Bridge between Shankar Party and Vishnu Party

1. Arjun Bhai, the human being, gets disappeared. Where has he gone?

2. Note too the RE-citation of the programmed text. With each Re-citation the speaker is reaffirming a TRUTH that they hold to be self-evident. (But this conviction is based on and reflects nothing more than the extent to which the speaker desires to remain programmed, has been programmed and gets feelings of being rewarded by the program )

3. Note too that after the RE-citation of the programmed text the speaker asks questions based opon assertions made in the self same RE-citation. Through this: (A) The Program gets broadcast; (B) The speakers programming is reinforced; and (C) The questions often represent a challenge to or an attempt to establish the measure of YOUR OWN inculcation of the programming.

Dear Abk,

Omshanti. Brother new_world has presented some questions regarding the Advanced Knowledge/Vishnu Party and I replied based on what we PBKs believe. Since most of the questions asked about PBKs or the Advanced Knowledge are repetitive in nature, the answers will naturally be repetitive.

There are broadly two categories of members on this forum. One who completely or partially believe in BK/PBK/ex-PBK lines of thought and the other category is of those who do not believe in either of these.

I have stated many times that we do not have concrete proof for many of the aspects of the BK/PBK knowledge as on date. It may be possible that we may find them later on. I repeat that whatever I state on this forum is not the absolute truth which has to be believed by all the members/readers. You can take it as an alternative line of thought.

I answered Brother new_world's questions only because he addressed the querries to me. If I have shown disrespect to Brother new_world, I am sorry.

I don't know whether I will become a deity or not, but I hope you accept me as human being. If I have degraded to a lower level, I am sure you would help me get back to the category of human beings.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Hi Arjun, as ever, much respect and always appreciative of your reply. Arjun Bhai for my part there is no real need for proofs. I was not finding fault with yourself, the methods you used to respond to new_world nor the PBKs. I wasn't even passing comment on the questions asked by new_world. So we'll leave it be, eh Arjun Bhai. Everything is good.

Arjun, if you ever come across Rastafari philosophy you may hear said or discussed the following: "I and I have to KNOW and not believe".

I too used too believe. Perhaps only belief's can change. One love always.

As you were saying before i interrupted:

The incorporeal Father Shiv does not come in The Cycle of birth and death at all. He is forever pure. He never becomes impure. So, He cannot come in the comparison of old, older, oldest. It is the remaining human souls which can be compared as new, old, older, oldest etc. So, among those remaining souls, the soul of Ram is the oldest.

If you say that incorporeal Shiv is permanent, then that way all the souls are permanent. None of the souls ever gets destroyed. So, how will you decide which is the oldest?

Hi Arjun, as ever, much respect and always appreciative of your reply. Arjun Bhai for my part there is no real need for proofs. I was not finding fault with yourself, the methods you used to respond to new_world nor the PBKs. I wasn't even passing comment on the questions asked by new_world. So we'll leave it be, eh Arjun Bhai. Everything is good.

Arjun, if you ever come across Rastafari philosophy you may hear said or discussed the following: "I and I have to KNOW and not believe". I too used too believe. Perhaps only belief's can change. One love always.

Thanks for the reply.

I have not heard about the Rastafari philosophy. I would appreciate if you could throw some more light on the subject.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Yes, my dear Brothers Arjunbhai & abek, it's not necessary to reply my queries if you have busy schedule or if you are not conform about answer. You can just neglect my queries or churn about them in your own mind.

Arjunbhai, the soul of Ram may be the oldest of all (only) human beings, but even then this does not mean that he is the oldest of everything (animate or inanimate) in existance. Logically this also means that he may not be older than some other non-numan souls. Again 'to be oldest of all the human beings' & 'to be permanent for ever' are different facts. Being absent from the eternal World Drama, the soul of Ram is not permanent FOR EVER, though he may be the oldest of all human beings.

But the ShivBaba (who is he???) described in the two Murli points (we are refering) is not only permanent FOR EVER, but also older than the oldest, i e, older than everything in existance (not only humanity).

Now ... now let us think over the fact that the soul of Ram is that ShivBaba (better to call as RamShivbaba?) to whome you describe as 'the oldest of all human beings. Then logically we have to accept that at the very first beginning of the history of manking, there was only the soul of Ram in existance as a human soul on the earth, i e, at that very first point of time of human history, the population of humanity was ONLY ONE. But this goes against Advanced Knowledge which believes that the history of humanity begins with 450,000 or 900,000 population. Arjunbhai, according to Advanced Knowledge, if the history of mankind starts with at least 4,50,000 population, then how can you say that the soul of Ram is the oldest of all human beings ...?

Again when the soul of Ram goes to the Supreme Home for few seconds, then at that time, were any otother human souls present on the earth? If yes, then that human souls are older than the soul of Ram. But this is contradictory to Advanced Knowledge. To be the soul of Ram as the oldest of all, there should be no any other human soul present on the earth during that time period (though only few seconds) when the soul of Ram goes to the Supreme Home.

Then who is this ShivBaba permanent for ever & oldert than the oldest?

Hi new_world, Apologies.
My remark: "So we'll leave it be, eh Arjun Bhai. Everything is good." was with sole reference to the points in the post About: Complete monkey puzzle tree-style logic which arjun responded to. I was saying that he ought not to feel obliged to reply to any of the observations that I made about his responses to your questions.

I have nothing enlightening to add on either of the 2 questions about "ShivBaba - Older than the Oldest? Egg first or hen first?" You will also note that at the end of the post entitled knowing belief I included a quote from one of your posts as an attempt to bring your questions back into focus.

Just what sort of bridge we are observing being constructed between Shankar Party and Vishnu Party?

As I step quietly out of this section of the forum I will try once more to ensure that at least one of your questions is visible: If you say that incorporeal Shiv is permanent, then that way all the souls are permanent. None of the souls ever gets destroyed. So, how will you decide which is the oldest?

Arjunbhai & abek, according to advanced knowledge, as the soul of Ram also goes to the Supreme Home for few seconds, i.e. he is absent from the Eternal World Drama for few seconds, then what's the problem to accept that he is not permanent for ever (though he may be the oldest of all human beings)?

But this does not mean that in my mind the Incorporeal Shiv (as described by BKs & PBKs) is that ShivBaba permanent for ever & older than the oldest. He is believed to be in the Eternal World Drama only for less than 100 years of the Confluence Age. Then how can he be considered to be permanent for ever?

Then who is this ShivBaba permanent for ever & older than the oldest? Nor the soul of Ram neither the incorporeal Shiv? - Then who is He? Puzzle!!!

The solution of this puzzle may be prove a new & revolutionary paradigm in BKWSU thinking.

Somebody has already very eloquently said exactly what i feel reading all of this stuff so I won't repeat those sentiments.

To be really, really awfully boring, I make one observation based on the primary school lessons that we did on Positives, Comparlatives and Superlatives. If memory serves me well the correct order ought to be: Old, Older, Oldest. Consequently older can never ever be more ancient than oldest.

So then, what are we talking about when we ask what is older than the oldest?! It just does not make sense. Total nonsense no matter which way you twist it. Can God not even point that out to you all! If the Bridge between Shankar Party and Vishnu Party will be built on nothing but such inane points and attempts at one-upmanship then i for sure will not trust to put my feet on it.

Good luck.

Bro abek I've translated the Hindi phrase 'puraane te puraanee' as 'older than the oldest'. Possibly for that the alternative term 'the Oldest' may be sufficient.

Again when the soul of Ram goes to the Supreme Home for few seconds, then at that time, were any other human souls present on the earth?

Its tantamount to the old "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" argument. But ... there is no need for anyone to go out of the The Cycle "for a few seconds".

Space and time only applies to the corporeal world. So coming and going would appear instanteous to someone in the corporeal world even though it felt like an eternity to the despatched one.

The way the BKs would get around this is to say that the Advance Party of scientists and already reborn BKs comes during that time. BKs that have already cleared there karma.

The first part is logical enough. I do not believe the second part. But that is what we were taught. Its all a bit futile to base one's faith on though ...

Dear bro ex-l, it's not that I believe in 'going of souls to the Supreme Home in dead silence stage'. I wish to say that if PBKs believe that the soul of Ram goes to the Supreme Home for few seconds, then how can we claim that he is permanent for ever?

Bro abek I've translated the Hindi phrase 'puraane te puraanee' as 'older than the oldest'. Possibly for that the alternative term 'the Oldest' may be sufficient.

Thanks new_world. I accept your explanation but you see it is a little toooooo convenient to my mind. Gyan, or let's say the interpretation of Gyan, always seems to have so many possibilities, each of which professes to be accurate and in no way altering the truth and facts of the matter. How can it be? bro new_world can you see what i mean?

If God really does present us with completely incontrovertible truths, then why is there always this room for us to squirm away from the focus of open-minded questioning? How can one build faith on this platform?

Dear bro ex-l, it's not that I believe in 'going of souls to the Supreme Home in dead silence stage'. I wish to say that if PBKs believe that the soul of Ram goes to the Supreme Home for few seconds, then how can we claim that he is permanent for ever?

I answered your question in both aspects. One) as in so many incidents, the word has a new, specific meaning; two) going to Paramdham take 'no time' as it is beyond time.

Given the history between the leader of the Vishnu Party, his family and followers, it is farcical to suggest that any bridge could be built on the basis of the PBKs modifying their faith.

I am attracted to the mental exercise of it all but it futile for me to discuss it any more as I belong to neither party. To lean on an individual who wrte "dead silence" might not be accurate. The theory is "beyond sound" but I cannot speak from experience.

Are you back with the Vishnu Party now? To try to act as an ambassador of peace between the parties expecting them to bow to your re-interpretation of their knowledge from your point of view is pretty pointless because each is their knowledge and the defence of it, and its source, is where they derive their faith.

It would also suggest you and your knowledge was superior to their sources and I am not sure anyone is ready for another god right now. Better just to give up "knowing".

Bro ex-l, how can you guess that I don't believe in multiple meaning of any word. I can quote 5 different interpretations of the word Paramdham, but that's not subject concerned here. Here I've not presented my own conception of Paramdham. I just wish to know that if PBK conception is taken into consideration, then how to interprete the Murli statements we are refering here?

Here I am going to compare PBK & Vishnu Party point of view & not trying to bow these cults as per my interpretation. To interprete Advanced Knowledge through an alternative perspective (as I am doing) is another fact & to bow their thoughts as per our own interpretation, is another fact. I do not consider myself superior to anybody.

I cant remember any clear and direct Murli quotes that say, "God only has one child".

If you look at the quotes in the commonroom from the Avyakt Vanis addressed to Dadi Kumarka, that how many children ShivBaba has, there it is said, some would say 5 billions some would say one Brahma, but i say he has two children. Brahma and Shankar (Brahma becomes Vishnu).

But it is also said in the Murli, "i speak to you and this Brahma listens in between. I make you masters of the world". So amongst the children to whom the Supreme Father speaks, and whom he makes masters? How many will become masters of the world?" The aim of the study is world sovereignty. World is one, sovereignty means kingdom. In the kingdom there is only one king and the rest are subjects. So amongst all souls there will be only one soul who will become emperor, master of the world. There is natural love for those who will fulfill the task that the supreme Father gives. World sovereignity through Yoga power.

It has been said that what is the difference from the kingdom of today to the kingdom of heaven of the Confluence Age. That there in the Iron Aged world the king builds a fortress for his children that are born out of the body and the rest, the sujects has to safeguard that fortress. Whilst for the unlimited Father, the Father of humanity who is not shown as king on the pictures from the path of bakti, but is shown as beggar and renunciate, he has the attitude that subjects are all children and that they should attain something. Not that i remain the king and they remain the subjects. It is said i don't become king - you become .

It is said that the Father likes that the children goes higher than him, the teacher likes that the student goes higher than him and aslo the guru likes that the follower goes higher than him. Here it may seem that Shiv and Shankar part are mixed, but it is because the personality is one although different souls. It is also that we also become masters of ourselves.