Q&A: PBK Murli discussions

[aimée]

Om Shanti Bansybahan, Arjunbhai,

Back from India and I would like so much to return quickly ...

I have put a new post to share with you my impressions, because I though this link was not appropriate. I could not ask Baba the questions that I have seen in this forum, because I had no time even to finish with my own set of questions I wanted to ask him. Also I am not sure what sort of questions are put forward in this forum, I am sometimes confused, as they come from all directions and are so diverse.

Maybe something I could add here, that seems to add to the discussion we are having with Shivsena about the role of Krishna in the actual Chariot of Ram: If I remember correctly, I told Baba that I was wondering whether, in BK life, all the love I received was coming from Brahma Baba or from Shiv I was just seeing in Brahma Baba, or the representation I had of Brahma Baba. He said (approximatively) that Brahma Baba played the role of the mother, and no one in the whole world can complain that Brahma Baba did not give me love. so it was him who gave me love. Sorry, that is not very precise, and he might have said something else, but I don't remember, we will see when the VCD is done, meaning in a while ...

But what I am sure of, is the way he presents Brahma Baba, it is obviously another personage in the play, with his defects (attachment, cold anger), and he is now incomplete (half moon on the forehead of Shankar), he is studying, and the day he becomes complete, he becomes Vishnu, meaning the part of sustenance can start, where Vaishna Vi Devi plays the main role, but also Krishna in Jagadamba plays the part of Mahakali and destroys the demons, the ones who have refused to recognized the Father, even after his revelation. She/he is then fully cooperative, as a full moon, this is when the children of religion will oppose him/her, for following the Father. what I have written in this last paragraph is a mixture of clarification and what he told me, with my own word, so not 100% accurate...

[arjun]

Disc.CD No.233, dated 9.1.07 at Arakonam

Kisi nay poocha: Baba, son shows Father, Father shows son – iska matlab kya hai? Voh kabhi hoga?
Baba nay kaha: Father shows sons. Father jyada powerful hai ya bachhey jyada powerful hai ya bachhey jyada powerful hain? (Kisi nay kaha-Father jyada powerful hai) Toh kaun kisko pehley pratyaksh kar dega? (Kisi nay kuch kaha) Jo Baap hai voh bachhon ko pehley pratyaksh karta hai. Chaahey voh 8 bachhey hon, chaahey 108 hon ya chaahey 16108 hon, Baap bachhon ko pratyaksh kartaa hai pehley. Baad may bachhey Baap ko pratyaksh kartey hain. Son shows Father, ye baad kee baat hai. Baap pehley bachhon ko pratyaksh kartaa hai. Baap khud apney aap pratyaksh nahee hota. Chupa rustam baad may khuley. Ram vali aatma last may jaakar pratyaksh hogi sansar kay saamney. Isliye 2500 varsh Gita ka Bhagwaan chaltaa rahta hai. Pratyaksh hokarke part bajaataa hai ya gupt hokarke part bajaata hai?

Someone asked: Baba, what is meant by ‘son shows Father, Father shows son’? When would that happen?
Baba said: Father shows sons. Is the Father more powerful or are the children more powerful? (Someone said – The Father is more powerful) So who would reveal whom first? (Someone said something) The one, who is the Father, reveals the children first – whether they are 8 children or 108 or whether they are 16108. The Father reveals the children first. Later, the children reveal the Father. ‘Son shows Father’ is a matter of the later times. The Father reveals the children first. The Father does not get revealed himself first. The hidden rostum gets revealed later on. The soul of Ram would get revealed in front of the world in the last. That is why the God of Gita (in the form of Krishna) continues for 2500 years. Does he play a part in a revealed form or does he play an incognito part?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:- The Hindi and English versions of the extracts of above mentioned Discussion CD are just draft versions.

[arjun]

Sister Aimee,
Om Shanti. Thanks for sharing the points of knowledge as well as your experiences of the trip to India.
Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

[shivsena]

I said: what we will find in the clarification is personal, and also the direct answers given by Baba (in Veerendra Dev Dixit) will also be interpreted in a personal way. It does not mean what he says is personal, but the way we interprets what he says is personal. See for example your interpretation of the Murli and mine are totally different, but we are looking at the same source, aren’t we? According to our sanskars, the influence of one or various religion in us, we will have different views, and then accordingly, we do the shooting for the broad drama.

Dear sister aimee.
I fully agree with you that each soul will interpret and digest this wonderful Godly knowledge according to his own reasoning capacity; that is how 9,16,108 souls will be seperated during the shooting period; those who have just identified ShivBap in the body of brahma(Krishna) will be amongst 9,00,000 ordinary praja(their intellect will never accept the advance knowledge); those who have accepted the advance knowledge will then be only 16108 souls; now lies the main part of selection of 108 souls from the royal praja of Advance Party; the thinking of 108 king quality souls of rudramala will be different from the 16000 royal praja souls (who cannot think beyond ShivBap in the body of Virendra Dev Dixit); so in short all three groups will think and interpret the knowledge limited by their intellect, which in turn will decide their fate of the next 84 births.(jaisi dhristi vaisi shristi -- meaning you create your own world by how you eye and interpret the knowledge given in the Murlis by ShivBap); this is what is feel.

shivsena.

[arjun]

Disc.CD No.233, dated 9.1.07 at Arakonam

Kisi mataji nay poocha: xpbkchat may ek point aaya hai; xpbkchat aisa hai na, usmay bola hai jab four and a half lakh shareeer chodengey, kanchankaya banengey, us samay sab saadhey chaar bhaarat may hee nahee lekin voh duniya kay sab jagah may hongey.
Baba nay kaha: Ho saktey hain. Duniya kay kisi bhi kshetra may ho saktey hain.
Mataji nay poocha: Fir voh khand toh abhi samudra kay andar chalaa jaayega toh?
Baba nay kaha: Lekin yeh bhi toh kaha hai ki jis samay vinaash hoga us samay jo videsh hongey voh tumhaarey picnic kay sthaan ban jaayengey.
Mataji nay poocha: Lekin Baba voh aatmaen kaisey idhar aayengey, pahunchengey? Voh shareeer kaisey idhar pahunchengey Bhaarat may?
Baba nay poocha: Voh shaktishaali hongey ki ashakta shareeer hongey? Nirogi hongey ya rogi hongey?
Mataji nay kaha: Nirogi hongey.
Baa nay kaha: Toh fir!
Mataji nay kaha: Nahee, paidal aayengey ya kaisey pahunchengey?
Baba nay kaha: Koi bhi tareeka ho, voh aa jaayengey. Prakriti sab saadhan muhaiyya karaati hai.

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

A mataji asked: A point has been mentioned in xpbkchat; there is xpbkchat, isn’t it? In that it has been mentioned that when four and a half lakh (souls) would leave their bodies, when they become kanchankaaya (i.e. acquire a deity-like body), at that time all those four and a half (lakhs) would be present not just in India but at all the places of the world
Baba said: They can be present; they can be present in any region of the world.
Mataji said: Then what if those lands get submerged under ocean now?
Baba said: But it has also been said that when the destruction takes place, at that time the foreign countries would become your picnic spots.
Mataji asked: But Baba how will those souls come here, reach here? How will those bodies reach here in India?
Baba said: Would they be powerful or would they be weak bodies? Would they be healthy or would they be diseased?
Mataji said: They would be healthy.
Baba said: Then?
Mataji said: No, whether they would come by walk or how would they reach?
Baba said: Whatever may be the method, they would come. The nature provides all the means.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:- The Hindi and English versions of the extracts of above mentioned Discussion CD are just draft versions. The words added within brackets in the English version have been added by the Translator to make the meaning more clear.

[aimée]

Dear Shivsena Bhai,
Where did you get the information that:

the 16000 royal praja souls (who cannot think beyond ShivBap in the body of Veerendra Dev Dixit)

And what do you mean by that? Is the idea of ShivBaba exactly the concept of God entering the Chariot to teach us, as a point cannot do much on his own?

[shivsena]

Where did you get the information that:
the 16000 royal praja souls (who cannot think beyond ShivBap in the body of Veerendra Dev Dixit)

Dear sister aimee.

Every senior pbk is aware that out of 9,16,108, 9 lacs are common praja; 16000 are royal praja(pyade) ; 100 are ghodesawaar(horsemen) and 8 are maharathis(elephants); this has been mentioned in the Murlis also.

And what do you mean by that? Is the idea of ShivBaba exactly the concept of God entering the Chariot to teach us, as a point cannot do much on his own?

My idea of ShivBaba is not bindi ShivBap(point); but the one who attains the 100% nirakari stage and becomes one with ShivBap and becomes living ShivBaba (ie shiv+Ram combined); this is where my manthan differs from advance knowledge and the rest of the PBKs.
shivsena.

[aimée]

Dear brother Shivsena,

I respect that you have you own vision of the Gyan, but your idea is not supported by anything written either in the Sakar Murlis or Avyakt Vanis, unless you prove me the contrary ... ? You also did not answer to my first question, as:

who cannot think beyond ShivBap in the body of Veerendra Dev Dixit

What is there "beyond" the concept of God coming in the mukarrar rath, the appointed Chariot, to purify us?

Yes, there is not one Chariot only.

"A name has been assigned – ‘Brahma’. In the Murli it has been said – Brahma is not just one. Brahma is not the name of just one person. Many people are named Brahma. There are at least five Brahmas. Among them, the head of one Brahma is cut. From the five-headed Brahma (Panchmukhi Brahma) one head is cut off. So, if the head is cut off and the body is separated, then is it a good act or a bad act? Hm? (Someone said – it is a bad act). It is a bad act in a limited sense and what about the unlimited sense? Hm? It is a good task in unlimited sense. The head (sir), the mund (head severed from the trunk), is a reminder of the face (mukh); the soul resides in it. The mind & intellect-like soul and the sense organs should get separated and the entire body consciousness should get separated."

VCD 322, but:

"Within the Sakar you have to remember that nirakar, because ours is a pravirti marg"

Clarification of Murli 8.4.88

"within Ram see that Supreme Soul. The Ram soul in his last birth becomes patit and the soul of Krishna on his last birth also becomes patit. Do not get entangled in them."

Clarification of Murli 28.3.88

"When the souls take on bodies and become human beings I am not the Father of those human beings. I am only the Father of the atmas. I am also the unlimited teacher [...] Prajapita who is the Father of the humans is not the unlimited teacher. In him the unlimited Teacher is the Supreme Soul"

Clarification of Murli 21.3.69

I do agree that Ram is the one who is going to become Bapsaman, equal to God at the end, when he becomes the Father and husband of the whole world but for the moment we also have to purify ourselves, to transform ourselves and to learn. So our focus should stay on God Himself, because He is the only one who is ever pure and has come down on this earth, in different chariots (especially the appointed or permanent Chariot), to change us from human beings (or monkeys) to deities.

[shivsena]

I do agree that Ram is the one who is going to become Bapsaman, equal to God at the end, when he becomes the Father and husband of the whole world but for the moment we also have to purify ourselves, to transform ourselves and to learn. So our focus should stay on God Himself, because He is the only one who is ever pure and has come down on this earth, in different chariots (especially the appointed or permanent Chariot), to change us from human beings (or monkeys) to deities.

Dear sister aimee.

If you are saying that Ram becomes Bapsaman (shiv-saman) in the end and is equal to God, then who is prajapita in the end?? Or are you trying to imply that during the shooting period Ram is Prajapita and SS Shiva enters him and make Ram like Himself? Then the question arises that who becomes Prajapita and who becomes Sangamyugi Krishna and who becomes Narayan ??? Again nothing but confusion and ambiguity!!!

shivsena.

[arjun]

If you are saying that Ram becomes Bapsaman(Shiv-saman) in the end and is equal to God, then who is Prajapita in the end?? ; or are you trying to imply that during the shooting period Ram is Prajapita and Supreme Soul Shiva enters him and make Ram like Himself; then the question arises that who becomes Prajapita and who becomes Sangamyugi Krishna and who becomes Narayan ??????????????? again nothing but confusion and ambiguity!!!!

It has been clarified by ShivBaba (through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) that the soul that plays the role of Prajapita/Confluence-Aged Krishna/Confluence-Aged Ram/Confluence-Aged Narayan is one and the same.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

[aimée]

Thank you Arjunbhai to clarify the matter without leaving any ambiguity.

[fluffy bunny]

f you are saying that Ram becomes Bapsaman (Shiv-saman) in the end and is equal to God, then who is Prajapita in the end?? Or are you trying to imply that during the shooting period Ram is Prajapita and SS Shiva enters him and make Ram like Himself? Then the question arises that who becomes Prajapita and who becomes Sangamyugi Krishna and who becomes Narayan ??? Again nothing but confusion and ambiguity!!![/color]

It a small issue but you souls ... REALLY ... have to get it together and make one simple diagram to illustrate this precisely. But, first, you have to address the anomalies in the written history which, Shivasena, you have been mighty silent about. So, from the books;

• • you have the small issues of Lekhraj Kirpalani retiring and starting his satsangs in 1932 not 1936,
  • (Lekhraj Kirpalani's younger than advertised age you are happy with)
  • the problem of Narain Shewakram being the secretary of the Anti-Party around 1938/39,
  he being the sleeping partner and owing money to Lekhraj Kirpalani
  • lastly, there being no mention of Shiva or a separate God at all until some point past 1950, how and when.

From the list of names, here, it could be that Shewakram's wife and family were members of the Om Mandli BUT we will need her/their name and age to identify them.

[aimée]

Ex-I Bhai, you have lost me here, maybe I should have known from other posts, but which book are you speaking about? The information you have given is totally new for me ...

[fluffy bunny]

Ex-I Bhai, you have lost me here, maybe I should have known from other posts, but which book are you speaking about? The information you have given is totally new for me ...

Hi aimee,

Yes, I think it all started to come out when you were in India. I found a load of original documents from Om Mandli, or the Prajapati Brahma-kumaris as they were known then, from the 1930s and 1940s.

I have linked to the topics here and put some up for downloading here. There are are a few more to follow but I am having them copied at present. You want to read somewhere near the end of the longer discussion threads.

[arjun]

Discussion CD No.237 dated 12.01.07 at Jainagar, Bangalore

Kisi nay kaha – Dilli sudharti hai toh saari duniya sudharti hai; iska matlab kya hai?.
Baba nay uttar diya – Iska matlab ye hai ki Dilli jitna sahan karti hai utna aur koi sahan practical may nahee kartaa hai. Sab dharmon nay raajya kiya hai Dilli kay oopar. Sab dharmon nay control kiya hai. Jo Brahma ka title hai Brahma sirf Brahma ka title hai, unmay badey tay badaa title kis aatma ka hai? (kisi nay kaha – Dada Lekhraj Brahma) Nahee, voh toh unhonay sahanshakti ko dhaaran kiya. Practical may koi us tarah kee baat nahee hai. Lekin Dilli kay oopar jo aakraman hotey hain khoon kharaabey kay. Voh aakraman Dada Lekhraj kay jeevan may nahee hua. (Kisi nay kaha – Jagdamba). Haan, Jagdamba kay oopar jo aakraman hotey hain, aur Dada Lekhraj kay oopar jo aakraman hotey hain unmay antar hai ... Bargalaay letey hain, fir bargalaay kay jaisey chaahey vaisi dharani kay oopar karma kartey hain.

Kisi nay poocha: Fir yah bhi bola hai na ki sach ki naiyya hilegi, dulegi lekin doobegi nahee.
Baba nay kaha: Haan, sabko goad may sthaan dena ye koi kharaab kaam kar diya kya? Kharaab kaam toh nahee kiya. Sirf itnaa hai ki Baap nay jo raasta bataaya hai, jo direction diya, voh direction ko Baap ko nahee pehchaana merey saath rahney vaaley merey ko nahee pehchaan paatey. Usmay chaahey Jagdamba ho ya koi bhi ho. Sabsey jyada saath kaun deta hai, shareeer say. (Kisi nay kaha – Jagdamba) Jagdamba. Itna toh saath kisi nay diya nahee. Na aagey chal ke dey sakega. Sankhya toh badhti chalee ja rahee hai.

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

Someone said – When Dilli (Delhi) gets reformed, then the entire world gets reformed. What does it mean?
Baba replied – It means that none else can tolerate practically as much as Dilli tolerates. All the religions have ruled over Delhi. All the religions have controlled (Delhi). The title of Brahma, the title of only Brahma; among them which soul assumes the greatest title? (Someone said – Dada Lekhraj Brahma). No, he imbibed tolerance. But practically it is not so. But the attacks of bloodshed that take place on Delhi, those attacks did not take place in the lifetime of Dada Lekhraj. (Someone said – Jagdamba) Yes, there is a difference between the attacks that take place on Jagdamba and the attacks that take place on Dada Lekhraj ... They mislead her, then after misleading, they act as they wish on the land (dharni).

Someone said – Then it has also been said that the boat of truth would shake, but it would not sink.
Baba replied – Yes, is it a bad thing to give place to everyone in one’s lap? It is not a bad task. Only thing is that the path shown by the Father, the direction given by the Father, she could not recognize that direction, and the Father. Those who live with me are unable to recognize me. Whether it is Jagdamba or anyone else. Who gives company through the body to the maximum extent? (Someone said – Jagdamba) Jagdamba. Nobody else gave company to such an extent. Neither will anyone would be able to give company in future. The numbers have been steadily increasingy.

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

Note:- The Hindi and English versions of the extracts of above mentioned Discussion CD are just draft versions.