jim wrote:Would it be fair for me to say that you're not really on this forum to discuss, but to do service?
Haven't we been discussing? I wouldn't choose to indulge in a discussion that I consider will do harm. What is the definition of "service". There will be some souls, almost certainly disaffected BKs, who will recognise this knowledge - or to put it another way, will say - wow this stuff is really cool, where can I learn more? If those souls come across this knowledge due to something on this website - good. If anyone else finds it interesting then good. I do not wish to try and convince anyone that this knowledge is correct.
john wrote:Also really the BKs say listen to us and no one else, you as a PBK are taking this to the extreme, which may be the right thing to do, but outsiders have noted what a good brainwashing technique this is
Hopefully it is a good "brainwashing" technique. Dobhiman is good at washing.
john wrote:Two things which crop up a lot in Sakar Murlis is to teach, Shiva says do service and teach. There are quotes like "If you cannot explain, then it is understood that you don't really understand Gyan"
PBKs have been accused of giving Murli quotes out of context in order to show BKs don't follow Shrimat. It seems to me that most of Shrimat is like Shrek (many layers - my kids watch Shrek often enough for me to know that Ogres (Shrek) are like onions - many layers). After all, there are ten religions and if ShivBaba is going to unite them, there really must be something in it for everyone - just one "correct understanding" but not just one understanding (but 9). I agree one should be able to explain - but what and to whom (to oneself - to others - which others?)
So your point seems well made.
john wrote:actually I think it's only your churning/understanding of the idea and you're trying to put it across as Shrimat. Not necessarily completely wrong , but maybe a distortion.
Your point is what I have been trying to get at all along. Everything anyone says apart from ShivBaba is a distortion of the highest instruction. So what could possibly be the reason for listening to anyone else? Only that there are no sanskars of avayabachari Bhakti - no recognition that there can be one highest truth. Such a soul will not wish to accept the opinion of one but will give validity to the opinion of many.
I hope that I have not given the impression that anything I have said is Shrimat. I wonder that even when Shrimat is quoted from a Murli - on this site or elsewhere - is it still Shrimat? The context in which it was spoken has been altered. I believe you get real Shrimat from the Murli class direct from the mouth of Baba preferably by sitting in front of him - or at least on a video. Audio only and written are less (that's official Shrimat by the way ). Otherwise, the Shrimat may not be so "shri".
john wrote:Jim do you read the Sakar Murlis at all?
Unclarified sakars - not any more. The ones I have are from the 2000ish onwards and are so chopped around that they don't make much sense - even if you know (or think you know) the meaning behind the words. This was explained to me by a BK senior as being the result of Lekhraj Kirpalani not speaking good Hindi! I think the activities of the fine Brothers of the Madhuban editing suite is a more plausible reason.
Jim