Prajapati to Prajapita - Name changed for what?

Here is the account given in the book 'Exploring New Religions' by George D. Chryssides.

BK teachings substantially derive from Dada Lekhraj's revelations. BKs state that he is not a guru, possibly meaning that he claims no lineage (or parampara), and he is certainly not regarded as an avatar. However, since his visions are believed to come directly from Shiva, they are imbued with authority. Lekhraj is described as the 'corporeal medium' of Shiva.

Lekhraj first became Shiva's medium at a satsang (congregational gathering) in 1936. His wife and daughter saw his eyes turn red, like red light bulbs, and heard a voice from Dada's mouth saying:

I am the Blissful self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.
1 am the Knowledgeful self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.
I am the Luminous self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.

Lekhraj is said to have a further decisive vision, this time from Vishnu, who appeared to him in his four-armed form, saying, 'Thou art that' - an allusion to the famous statement of the Chandogya Upanishad.

Other visions of Lekhraj included an apparition of Shiva in the form of a self-luminous ball of light. Shiva bestowed the name of 'Prajapati Brahma' upon him, 'Prajapati' and 'Brahma' being different names for the creator God in Hinduism. (The name 'Brahma Kumaris' is related to this.)...

Brahma said that he found a beginning. He lied. Thereupon, the Pillar of light immediately changed into a form of Shiva who called Brahma a liar and sentenced him to be little observed in the divine ceremonies. This is why you will not find many pujas to Brahma.

The foundation for this could have been laid in the Confluence Age. It is believed by the PBKs that Brahma Baba got the clarifications for his divine visions from another personality (his business partner) at Calcutta whereas BKs believe that he got The Knowledge directly from incorporeal Shiv.

Its proof is available even in one of the recent (edited and revised) version of a Sakar Murli dated 6.6.08, pg.2 published by the BKs:

"Achchey-achchey first class dhyaan may jaaney vaaley, jinkay direction par maa-baap bhi part bajaatey thay, aaj vah hain nahee. Kya hua? Koi baat may sanshay aa gayaa."

"Nice first class ones, who used to go into trance, on whose directions even the mother and Father used to play their part, are not present today. What happened? They developed doubts in something."

I have also come across another Murli extract (quoted widely by PBKs) in a recent Murli published by BKs which speaks about someone who used to live with Baba since 10 years (a male) and used to go into trance (a female) whose directions Mama Baba used to follow. I don't have this Murli with me right now.

The above Murlis clearly prove that there were some children who were playing a greater role in the Yagya than Brahma Baba and Mama in the beginning of the Yagya. But since they left the Yagya, they were forgotten or deliberately removed from the Yagya history. In case it was a deliberate attempt then it was certainly a lie, both by Brahma Baba and his successors. May be that is the reason for the above mythological story quoted by ex-l.

Initially, the official name of BKWSU was just Brahmakumari Ishwariya Vishwa Vidyalaya. Brahma Baba got the name 'Prajapita' added to it later on. May be he tried to correct the mistake that was committed by forgetting the original personality who gave him the clarifications of his visions.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

I think it is always worth keeping in mind that 'Prajapati Brahma' and 'Prajapita Brahma' are used in a fairly indiscriminate manner through the Anglicisation of Hinduism to mean the same thing, in the same way that Brahmin and Brahman are. This is not to say that they are the same thing, and it is still for the BKWSU to clarify and elaborate on the changes, but in a case like George D. Chryssides above, I would say it is just a spelling mistake.

In my opinion, the academics tend not to separate the BKs as far from Hinduism as they ought be. All them, even including the BK ones like Stephan Nagel, use Adi Dev as the source of their "facts" and it uses Prajapita. No one academic has, until now, questioned the missing 20 years. Nor have they picked up on the cover ups over the historical revision. 20 years is a huge period of time to venerate one man, Lekhraj Kirpalani, as a living god ... and for one man to accept himself venerated as a god.

Arjun, may I ask again what is the word "God" used for Lekhraj Kirpalani in the Hindi version of the 1940s letters? Is it Paramatma, as in "Paramatma Prajapaita Brahma"?

I am the Blissful self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.
I am the Knowledgeful self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.
I am the Luminous self, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.

Personally, I think Jagdish Chander made all that stuff up taking quotes and visions taken from classical Hinduism to fluff the whole thing up. I do not know who else was involved. I would like to know. They make it into something it never was and fool the double foreigners with it. Chander was not even around in the early days and so it would all be taken second hand! Does it not come from Adi Shankaracarya or someone similar?

Am I wrong, or have the BKWSU changed their video of the 'red-eyed Lekhraj Kirpalani' episode, as per your user image, into one that shows his body just shimmering instead? Jagdish Chander has done for the Brahma Kumaris what St Paul did for Christianity.

I am not mind, nor intellect, nor ego, nor the reflections of inner self.
I am not the five senses.
I am beyond that.
I am not the ether, nor the earth, nor the fire, nor the wind.
I am indeed, that eternal knowing and bliss, Shiva, love and pure consciousness.

(There are more versus to come if you Google the original)

Mano Buddhi Ahankara Chitta Ninaham
Nacha Shrotra Jihve Na Cha Ghrana Netre
Nacha Vyoma Bhoomir Na Tejo Na Vayu
Chitananda Rupa Shivoham Shivoham

Arjun, may I ask again what is the word "God" used for Lekhraj Kirpalani in the Hindi version of the 1940s letters? Is it Paramatma, as in "Paramatma Prajapaita Brahma"?

The words used to describe Dada Lekhraj in the book "Mahabharat larai' are "Divine Father Gita Author Prajapati Brahma" but at many places the words 'bestower of imperishable knowledge, bestower of divine eyes' have also been prefixed to the above.

The word 'Parmatma has been used separately to describe God.

In one of the pages which contains discussions between BK Sisters one of the Sisters BK Sundari says:

"Priy sakhi, aaj British Sarkaar nay ghoshnaa kee hai ki har ek nar aur naari apney apney dharm sthaan, mandir, tikaaney, masjid, girja, ityaadi may vijay arth praarthana karein, parantu prashna uthtaa hai ki kisko praarthanaa karein, niraakaar Parmatma ko va poorva (Past) Saakaar paigambaron (Divine Fathers) ko?"

"Dear friend, today the British Government has declared that every man and woman should pray for victory in their respective places of worship, temples, mosques, churches, etc., but a question arises as to whom should they pray - to the incorporeal Supreme Soul or to the past corporeal messengers (Divine Fathers)?"

At your leisure, could we have more of the full context?

On the path of Bhakti, the term nirakar (formless) paramatma are also used for what the BKs call the Brahm elment and others "Supersoul" or "Non-being" etc. Vishnu, for example, has a nirkar form. (Ditto, the term "Sakar" also came from and is used outside of the BKWSU).

Your suggestion is inline with PBK lore but I do not think that is how it was used in the original treatise.

At your leisure, could we have more of the full context?

The lines that I quoted were the first lines spoken by BK Sundari as part of her conversation with BK Mira in the document 'Mahabharat larai'. Since the paper carries a date of 24th February, 1942, i.e. just before the beginning of the second world war, I suppose the British Government appealed to all the subjects in England and its colonies to pray for the victory of Britain in their respective places of worship. Therefore BK Sundari is asking BK Meera as to whether people should remember the incorporeal Supreme Soul of the past corporeal messengers (divine fathers)?

The lines that I quoted were the first lines spoken by BK Sundari as part of her conversation with BK Mira in the document 'Mahabharat larai'.

That may be Arjun, but you are making a suggestion that the original text does not and ignoring my question.

You are suggesting that Paramatma is being used as it is used currently, whereas I am suggesting that it is being used as to say what we understand as "the Brahm".

Which is correct?

The lines that I quoted were the first lines spoken by BK Sundari as part of her conversation with BK Mira in the document 'Mahabharat larai'. Since the paper carries a date of 24th February, 1942, i.e. just before the beginning of the second world war, I suppose the British Government appealed to all the subjects in England and its colonies to pray for the victory of Britain in their respective places of worship. Therefore BK Sundari is asking BK Meera as to whether people should remember the incorporeal Supreme Soul of the past corporeal messengers (divine fathers)?

Here is the approximate English translation of the complete text of the above mentioned page and some portion of the next page:

24th February, 1942
No.18
P.O.Box 381,
KARACHI

At midnight or at the time of Brahm Muhoorth, two maharathi Brahmakumaris are guarding their posts at the imperishable Gyan Yagya building and discussing deep knowledge with each other as given below:

BK Sundari: Dear friend, today the British Government has declared that every man and woman should pray for victory in their respective places of worship, temples, mosques, churches, etc., but a question arises as to whom should they pray - to the incorporeal Supreme Soul or to the past corporeal messengers (Divine Fathers)?"
BK Mira: Friend, it is ponderable that the incorporeal Supreme Soul does not have a shape or body at all, so how would He listen and come? Yes, the remaining corporeal or embodied human-form Messengers (Divine Father) have been becoming instruments in establishing their dynasties in this Kurukshetra (World) by different name, form and country at their designated time and as per their powers.
BK Sundari: These messengers (divine fathers) and their divine ones take birth in the demoniac community only, when by chance, after having the vision of the soul (self realised) they have to face many tortures from the human community with doubting intellects (self unrealized). In the end they become instrumental in establishing their dynasties and are praised for many births. Look friend, it is such a deep secret.
BK Mira: The foolish people with The Knowledge of Vedas, scriptures, Quran, Bible, Granth think that every Messenger (Divine Father) establishes his dynasty and then merges into the divine light, but on the basis of the experience obtained from divine vision and the scriptural theory says that every Messenger (Divine Father) takes rebirth along with his divine dynasty and keeps becoming instrumental in increasing the dynasty established by himself.
BK Sundari: At present people belonging to all the religions, Islamic people, Buddhists, Christians, etc. who are entangled in the crisis of this Mahabhari Mahabharata war must be definitely praying for help from their Messenger (Divine Father) for the sake of the victory of their dynasty?
BK Mira: Yes, friend, they do like that, but only that one would come whose turn it is now. How can everyone come at the same time?
BK Sundari: Dear friend, to which Messenger (Divine Father) does this community that calls itself as Hindus pray for help?
BK Mira: Just don’t ask about this colourful, atheist, slave Hindu community. Actually, there is no such religion as ‘Hindu’ in the scriptures. They do not know even the name or trace of their Messenger (Divine Father). Even among them, especially those who call themselves as Brahmins and say that we have emerged from the mouth of Prajapati Brahma, don’t even know that when, where and how did the Divine Father Prajapati Brahma get revealed? This Hindu community neither knows about its religion nor do they believe in any one God. The ones whom they remember or worship today, they insult and leave them tomorrow.

Much appreciated. Its all very interesting and I would love to read more of it.

I think you will find it is still the "Divine Light" or 'Brahm Element', as per Hinduism in general they are talking about here. Not the post-1950 interpretation of "Supreme Soul". There was no preconception of any Shiva soul at this time ... unless some other medium had offered it.

I think you will find it is still the "Divine Light" or 'Brahm Element', as per Hinduism in general they are talking about here. Not the post-1950 interpretation of "Supreme Soul".

This seems reasonable to me but as you said in your post of 29 September 2008 concerning the change from Prajapati to Prajapita:

It is still for the BKWSU to clarify

However, considering their record, could we ever trust that what they would say would be true?