Who is Maya ???

But your words do not indicate anything like that. In almost every post you try to demoralize the BKs and PBKs by calling the entire BK and PBK knowledge as false or their efforts as a waste of time. You believe the Sakar Murlis spoken through Brahma Baba as the versions of God, but you completely ignore the innumerable dharana points which never direct Brahmin children to demoralize others ... There are so many other threads in other Sections of this site. But you never post in those threads just because you feel that all the souls participating in those threads are not even BKs and thus not even worthy of being included in the rosary of 900,000 and hence unworthy of discussing knowledge.

Dear arjun Bhai.
Before i reply to your outburst of emotions, i wish to have a very frank answer from you.

Who do you think is 'Maya"; do you feel that Maya is 5 vices (just like BKs) or do you feel that there is some soul who is playing the role of chaitany Maya in this behad ka drama and if think the latter, then please specify who and where that soul 'Maya' is, just as i have been frank on this forum.
shivsena.

Who do you think is 'Maya"; do you feel that Maya is 5 vices (just like BKs) or do you feel that there is some soul who is playing the role of chaitany Maya in this behad ka drama and if think the latter, then please specify who and where that soul 'Maya' is, just as I have been frank on this forum.

I do not know if there is any particular soul which plays the role of Maya, but I find that explanation about maya-Ravan given in the advanced knowledge quite satisfactory that the seed-form and root-form souls of the four leftist religions (Islam, Christianity, Muslim and Atheism) and one rightist religion (Arya Samaj) represent the five male and five female faces of Maya-Ravan.

I do not want to pinpoint any particular soul as Maya because every soul has his/her own karmic accounts. Just by naming one soul as Maya, I cannot put the entire blame for all the sins that I have committed in the 63 births on that particular soul, be it X, Y, Z. That is the reason, throughout my days as a PBK I was never interested in this topic of a particular soul representing Maya. Even if there is a soul representing Maya, it will play its negative role in the Confluence Age. I have to concentrate on playing a positive role.

Although, as long as Dadi Prakashmani was alive, PBKs were under the impression that she was playing the role of daughter of ShivBaba, i.e. Maya, who tests them. After here demise, in response to querries of some PBKs in discussion classes ShivBaba (through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) replied with a question that why do they think of Maya only to be from the root-like souls and why not from the seed-like souls, but he has not specified any particular soul as Maya.

As regards your comment terming my post dated 1st January, 2008 as an emotional outburst, you are free to express your opinion. I don't mind being termed 'emotional' rather than 'someone lacking any emotions'.

I am still awaiting your reply to another of my querry in another post as to whom do you consider greater - Shiv or Ram?

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Although, as long as Dadi Prakashmani was alive, PBKs were under the impression that she was playing the role of daughter of ShivBaba, i.e. Maya, who tests them. After here demise, in response to querries of some PBKs in discussion classes ShivBaba

Was it Prakashmani that order all the bad things, e.g. beatings, and suppression of the PBKs?

I am still awaiting your reply to another of my querry in another post as to whom do you consider greater - Shiv or Ram?

Dear arjun Bhai.
When Ram reaches his 100% incorporeal stage, then Ram becomes equal to Shiv and all the titles of bindi ShivBaba are then transferred to Ramshivbaba. I have been repeatedly saying this in all my posts.

BKs use the same point to dissuade BKs from becoming PBKs. PBKs use the same point to describe the numerous ex-PBK chariots of Shiv. And now you are using the same to demoralize all BKs and PBKs from making any efforts in the Confluence Age.

Instead of pointing out who uses this point against whom and how, let us first concentrate on why Brahma made this statement and who are the souls he is emerging and speaking to; To know Brahma's point of view is more important than what BKs or PBKs or any other group is thinking.

I feel that all Vanis is spoken to PBKs(Advance Party only) and not to BKs, because even though Vanis are spoken in front of BKs, they do not understand a word of it. So Brahma is trying to give subtle hints to PBKs only about the royal Godly form of Maya going on in the Advance Party (which is establishing narak in the PBK world).

shivsena.

When Ram reaches his 100% incorporeal stage, then Ram becomes equal to Shiv and all the titles of bindi ShivBaba are then transferred to Ramshivbaba. I have been repeatedly saying this in all my posts.

What you have said is the same as the belief of all other PBKs, but you have still not answered what I want to ask. Who is greater - Shiv or Ram? When you don't like to give direct answers to our simple questions why do you blame the soul of Krishna for being 100% mayavi?

I do not know how more simple i can be in answering your query.

According to me Shiv is parampita and Ram is paramatma (supreme among all 600 crore souls) and only when they combine they become Parampita paramatma. I do not believe in the superiority of Shiv over Ram (if that is what you are trying to imply). i only believe that one without the other cannot be revealed as God and only when they combine they will be revealed as GodFather.

shivsena.

According to me Shiv is parampita and Ram is paramatma(supreme among all 600 crore souls) and only when they combine they become Parampita paramatma.

My dear Brother shivsena, according to you, we are not related to Shiv in any way; and without any connection with us, how could Bindi Shiv play the role of Parampita?

Also we do not receive any inheritance from him including that of Mukti & JeevanMukti. Then how do you state that Shiv is Parampita?

shivsena,

what are "nagadas" and can we have a copy of them upload to the website so everyone can share in the same good fortune?

My dear Brother shivsena, according to you, we are not related to Shiv in any way; and without any connection with us, how could Bindi Shiv play the role of Parampita? Also we do not receive any inheritance from him including that of Mukti & JeevanMukti. Then how do you state that Shiv is Parampita?

I have said this before also that no integer can relate to zero. We all have to relate to one (alaf) and if you want to relate to zero that is your wish. Shiv is parampita only on paper and zero by itself has no value. It is always said parampita paramatma and never parampita alone. I have observed that most souls on this forum want to argue for the sake of arguing and not for the sake of understanding.

shivsena.

Dear arjun Bhai.

Murli 21-1-06: Shiva says in Murli "Bap apna parichay khud hi aakar dete hai" ("Father comes and gives his own introduction")
Murli 30-1-06: Shiva says in Murli "Bap hi apni pehchaan dete hain".( ''Father only gives his introduction'')

The above two Murlis clearly say that Father comes and gives his own introduction. If Father here refers to Shiva himself, then why does Shiva not give his own introduction through' the body of Virendra Dev Dixit and during conversation why does he keep on repeating the words "Baba ne Murli mein yeh kaha hai"(''Baba has said this in Murli"); if ShivBaba himself is speaking, then he should say that i have spoken this in Murli. Does this not mean that it is Krishna who is giving references of Murlis and it is Krishna who is calling bindishiv as Baba and it is Krishna who has done the churning and made the Advance Literature under various headings and it is Krishna who is addressing everyone as 'Bhai' and 'behan' and it is Krishna who is playing Godly roop of Maya to mislead the PBKs. If it was ShivBaba, then a direct introduction of Himself(as said in Murlis) would end all confusion and debate and unite the whole PBK family.

shivsena.

Murli 21-1-06: Shiva says in Murli "Bap apna parichay khud hi aakar dete hai" ("Father comes and gives his own introduction")
Murli 30-1-06: Shiva says in Murli "Bap hi apni pehchaan dete hain".( ''Father only gives his introduction'')

Dear Shivsena Bhai:

Why did Shiva not say in the Murlis " Mai apna parichay khud hi aakar deta hu." ("I come and give my own introduction"). "Mai hi apni pehchaan deta hu". '' Only I give my own introduction''.

"Baba ne Murli mein yeh kaha hai"(''Baba has said this in Murli"); if ShivBaba himself is speaking, then he should say that I have spoken this in Murli.

Who ever uses the word I in his/her speech is not nirahankari.

If it was ShivBaba, then a direct introduction of Himself(as said in Murlis) would end all confusion and debate and unite the whole PBK family.

First of all the introduction is not direct, because he has not used the word "I", he has said "bap".
Secondly, IF it was Shiv he cannot say "I" since he is Nirahankari.
Thirdly, Who ever calls himslef GOD is Hiranyakashpa. So, IF it was Shiv, he cannot I am GOD.

"Maya" is just another symbolic interpretation, like the entire Gyan, of what befell the "Pandavs", who are just another symbolic interpretation of goodness, when they, the so-called pure sons, also cheated in the M-war and plunged into darkness.

The entire Gyan is symbolic intrepretation of a poem that no-one knows its origin, so everything you are studying is your own dharma intepretation of symbols. Even if it comes under the title of "Advanced Knowledge" "Basic Knowledge", that has been trying to justify the origin of the poem, as all other Hindu cults are doing, you will always be going round in circles. It was meant that way. Thus "Maya" is what you want it to be or who you want it to be because it will never reveal itself until the end of your thoughts.

When Yuddhistra has to decide whether the leave the dog behind so he can enter paradise, the English phrase that comes to mind in that situation is "Let sleeping dogs lie".

However, please continue with your battles.

According to me Shiv is parampita and Ram is paramatma (supreme among all 600 crore souls) and only when they combine they become Parampita paramatma. I do not believe in the superiority of Shiv over Ram (if that is what you are trying to imply). I only believe that one without the other cannot be revealed as God and only when they combine they will be revealed as GodFather.

If, according to you, Shiv and Ram are equally superior, then why is the word 'Sadaa' (forever) prefixed to the name of Shiv and not with the name of any other deity?

I wish to know whether, in your opinion, both Shiv and Ram remain equal throughout the Kalpa (i.e. 5000 years) or not?

I have said this before also that no integer can relate to zero. We all have to relate to one (alaf) and if you want to relate to zero that is your wish. Shiv is parampita only on paper and zero by itself has no value.

I think very recently you said you do not know mathematics/algorithms!

I have observed that most souls on this forum want to argue for the sake of arguing and not for the sake of understanding.

You attract the maximum attention in the PBK section, often at the cost of other members' posts and despite that you say that most souls want to argue for the sake of arguing. Most members spare some moments from their busy schedule to respond to posts here and that too with Murli proofs and you say that they are just arguing. I don't think this is a fair assessment. Do you want us to stop writing?

I have received the Nov. edition of the Gyanamrit magazine containing the second part of the article of BK Ramesh Shah containing important points related to the setting up of the BKs' trust, but because of being busy in replying to your posts I am unable to discuss that article in other threads. Similarly, there may be many other members who may be interested in other threads but are devoting time to reply to your posts and if you tell that they are simply arguing, then it does not appear to be rational.

With regards,
OGS,
Arjun

I think very recently you said you do not know mathematics/algorithms!

I understand simple arithmatics and not complex geometry and algorithms.

You attract the maximum attention in the PBK section, often at the cost of other members' posts and despite that you say that most souls want to argue for the sake of arguing. Most members spare some moments from their busy schedule to respond to posts here and that too with Murli proofs and you say that they are just arguing. I don't think this is a fair assessment. Do you want us to stop writing?

I have nothing against rational arguments with reference to Murlis and Vanis, but against irrational arguments for the sake of arguments; i just made a statement of what i observed and if you feel otherwise then it is just a difference of opinion(nothing personal against anybody). Nobody is doing any favour to anybody by expressing his views and taking part in this forum. We all are doing it because we have the time and inclination to share our views.
shivsena.

First of all the introduction is not direct, because he has not used the word "I", he has said "bap". Secondly, IF it was Shiv he cannot say "I" since he is Nirahankari. Thirdly, Who ever calls himslef GOD is Hiranyakashpa. So, IF it was Shiv, he cannot I am GOD.

Dear cal Bhai.
Welcome to the forum.

I just want to know which Father comes and gives his own introduction. Is it Shiv through Virendra Dev Dixit or when Ram becomes 100% nirakari stage, then Rambap will give his own introduction in the future Sangamyug.

shivsena.