woh kabhi nivritti-marg wala banta hi nahin."...but BKs-PBKs (by believing that ShivBaba is just a point of light) are doing the shooting of omnipresence of God and making Shiv as nivritti-marg. (like sanyasis who remember the brahm in outer space)


OK more later.
shivsena.

Dear brother,

It is said in the Murli that "I do not come in Heaven." How do you comment this?

[Sach_Khand]

Dear sita.

I have answered this question elsewhere in forum, but i will not mind repeating it again.

First of all, i do not believe that Shiv is any independent entity (point of light) staying in some distant Paramdham for 4900 years and then coming on earth in 1937 to redeem the world.....it has been said in Vanis that the whole drama is a play of merging and emerging the sanskars of the soul at the right time in the drama...so what i feel that the role of paramatma(Mama) is always combined with Shiv(parampita) and the two never get seperated in the drama....in Bhakti it is always said: "Shiv ke bina shakti nahin aur shakti ke bina Shiv nahin." and also that "Shiv hi shakti hai aur shakti hi Shiv hai"...so i believe that Shiv(powerhouse) never gets seperated from shakti(electricity) and the power of expression of Shiv(parampita) always remeins in HIS shakti(paramatma)....without the power of expression shakti, Shiv is nothing but shav(corpse)....the two are always to be considered as one entity as it is said in Murlis: "ShivBaba hamesha pravritti-marg wala hai, woh kabhi nivritti-marg wala banta hi nahin."...but BKs-PBKs (by believing that ShivBaba is just a point of light) are doing the shooting of omnipresence of God and making Shiv as nivritti-marg. (like sanyasis who remember the brahm in outer space)


OK more later.
shivsena.

Dear Brother,

It is said in the Murli that "I do not come in Heaven." How do you comment this?

Although this question is not for me I still want to give my opinion here.
IMO, Shiv is not just a point of light without body. In the beginning of yagnya there was no mention of Shiv, but Lekharaj was shown as The Inventor of Gita by the name Prajapati Brahma.
So, Lekharj is actually Shiv. But in Murlis it is said that Shiv is Nirakar and has no body. That is because in Purushottam Sangamyug, Lekahraj does not have his own body but plays the role of Nirakar Shiv. First as Brahma through the soul of Mama Saraswati. Then as Shiv in the end when simultaneously Shiv Jayanti occurs and also Krishna ki jayanti occurs.
Please also read the post given here,
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=2123&start=510#p38252

Actually Shiv and Shakti are One in Satyug and Tretayug. And Shiv is Nirakar then, he does not come in Satyug and Treta. With the beginning of Dwa-pur, Shiv and Shakti separate and Shiv plays the part in subtle by giving the rewards to indirect Bhakti and only in Sangam Shiv becomes Sakar to give the reward of Mukti Jeevan Mukti.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[shivsena]

Dear Brother,
It is said in the Murli that "I do not come in Heaven."
How do you comment this?

Dear sita.
First i would like to comment on the title of the thread "Is Shiv a separate soul ? ".

Have you anytime seen the sun and the sunrays seperately ??
Have you ever seen the Ocean and waves seperately ??
Can powerhouse and electricity ever be seperated !!
When all Hindu religious scriptures and various saints/sages/learned scholars in the last 2500 years till today, believe that Shiva and shakti cannot be seperated, then on what basis do BKs-PBKs believe that Shiva(parampita) and his shakti(paramatma) are seperate.

As regards : "I do not come in heaven."...for whom is it said??....is it for shiv bindi (whom no one can see and confirm that he has gone to heaven or not).
I feel that it is said for ShivBaba(no. 1 shivshakti-Mama) who never goes to Vaikunth (heaven) as it is said in Murlis "ShivBaba hai swarg ka rachieta" and rachieta(creator) ShivBaba never enjoys his own rachna(swarg)...heaven is created for children to enjoy.(not for ShivBaba)...also in Bhakti marg Maa adi-shakti jagdamba(personified ShivBaba) is never associated with heaven....this is how i see the whole concept of shiv and ShivBaba.

shivsena.

[sita]

So, Lekharj is actually Shiv.

Actually Shiv and Shakti are One in Satyug and Tretayug.

In Satyug it is said that it is the kingdom of Lakshmi and Narayan. Does it mean that they are not separate? If Lekhraj is Shiv, who is combined with Shakti (Om Radhe) in Satyug, then in what form are they combined? How are they combined? Are they in one body, and there is no Narayan then, only Lakshmi, combined with Shiv/Lekhraj in one body?

As regards : "I do not come in heaven."...for whom is it said??....is it for Shiv bindi (whom no one can see and confirm that he has gone to heaven or not).
I feel that it is said for ShivBaba(no. 1 shivshakti-Mama) who never goes to Vaikunth (heaven) as it is said in Murlis "ShivBaba hai swarg ka rachieta" and rachieta(creator) ShivBaba never enjoys his own rachna(swarg)...heaven is created for children to enjoy.(not for ShivBaba)...also in Bhakti marg Maa adi-shakti jagdamba(personified ShivBaba) is never associated with heaven....this is how i see the whole concept of Shiv and ShivBaba.

But in the Murli it is said that this Mama becomes Lakshmi.

You say that Mama has spoken the Murlis through Dada Lekhraj ater 65, but in the Murli it is said that Murlis have started from Karachi.

so what i feel that the role of paramatma(Mama) is always combined with Shiv(parampita) and the two never get seperated in the drama

the two are always to be considered as one entity

It is said in the Murli that my name is Shiv, this is the name of the soul and it never changes, he never has a body. If the soul of Shiv goes into different bodies in the drama he will have diferent names based on the different bodies. How it is that his name never changes and he does never have a body?

It is also said in the Murli that i come only once, i come only in the Confluence Age and i stay in Paramham for the rest of the cycle. You call me after Dwaper yug, i don't come. Why do you say...

First of all, i do not believe that Shiv is any independent entity (point of light) staying in some distant Paramdham for 4900 years and then coming on earth in 1937 to redeem the world.

If the soul of Shiv is always in the drama...it is said in the Murli that i come in this ones body at the end of his many (84) births. I come in impure body. I don't come in pure body. Where is the soul of Shiv in Satyug, when all bodies are pure?

It is said in the Murli that i have three acts - creation of the new world, destruction of the old world and sustenance of the new world. Please, share your view about this!

[Sach_Khand]

the Murli point in which it is said that Prajapita Brahma is the highest authority, and in the very next sentence it is said that ShivBaba is the greatest authority. And in the very next sentence it is said this Dada is the highest authority (some words like highest and greatest may differ). I will try to give the actual Murli point.

Murli date 8. 1. 95 :
Baap to hai hee highest authority aur phir wah Prajapita Brahma bhee highest authority thaharaey. Yah Dada hai sabsaey badi authority. Shiv aur Prajapita Brahma. Aatmaein hain ShivBaba ke bachhe aur phir Sakar mein hum Bhai- bahan sab hain Prajapita Brahma ke bachhe. Yah hai sabka Great great Grand Father.

Dear Sita, I think some PBKs are bent upon changing the track of this topic. I hope you will get this post transferred to ex-PBK section by Admin.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[shivsena]

Dear sita.

Whatever queries you have put forward are most appropriate and logical fallout if shiv and shakti are same.....i cannot answer your queries on this forum for the simple reason that i will not be able to pen my thoughts on paper in a systematic simple manner as this requires a face to face discussion.....if i try to explain on paper then there will be never ending list of queries......so i will write to you in private email and we can have a talk over the phone (if possible).

shivsena.

[sita]

Dear sach khand,

It is said in the Murli:

The soul of Krishna is the first leaf, it is a small child.

...as if he has a small body of his own.

Who is in the very first number? In first number is the one who comes from mulvatan leaving me. The main will be said to be Krishna, isn’t it?

...as if there are two separate souls - one that is leaving mulvatan and one that is being left there.

Dear shivsena,

It is said in the Murli that no human being can give sadgati to human being. How do you comment this?

[arjun]

Whatever queries you have put forward are most appropriate and logical fallout if Shiv and shakti are same.....i cannot answer your queries on this forum for the simple reason that i will not be able to pen my thoughts on paper in a systematic simple manner as this requires a face to face discussion.....if i try to explain on paper then there will be never ending list of queries.....so i will write to you in private email and we can have a talk over the phone (if possible).

God doesn't whisper in someone's ears. It is the dehdhari gurus who have been following this practice since the Copper Age.

And now that shivsena Bhai has started following this practice, I hope he would not object if the answers given by ShivBaba through Baba Dixit on this forum which are conveyed by PBKs are not satisfactory.

[Sach_Khand]

Dear sach khand,

It is said in the Murli:

The soul of Krishna is the first leaf, it is a small child.

...as if he has a small body of his own.

Who is in the very first number? In first number is the one who comes from mulvatan leaving me. The main will be said to be Krishna, isn’t it?

...as if there are two separate souls - one that is leaving mulvatan and one that is being left there.

I do not think it is like having a small body of his own.
There is confusion regarding from Nar to Narayan and Nar to Shree Krishna. I have read a Murli point which says that becoming Narayan from Nar and Krishna from Nar is same.

Ragarding Mulvatan.
Please will you give your views about Mulvatan? What do you think it is?
Are Mulvatan, Paramdham, ShantiDham one and same?
I have not read but heard the point where it is said that children will bring ShantiDham here. So, what does Mulvatan mean? What is Shantidham and what is Paramdham?

I have seen some very contradictory Murli points wich it is very difficult to answer. I admit that I cannot explain all those. What are the resons for such contradiction I cannot tell. I have tried my best to understand even such contradictory points and Based on my churnings and experiences and feelings, I am presenting my views. Please do write your questions. But I cannot say that I will be able to answer all of them.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[Sach_Khand]

Whatever queries you have put forward are most appropriate and logical fallout if Shiv and shakti are same.....i cannot answer your queries on this forum for the simple reason that i will not be able to pen my thoughts on paper in a systematic simple manner as this requires a face to face discussion.....if i try to explain on paper then there will be never ending list of queries.....so i will write to you in private email and we can have a talk over the phone (if possible).

God doesn't whisper in someone's ears. It is the dehdhari gurus who have been following this practice since the Copper Age.

And now that shivsena Bhai has started following this practice, I hope he would not object if the answers given by ShivBaba through Baba Dixit on this forum which are conveyed by PBKs are not satisfactory.

Dear Admin,
The above reply by Arjun is nothing but a personal comment. He has not replied to any point that are being discussed in this topic and is an attempt to change the track of this topic. I strictly oppose such somments from a PBK who is considered as a gentleman by many members of this forum.

I am opposing because what has happenned with you will happen with me or anyone else too. So please warn such behaviours and if they do not heed to the warning, please ban such people from the forums where discussion is allowed between all parties.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[Roy]

The above reply by Arjun is nothing but a personal comment.

Dear Sanjeev Bhai

If making a point about Shrimat is being personal, then yes you are right; Arjun Bhai was guilty of making a point about Shrimat! He is pointing out Shivsena Bhai's, double standard here i believe; which he(Shivsena Bhai), may, or may not, be aware of.

If you find the debating section, too rich for your blood Sanjeev Bhai; then it may be better for you to stay, in the ex-PBK, and other areas of the forum. Arjun Bhai and Shivsena Bhai, have a long history; and their ongoing war, will probably rage, for a few more years yet! Arjun Bhai may well be a gentleman, but he is no pussycat!

If we cannot tolerate a bit of robust debate; how are we to face what is to come in the Drama, in the very near future?

Roy

[arjun]

Dear Admin,
The above reply by Arjun is nothing but a personal comment. He has not replied to any point that are being discussed in this topic and is an attempt to change the track of this topic. I strictly oppose such somments from a PBK who is considered as a gentleman by many members of this forum.

I am opposing because what has happenned with you will happen with me or anyone else too. So please warn such behaviours and if they do not heed to the warning, please ban such people from the forums where discussion is allowed between all parties.

The above comment is just because shivsena is his friend. Had Baba Dixit given the same reply as shivsena Bhai has given (asking someone to send a private mail or personal meeting to get an answer), he would have been criticized heavily. I hope members remember how anu reacted angrily when Baba Dixit asked him/her to reveal his identity. But at that time nobody asked the admin to ban anu or to investigate his/her identity, but now that I have made this comment, sachkhand is seeking a ban on my participation. If Admin agrees with sachkhand he can do so.

[Sach_Khand]

Dear Sanjeev Bhai

If making a point about Shrimat is being personal, then yes you are right; Arjun Bhai was guilty of making a point about Shrimat! He is pointing out Shivsena Bhai's, double standard here i believe; which he(Shivsena Bhai), may, or may not, be aware of.

Do not try to teach me Shrimat. O.K. And I had not expected such a reply from you.
And what great Shrimat is he giving. He is just venting out his frustration and anger. And that itself is against Shrimat.
Arjun would have directly told shivsena what he want to tell. But ther is no necessary to write, "God doesn't whisper in someone's ears. It is the dehdhari gurus who have been following this practice since the Copper Age."
what does he mean by it? And for what has he written this?
Does he mean that shivsena should not talk on phone with someone who wants to discuss knowledge? Foolish comments.
Does Virendra Dev Dixit not talk on mobile and give directions or explain any point on phone.

Next, "And now that shivsena Bhai has started following this practice, I hope he would not object if the answers given by ShivBaba through Baba Dixit on this forum which are conveyed by PBKs are not satisfactory."
Any link between the above two underlined parts? Just ridiculous comaprisons. Is he in his senses or not?
If shivsena has become a guru by accepting talking points of knowledge on phone and if Shivsena should not object Virendra Dev Dixit now. Then it means that Virendra Dev Dixit too is nothing but a guru who wishpers in ears and since shivsena accepts doing this then he should not object another guru Virendra Dev Dixit!!! :laugh:
And what does the communication media has to do with the incomplete or unsatisfactory explanations? If someone feels that he cannot express himself in writing then better talk, and if talking on phone is not suitable due to the length of the explanation then meet in person and talk. I think nobody has any misunderstanding in such simple facts. is anything complex in this?

If you find the debating section, too rich for your blood Sanjeev Bhai; then it may be better for you to stay, in the ex-PBK, and other areas of the forum. Arjun Bhai and Shivsena Bhai, have a long history; and their ongoing war, will probably rage, for a few more years yet! Arjun Bhai may well be a gentleman, but he is no pussycat!

Debating here is not rich but smells foul.
And there is no need of your foolish advice to me. So, Arjun is following Shrimat in discussing in the way of a war. And you support such behaviour. great followers of Shrimat !!!
Let Arjun be a Lion and not a fox. This is what I wish.

If we cannot tolerate a bit of robust debate; how are we to face what is to come in the Drama, in the very near future?
Roy

So then why did you people made drama to change the forum? Stop advising to me then. and just see your own business. :D

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[Sach_Khand]

The above comment is just because shivsena is his friend. Had Baba Dixit given the same reply as shivsena Bhai has given (asking someone to send a private mail or personal meeting to get an answer), he would have been criticized heavily. I hope members remember how anu reacted angrily when Baba Dixit asked him/her to reveal his identity. But at that time nobody asked the admin to ban anu or to investigate his/her identity, but now that I have made this comment, sachkhand is seeking a ban on my participation. If Admin agrees with sachkhand he can do so.

I think you have lost your mental balance and are writing things which are having no connections at all.

We are here to make a new start. And if you still want to continue with the old things then there is no meaning in new start and all the forum changes. Make up your mind once and for all. Do you really want the same kind of forum or would let bygone be bygone and have a new start.
I can list many things about you. But since I do not want to bring up old issues once again, I am leaving them behind.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

[Sach_Khand]

Dear Sita,
Sorry, by mistake I have edited my reply on 12 th instead of quoting it. I did a great mistake. Probably I pressed edit instead of quote.
Drama.

:neutral:
Sanjeev.