Who is the God of Gita - Krishna, Ram or Shiva Baba?

In the woods there lived a herd of monkeys. It was winter they were cold. They saw a firefly and thought it to be fire. They gathered branches put them over it, stared to blow on it and to act as if they feel the heat.

Dear andrey Bhai.

If you are implying that i am a monkey and you are a devta, then thanks very much. For ShivBaba says in Murlis "i come in the gathering of monkeys and not in the midst of devtas"(''main bandaron ki mehfil mein aataa hun; devtaon ki mahfil mein nahin'')
Also ShivBaba says in Murlis, "Devtaon ko bap ki prapti nahin hoti hai" (devtas do not recognise the Father and hence do not receive any inheritance from ShivBaba) and "main bandar ko mandir layak banane aataa hun".

So i would rather be a monkey in Sangamyug than a devta (royal buddhu) who nod their heads only in one direction without understanding a word of Shivbap's Murli.

shivsena.

No, Brother. It is that I am the monkey who has mistaken the firefly for fire and you are the bird who tells the truth. It is not that i really think that what you say is true. The point is that the one who does not like to hear does not like to hear and the one who insist on something that is true to be accepted, it is like stubbornness. The point is, if what you say is true, then it will be proved by time and circumstance. You don't have to make a lot of effort. Truth is self evident. It cannot be hidden. It will come up. We don't have to prove it.

It is also the attitude that it is not only me, and necessarily me, who will prove it. This is common knowledge for everyone. Everyone can have it, can share it, truth will be accepted by all easily. This is where the matter of manners comes, that truth can be proved with manners. I don't say whether you have or not. I know from my experience that it is very delicate this knowledge. Some just don't accept.

He does not come amongst deities because there are no deities. We have all become monkeys. Where would deities come from? He comes to make deities. Will he come to find his work already done? Is there anyone else who can do this work of changing human beings into deities.

Devtaon ko bap ki prapti nahin hoti hai" (devtas do not recognise the Father and hence do not receive any inheritance from ShivBaba

You should have mistaken the version here. It is that deities doesn't remember Father etc, that is meant for the deities of the Golden Age. They are fools because they don't take direct inheritance from the Father and become deities because of being children to their parents. There are deities in the Confluence Age which are not fools and take direct inheritance from the Father. They recognize the Father. When they recognize they are not deities. They become after making effort.

Indeed, it is important to nod only in one direction. We don't have to nod in many directions. We will get sea-sick.

Nar-Deva, welcome to the forum.

Thank You Arjuna !!

Your Posts are really uplifting i want to stress out in this shooting that i am interested in realising the Murli and the Murli alone.

So, Murli it is the Gitä spoken by the Incorporeal.

No, Brother. It is that I am the monkey who has mistaken the firefly for fire and you are the bird who tells the truth. It is not that I really think that what you say is true.

Dear Brother andrey.
If you are the monkey, then why have you not understood the nirakari stage of Ramshivbaba (monkeys are connected with Ram and not with bindi Shivbap); you are just stuck with bindi ShivBaba who has no role all throughout the 84 births in the broad drama and it is with Ram's soul, no. 1 soul (who becomes Ramshivbaba) in the end, that we all have to relate with (as one cannot have any relations with bindi-zero); so try to recognise the 100% nirakari stage of Rambap and become his monkey to come in 108 rudramala beads. (Ram ki bandar sena)

shivsena.

Dear arjun Bhai and other PBK Brothers,

I am reproducing the different answers to the same query (given in 2 seperate cds) for your ready reference; kindly see for yourself and judge why different answers are given to the same question.(and who is giving these answers and why???)

shivsena.
======
Disc.CD No.233, dated 9.1.07 at Arakonam.
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?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion CD No.191, Talipuramba-25.10.06 and Nellore-28.10.06
1. Someone asked - who is the Father and who is the son in the proverb "Son shows Father, Father shows son''?

Answer : Baba said Father is Shiv and Son is Shankar (i.e. the soul of Ram). Shankar is the first child. He reveals the Father Shiv and Father Shiv reveals the son Shankar in the world.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can any PBK please give an exacting answer as to who is answering differently to the same question??? Is it Shivbap(ocean of knowledge) or is it Krishna baccha (who does not remember what he has spoken previously)

shivsena.

Dear Shivsena Bhai,

Omshanti. In the answer to the question raised in the Disc.CD No.233 ShivBaba (through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) has mentioned who reveals whom first, whereas in the answer to the question raised in the Disc.CD No.191 (which is not the exact quotation of the wordings of Baba) He has not mentioned as to who reveals whom first. He has just clarified who is son and who is Father.

So, I feel your conclusion from the comparison of both answers is not justified. It is up to members/readers to make their own interpretations.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Omshanti. In the answer to the question raised in the Disc.CD No.233 ShivBaba (through Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit) has mentioned who reveals whom first, whereas in the answer to the question raised in the Disc.CD No.191 (which is not the exact quotation of the wordings of Baba) He has not mentioned as to who reveals whom first. He has just clarified who is son and who is Father.

So, I feel your conclusion from the comparison of both answers is not justified. It is up to members/readers to make their own interpretations.

Dear arjun Bhai.

One can go on spliting hair on this issue endlessly with no conclusion. You see Shivbap possessing the body of Virendra Dev Dixit and hence you find your own way of interpreting the answers; i, on the other hand, see that Virendra Dev Dixit is being possessed completely by Krishna's soul (since Shivbap cannot be attached to body and Ram is in continous rememberence of Shivbap) and hence i feel that all the answers are given by Krishna, whose part is to create confusion amongst the PBKs (to see who is nodding their heads without understanding and who has an independent thinking), as he has to seperate out the kings (108) from the praja (16000).

My only contention is that if Shivbap was giving the answers, then both answers would have to be identical (as the crux of the question was the slogan "Son shows Father and Father shows son"). How the question was put forward is just a matter of asking, both answers are miles apart as far as the main issue goes.

shivsena.

My only contention is that if Shivbap was giving the answers, then both answers would have to be identical

Dear Brother,

When the questions are not same, how can the answers be identical?

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

When the questions are not same, how can the answers be identical?

Dear arjun Bhai.

Any person with a little common sense would say that the queries are essentially the same;
Any query with the slogan "Father shows son and son shows Father", would require a simple clarification of 'who is Father' and 'who is son' and when does the Father and son show each other. The answer also essentially, would have to be very specific in those terms only and there is no need for elaborate answers which take you off track. (Unless of course Krishna wants to confuse everybody).

If you ask the first soul who put the first query, i doubt whether he has understood any part of the answer or is he any wiser than before. I very much doubt it as i have read and re-read both answers several times and my confusion has increased more on comparing both the answers.

shivsena.

That is why ShivBaba has mentioned in one of the Sakar Murlis (published by BKs) that He comes in a land of crocodiles!!!!

Dear arjun Bhai.

I am quoting the Murli point and the clarification given by you about magadh desh(land of crocodiles)

ShivBaba says - you are my children. You souls were also incorporeal. But knowledge is required (to be given) in corporeal form. You know that we belonged to the Aadi Sanaatan Devi Devataa Dharma (ancient deity religion); creation through Brahma takes place here. Shiv Jayanti (Birthday of Shiv) is also celebrated here. He has taken birth here in the Magadh country only. Father says – this country was very pure heaven. Now it is called a hell, Magadh country. It has to become a heaven again.

(Revised Sakar Murli dated 16.05.06, page 1 published by BKs).

(arjun Bhai's clarification);

Baba is telling that Father has taken birth here in the Magadh country only. The region between the rivers Ganga and Yamuna is called Magadh country (a kingdom of the ancient India corresponding to present states of U.P. and Bihar) Father is also telling that now it is called a hell, Magadh country. If we look at the present circumstances then the states of U.P. and Bihar in India are considered to be among the most backward states, which are also considered to be the worst states from the point of view of law and order. But BKs say that Father comes in Sindh, Pakistan or Mount Abu. That region is not called Magadh country. But the part of Shiv was played even in that region. So can we say that Shiv played the role of mother (Brahma) at Mt. Abu and plays the role of a Father (Prajapita) in the Magadh country?

Dear arjun Bhai.

If you look for Magadh Desh in google search, then today it refers to a province in southern Bihar and has no connection with UP (nor the territory between Ganga and Yamuna). Today Magadh university is in bihar and not in UP. Also ancient Magadh kingdom is also described in southern Bihar (occupied by Jharkhand today), the capital of which was Patliputra (now Patna) and was the kingdom ruled by Chandragupta Dynasty and this was the only kingdom which was not invaded by Alexander.

Also i think that when Shivbap is speaking about Magadh Desh he is speaking of Chaitanya Magadh Desh and not the geographical Magadh country -- so we have to think who is this Chaitanya Magadh Desh (Magarmach ka Desh--land of crocodiles) which has become Narak today.

shivsena.

If you look for Magadh Desh in google search, then today it refers to a province in southern Bihar and has no connection with UP (nor the territory between Ganga and Yamuna). Today Magadh university is in bihar and not in UP. Also ancient Magadh kingdom is also described in southern Bihar (occupied by Jharkhand today), the capital of which was Patliputra (now Patna) and was the kingdom ruled by Chandragupta Dynasty and this was the only kingdom which was not invaded by Alexander.

You are looking at Magadh in the present context, but Magadh is not a modern province, but was an ancient kingdom which covered a vast area of Indian subcontinent from East to West traversing thousands of kilometers. I do not have the relevant history book as a ready reference to prove myself fully, but nevertheless I have a history book titled 'Indian History' written by K. Krishna Reddy for candidates preparing for Civil Services Examination in India to prove that UP was definitely included in Magadh. In the chapter on Mauryan Empire, under the subtopic 'Chandragupta (321-297 BC)' the author writes:

"Chandragupta, at the young age of 25, dethroned the last Nanda ruler (Dhanananda) and occupied Pataliputra in 321 BC (the capital of the Nandas and later of the Mauryas) with the help of Kautilya, also known as Chanakya or Vishnugupta. Once the Ganges valley was under his control, Chandragupta moved to the north-west. The areas of the nort-west fell to him rapidly until he reached the Indus. There he stopped, and moving back to Central India, he occupied the region north of the Narmada river by 312 BC. But 305 BC saw him moving to the north-west again, in the campaign against Seleucus Nikator (Alexander's general who gained control of most Asiatic provinces of the Macedonian Empire), with the treaty of 303 BC concluding the war in favour of the Mauryas. Chandragupta made a gift of 500 elephants to Seleucus and obtained the trans-Indus region (the territory across the Indus)."

The above extract proves that Chandragupta's kingdom (Magadh) extended from Pataliputra (even if it is considered to be the last point on the Eastern border of his kingdom) to beyond Indus river (in present Pakistan) which is a few thousand kilometers distance. Whereas Farrukhabad district in UP State of present day India is situated well within the Ganges valley mentioned in the above extract. So, your statement that UP state has nothing to do with Magadh country does not appear to be based on historical facts.

The same book also contains a map showing the Mauryan Empire under Ashoka who also belonged to Magadh. The boundaries of his kingdom extended from Bangladesh in East to Iran in the West, from Afghanistan in the North to almost the middle of the Southern Peninsula of India (upto Karnataka and Tamilnadu of present day India). In this huge map, UP appears very close to Pataliputra.

Moscow, the capital of Russia is very near to Europe, but the boundaries of Russia extend almost upto Korea and Japan. Can we say that a Russian city situated near Korea is not a part of Russia?

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

fnaar fnaar

Dear arjun Bhai.

Thanks for the detailed historical and ancient geographical class.

But i was talking in terms of Shivbap coming in Sangamyug from 1937 onwards and not somewhere in the past; geographical magadh desh as it stands today is not connected to UP in any way; and again Shivbap does not talk about geographical locations but in unlimited(behad) terms and the meaning of Magadh Desh has to be understood in the unlimited sense and not as a geographical province.

shivsena.

Discussion CD No.219 dated 17.12.06 at Mumbai mini-Madhuban
Ref. No.Disc.CD-219-extracts, dated 02.04.07
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kisi nay kaha - Baba aapmey sabhi dharmon ke beej samaaye huay hain.
Baba nay uttar diya - Merey may kahey ke liye samaayein, terey may samaaen, terey Mama-Baba may samaaen, merey may kaahey ke liye samaaen? Mai toh devi-devata sanaatan dharma ka pakka banoonga.

Someone said - Baba, the seeds of all the religions are merged in you.
Baba replied - Why would they be merged in me? They would be merged in you. They would be merged in your Mama & Baba. Why would they be merged in me? I would become pakka in the devi devata sanaatan dharma.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear arjun Bhai and other PBK Brothers.

If you read the above answer given by Baba to the query asked, then it will be very evident that this answer has been given by Krishna's soul (who is adi-sanatan devta dharm ki pakki atma) and not Shivbap (for the simple reason that Shivbap would admit that He is the seed of the human tree and so the whole tree is merged in him). Shivbap would never call Himself as pakka in devi-devta sanatan dharma.

shivsena.

This is an interesting little snippet for PBKs, form the "Is this Justice" book by the Prajapati Brahma-kumaris, 1939. (I, personally, do not believe it was written by Om Radhe although it is in her name. On page 61 it says talking of Om Radhe, "fluent Sindhi interspersed with a few ords of English").

"Om Mandli liberates one from meaningless worldly manners, mannerism, and hypocrisy and useless and unnecessry [sister in charge] family traditions and leads him to Supreme Silence, Supreme Light and SUpreme Happiness.

Father Krishna says, "who ever gives immortal 'Gyan' like me in a moment and gives 'Divya Drashti' or 'Swa-Darshan' like Me and leads to 'Didar', (as stated in Gita Chapter 11) he is 'Myself' though in different names in different places and at different times."

Translation of Divya ... Didar etc please.