Too many Shivas?

for members of the Vishnu Party, Krishna Party, Inadvance Party, PPPBKs & others.
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

paulkershaw

ex-BK

  • Posts: 863
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2006
  • Location: South Africa

Post07 Jun 2007

sparkal wrote:The one who does and does through others speaks through a body? Seems likely. What if Shiva was to start using a number of chariots? Would they all argue that THEY are the chosen one?

The majority of well-known mediums who trance channel various entities (ascended masters and guides) will tell us that they never claim to be the only Chariot or medium. I know that that it is also possible for the same ascended being to channel through different mediums at the SAME time. So the question we could be asking is if this is really G-d coming through then would He/She really only choose one channel or appear through other mediums (but admitteldly may do so in a different guise)? To my experiences, exclusivity is not limited to one channel and I don't see G-d doing it either or he'd be allowing one particular group to develop the ego of the experience ...

Already it is said in classes and Murlis that G-d works through each and every BK ... so in essence everyone should be a 'channel' on some level ... perhaps not in trance but in their own unique way.
User avatar

andrey

PBK

  • Posts: 1090
  • Joined: 13 May 2006

Post07 Jun 2007

Dear Brother,

I believe that this is exactly the main point that makes the difference. It is said that God is not omnipresent and he comes to establish the temple of Shiva where only one shivling is worshipped.

Omnipresence does not concern only physical stones, mud, cats and dogs that god is not in them, but also such souls with such stone like intellect that he wouls not come in them, souls that fight like cats or are lustful like dogs. He will still be coming in the one who is highest on high amongst the human beings, the first Human being Adam, who is firm in his faith and not like mould of mud that on a little kick of Maya would break away from the path of knowledge.

If he used to come in many then many speak different things that does not tally and contradict with each other. It is said that he is one and gives only one direction. If he still does service trough others, like said in the Murli, this is not to confuse us whether he is present in one or in many. He is present in one, then what service he does we don't know what he does. We may think when good service is done that it is he who has done still he has a fixed Chariot.

It is said in the bible that we should have only one God and no one else, then, if we think he comes in many we go to each one and say yes, whatever you say is true, it comes from God, yes whatever you say is true. Then how many Gods in corporeal form does it make? It makes many gods. With this practice the intellect becomes confused, listening to different things from different sources. It does not make a temple but a brothel, where the prostitude listens and obeys whoever comes to her. A faithful wife is faithful only to her husband. We are all souls like wives of one husband.
User avatar

john

reforming BK

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

Post07 Jun 2007

andrey wrote: If he used to come in many then many speak different things that does not tally and contradict with each other. It is said that he is one and gives only one direction.

Yet things spoken through just Virendra Dev Dixit do not always tally and can contradict with Murli. Maybe we expect too much of God, but I at least expect him to get his own knowledge sorted.

Do we make too many excuses at times when things don't tally with our chosen Chariot?
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Too many Shivas?

Post07 Jun 2007

mitra wrote:It is part of the life. Here we are establishing a different religion - the FIRST religion. If you look at the history you can see that in every religion there are sub-parts started from the main branch. Here also same is the case.

Surely that is not according to Gyan though and not according to the Murli. According to The Tree, sects and cults all belong to Kali Yuga? The BK Brahmin family was meant to be one and not a Kali Yugi sect ... no?

Mitra, as a BK, what do you know about the new BKs being trained up to be the potential mediums is Gulzar gets sick/die? Can you check in and see what the offical statement is? I am interested in the chosing and training of these individuals.

Actually, it would be more interesting and more "proof" that Lekhraj Kirpalani is entering them if the chosen mediums DID NOT speak Hindi. (Or am I being too logical again ... ?).
andrey wrote:fixed Chariot.

This is something Aimée clarified. Virendra Dev Dixit is not the fixed Chariot ... because of course the Chariot chances. She said it was a mistranslation of "appointed Chariot" which read much better in English.

Something that changes cannot be fixed. its a simples as that. It is ridiculous to call Virendra Dev Dixit the "fixed Chariot" because he is not ... and time can only tell what changes the future will bring.
User avatar

andrey

PBK

  • Posts: 1090
  • Joined: 13 May 2006

Post11 Jun 2007

"This is a school. The one who is teaching you is Abhogta. No one else would say: I am Abhogta. In Ahmedabad, a sage used to say this. However he was later caught cheating. At this time there is a lot of cheating. There are many who have adopted different costumes. This one doesn't have a costume. People think Krishna spoke the Gita. Therefore so many people have now become Krishna. There cannot be so many Krishnas." revised Sakar Murli spoken through the mouth of BB dated 3.2.05
Previous

Return to Splinter Groups