Relative or Absolute truth

for Prajapita Brahma Kumaris (Advance Party), or those interested in becoming PBKs, to discuss AIVV matters in an open, non-judgemental manner.
Forum rules Read only. BK and PBK followers wishing to discuss "The Knowledge" from the point of view of a "believer", please use; http://www.bk-pbk.info.
  • Message
  • Author
User avatar

john

reforming BK

  • Posts: 1563
  • Joined: 03 May 2006
  • Location: UK

Relative or Absolute truth

Post20 May 2006

Is PBK knowledge seen by PBKs as relative or absolute truth?

Is Virendra Dev Dixit the final Chariot or is there another Chariot to come, if there is another Chariot to come can the present advanced knowledge be seen as absolute truth as revealed by Shiva?
User avatar

arjun

PBK

  • Posts: 3588
  • Joined: 01 May 2006
  • Location: India

Post20 May 2006

Dear John,
Omshanti. The Advanced Knowledge being given by God Shiva through the corporeal medium of Shankar (Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) is considered to be the absolute truth by most of the PBKs. But this knowledge is subject to refining and changing from time to time by God Shiva Himself.

Most of the PBKs consider Baba Virendra Deo Dixit to be the final Chariot. Now the role being played through him is that of Shankar, but we believe that finally he is going to be revealed as Prajapita Brahma and accepted as the Confluence-Aged Narayan.

With regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

john

reforming BK

  • Posts: 1563
  • Joined: 03 May 2006
  • Location: UK

Post20 May 2006

Most of the PBKs consider Baba Virendra Deo Dixit to be the final Chariot.

OK but if Shiva is Trimurti then that involves 3 parts; Brahma, Shankar and Vishnu. Virendra Dev Dixit being revealed as Prajapita Brahma doesn't discount Shiva entering another Chariot to play the part of Vishnu.

    Is it considered by PBKs that Vishnu is a part played in the drama?
    If a part is played then surely it will then be a case that more advanced knowledge is revealed?

suryavanshi

PBK

  • Posts: 122
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2007

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post24 Sep 2008

OK but if Shiva is Trimurti then that involves 3 parts. Brahma , Shankar and Vishnu. Veerendra Dev Dixit being revealed as Prajapita Brahma doesn't discount Shiva entering another Chariot to play the part of Vishnu. Is it considered by PBKs that Vishnu is a part played in the drama? If a part is played then surely it will then be a case that more advanced knowledge is revealed?

John Bhai,

As per Advanced Knowledge, Vishnu is not any personality in practical with four arms. The head and the four arms of Vishnu in fact represent the 5 main souls who become instrumental in God Shiva's task of transforming this world from hell to heaven.

The head is the representative of intellect who controls all the four arms. All the four arms behave according to the directions that come from the head which would be the form of the future when the Vishnu kaa rajya (or kingdom of Vishnu) starts. In the kingdom of Vishnu, there would not be a clash of swabhaav and sanskars (nature and personality traits) between these 5 five souls or other souls who enter this kingdom. But all the souls will act and behave according to One. Rule of One only will prevail.

The head is representative of the soul of Ram, the right lower arm is representative of the soul of Brahma (Dada Lekhraj), the right upper arm is representative of the soul of Om Radhe Saraswati, the left lower arm is representative of Jagdamba and the left upper arm is representative of Confluence Age Lakshmi. The murti of Brahma has given immense love and the murti of Shankar has been immensely lawful but the practical third murti of Vishnu can be represented by Confluence Age Lakhsmi because only this soul has been neutral, in the sense that not very loveful and not very lawful. There is a fine balance of love and law in this soul and so she is said to represent the third murti, i.e. Vishnu.

Supreme Soul Shiv only enters into Brahma (Dada Lekhraj) and Shankar (body of Virendra Dev Dixit), i.e. only two murites. The third murti represents the kingdom of Heaven and Supreme Soul never comes in Heaven or in the world of deities (in Vishnu kaa Rajya or Satyug or Swarg). Also, the third murti is the head of practical party (i.e leader in leading a life of purity). So, again this proves that Supreme Soul Shiv does not enter into the third murti (representative of Vishnu because She is pure).

According to Murli, why would Supreme Soul Shiv enter into one who is completely pure (here the third murti representative of Vishnu)? What would He (Supreme Soul Shiv) do by coming into one who is already pure. He is called Patit Pavan. So, one who has become pure or represents purity (Vishnu), why would He enter into Vishnu (third murti represented by Confluence Age Lakshmi)? Since, the third murti and the soul of Ram (the controller of the four arms of Vishnu) become so immensely engrossed in Supreme Soul Shiv remembrance that they (Vishnu = purity ) can be said to be the third murti of Shiv. It can be said that as if Shiv (who is ever pure) is present in Vishnu, although Shiv does not enter practically into Vishnu because Vishnu itself means no "vish" at all (i.e. no viciousness or no vices at all or in other words completely pure).

So, when the swabhav and sanskars of all the souls who are part of Vishnu become one or when there is no clash at all between the swabhav and sanskars of these 5 main souls, then it will be said that the kingdom of Vishnu has started. Then, it can be said that the much awaited second of Brahma so Vishnu has come. (Because Brahma so Vishnu in One second and Vishnu so Brahma in 5000 years). This is according to the description in one of the clarification VCD* of ShivBaba (through Virendra Dev Dixit).
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post24 Sep 2008

suryavanshi wrote:the left upper arm is representative of Confluence Age Lakshmi.

And, who is the "Confluence Age Lakshmi" ... Mrs Dixit or BK Vedanti, please clarify?

suryavanshi

PBK

  • Posts: 122
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2007

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post24 Sep 2008

suryavanshi wrote:the left upper arm is representative of Confluence Age Lakshmi. And, who is the "Confluence Age Lakshmi" ... Mrs Dixit or BK Vedanti, please clarify?

Confluence Age Lakshmi = BK Vedanti = Practical Murti of Vishnu (Third Murti in Trimurti Shiv).
Mrs. Dixit = Jagdamba = Current Practical form of Brahma = Practical First Murti of Trimurti Shiv (Brahma).

shivsena

ex-PBK

  • Posts: 866
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2006
  • Location: Mumbai

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post24 Sep 2008

The Advanced Knowledge being given by God Shiva through the corporeal medium of Shankar (Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit) is considered to be the absolute truth by most of the PBKs. But this knowledge is subject to refining and changing from time to time by God Shiva Himself.

Dear arjun Bhai.

Are you not contradicting the two things: on one side you say that Advanced Knowledge is absolute truth and on the other side you say that it is subject to refining and changing from time to time.

Is absolute truth subject to refining and changing or it is our perception of the absolute, which keeps on changing as our intellect matures from time to time ???

shivsena.
User avatar

arjun

PBK

  • Posts: 3588
  • Joined: 01 May 2006
  • Location: India

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post25 Sep 2008

shivsena wrote:Is absolute truth subject to refining and changing or it is our perception of the absolute, which keeps on changing as our intellect matures from time to time ???

What can I say on your statement when you consider the entire advanced knowledge to be false and only your individual perceptions of the Murlis to be true?
shivsena wrote:Are you not contradicting the two things: on one side you say that Advanced Knowledge is absolute truth and on the other side you say that it is subject to refining and changing from time to time.

It is definitely contradictory, but it has been going on since the beginning of the Yagya. Today you want us to believe that Ramshivbaba will get revealed in January, 2010 (or anytime after that, as clarified by you later on) but if it does not materialize you will give your own explanation. Even if the revelation takes place in 2018 as being guessed by the PBKs, you will say that you were correct because it has taken place after January, 2010. :D
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1877
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post25 Sep 2008

I would like it if you could define what relative or absolute truth means, I am a bit of a thicko and I am not sure.

shivsena

ex-PBK

  • Posts: 866
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2006
  • Location: Mumbai

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post28 Sep 2008

arjun wrote: What can I say on your statement when you consider the entire advanced knowledge to be false and only your individual perceptions of the Murlis to be true?

Dear arjun Bhai.

As per my study of Murlis, I definitely believe that Advanced Knowledge is bhakti-marg and hence whatever is taught in Bhakti is false. I am just sharing my churnings of Murli and Vani points and I have never said they are to be taken as final truth.

shivsena.

new knowledge

ex-Vishnu Party

  • Posts: 373
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2007

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post28 Sep 2008

Mr. green,

* Absolute Truth is the valid entity; it's not a matter of blind faith though it's not an observable fact. If nothing is 'Absolute', how can we use the term 'relative'? If 'relative' is a valid term, 'Absolute' must be a valid term. Though the Absolute Truth is not observable, it's definately 'empirical', i.e, it can be experienced. It's not that every empirical fact must be observable & logicaly proved (by inductive or deductive methods); and also it's not that Absolute Truth is a blind faith, just because it cannot be 'conceptualised' & 'observed'.
* Truth is not an observable fact, but the path of Truth-seeking means the state of 'being' similar to that of the fact under observation, i.e it's the logical merging of 1) the observer & 2) the fact under observation.
* Absolute Truth is 'DEFINATELY' approchable (numberwise?). And to approch the Absolute Truth (and/or God) is the ultimate goal of all spiritual practices. Mr. Green, if you don't believe in Absolute Truth and/or God, why are you wasting your time here & what's the aim of your life?
* Absolute Truth is unified, non-logical & beyond all worldly dimentions like 3 dimentions of space & 1 dimention of time.
* Godly Knowledge, i.e, Shrimat is the gate-way[U] to Absolute Truth; but it's also relative, subject to refining & changing; Truth cannot be refined or changed.

* Truth is always '[u]Absolute', but knowledge (including Godly Knowledge) is always 'relative'.


* At the level of Absolute Truth, the Creator & His Divine Creations, self-realisation & God-realisation, animate & inanimate entities, statics & dynamics appear to be merged if viewed & interpreted logically. That is, at the level of the Absolute Truth, we cannot derive logically clear-cut boundaries to separate any two things or entities. I don't mean to say that self is God, or the Creator & His Divine Creations, or animate & inanimate entities are same; but at the level of Absolute Truth, they appear to be merged if viewed & interpreted logically. At that level of the Absolute Truth, there is the sense of Oneness. This fact should be understood carefully.

I cannot find proper words to describe this Oneness. At the level of the Absolute Truth, if interpreted logically & statistically, everything appears to be infinite or unlimited, as no any absolute or relative scale of measurement is known to the scientific community to measure the dimentions of anything at that level.

shivsena

ex-PBK

  • Posts: 866
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2006
  • Location: Mumbai

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post29 Sep 2008

new knowledge wrote:* Truth is always 'Absolute', but knowledge (including Godly Knowledge) is always 'relative'.

Dear new knowledge Bhai.

I fully agree with you that "Truth is always absolute" and all knowledge in the world (including Godly knowledge of BKs) is just a means to reach the Truth.

shivsena
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Relative or Absolute truth

Post29 Sep 2008

shivsena wrote:I fully agree with you that "Truth is always absolute" and all knowledge in the world (including Godly knowledge of BKs) is just a means to reach the Truth.

I would agree with you both but question whether 'The Knowledge™ of Brahma Kumaris' is a means to reach 'the Truth' ... It may just be a means to delude those who sincerely sought the truth, having gotten to a specific level in their evolution, are then distract them from going any further whilst being turned instead into their servants.

This shivsena is, funnily enough, very similar to your usual position.

For any questioning BKs making this far, there is a common line of thought often passing through the BKWSU, that questions whether The Knowledge™ is really just a cap on further spiritual development. Although there are many good people within the Brahma Kumaris, I have yet to see anyone I could honestly say was the embodiment of the type of truth we are talking about here, especially within the leadership, nor do I honestly think that is what they are aiming for.

Mostly, I found individuals that who were aiming for that kind of truth were on the sidelines, or sidelined as "inconvenient truths" with the movement. The Brahma Kumaris do not seek or encourage to their followers to aspire to understand ... instead they encourage their followers into acceptance of the potted "truths" they sell most by endless repetition.

Between relative truth and absolute truth, Aristotle and others suggested 2,000 years ago "temporal truth", or temporal logic. That is to say, a "truth" which is only true within some particular time or, as I would suggest, to get one to a place where one could accept an ever greater or more absolute truth.

Repetition does not lead to understanding, it leads to acceptance which is not the same thing. One is awareness, the other is stupor.

Return to PBK