The Murlis: Ownership, access to and re-writing of

for ex-BKs to discuss matters related to experiences in BKWSU & after leaving.
  • Message
  • Author
User avatar

alladin

no label

  • Posts: 917
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2007

Carrots

Post01 Jun 2007

Yes, thank you! And thank God haven't looked for those rare carrots in a long time. I am just saying that sometimes you bump into genuinely nice souls in the BK but they are an exception that doesn't change the rule that especially the ones "in charge" are on power trips and career conscious and don't want/have much love to share.

Good vibes are the main thing for me! Ciao.
User avatar

arjun

PBK

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

Post22 Jun 2007

Another CLASSIC example of cutting/editing/manipulation of Murlis by the Administrators of BKWSU:

"Kumarka bataao Baba ko kitney bachhey hain? Koi kahtey hain 500 karor. Koi kahtey ek bachha Brahma hai. Kya Shankar bachha nahee hai? Tab Shankar kiska bachha hai. Yah bhi gunjaaish hai. Mai kahtaa hoon ShivBaba ko doh bachhey hain, kyonki Brahma vah toh Vishnu ban jaatey hain. Baaki raha Shankar, toh doh huay na. Tum Shankar ko kyon chod detey ho? Bhal Trimurti kahtey hain parantu occupation toh alag-alag hai na." (BKs dwara prakaashit revised Sakar Murli taareekh 14.05.72, pg 2, ant)

"Kumarka bataao Baba ko kitney bachhey hain? Koi kahtey 600 karor, koi kahtey ek Brahma ... Bhal tum Trimurti kahtey ho parantu occupation toh alag-alag hai na. Vishnu kee naabhi say Brahma niklaa. Brahma kee naabhi say Vishnu, toh ek ho gaye. Vishnu 84 janma letey hain va Brahma baat ek hee hai. Baaki raha Shankar. Aisey toh nahee Shankar so Shiv hota hai. Nahee, Trimurti kahlaya jata hai. Parantu righteous bachhey do huay. Yah sab gyaan kee baatein hain." (BKs dwara prakaashit revised Sakar Murli taareekh 15.05.07, pg 3)


“Kumarka! tell, how many children does Baba have? Some say 500 crores. Some say there is one child Brahma. Is Shankar not a child? Then whose child is Shankar? This is also a possibility. I say ShivBaba has two children, because as regards Brahma, he becomes Vishnu. Remaining is Shankar. So, there are two (children), are there not? Why do you leave Shankar? Although it is said ‘Trimurti’, but the occupation (of all the three personalities) is different, isn’t it?” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 14.05.72, at the end of pg 2, published by BKs and narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba)

“Kumarka! tell, how many children does Baba have? Some say 600 crores. Some say there is one Brahma.....Although you say ‘Trimurti’, but the occupation (of all the three personalities) is different, isn’t it? Brahma emerged from the navel (naabhi) of Vishnu. Vishnu emerged from the navel of Brahma. So, they are one. Whether Vishnu takes 84 births or Brahma (takes 84 births) the matter is the same. Remaining is Shankar. It is not that Shankar becomes Shiv. No. It is called Trimurti. But the righteous children are two. All these are matters of knowledge.” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 15.05.07, pg 3, published by BKs and narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba)

- It is known to everyone that the Brahmakumari Institution has a record of about five years of Murlis that were narrated by ShivBaba through the mouth of Brahma Baba prior to 1969, which they revise once in every five years ever since 1969, i.e. they get it reprinted and read at every service-center of the Brahmakumari Institution.

- At the end of the page 2 of the revised Sakar Murli dated 14.05.72 published by the BKs, ShivBaba, while speaking to Kumarka Dadi, has described Brahma and Shankar as His two children and asked Dadiji as to why does she leave out Shankar?

- But when the same Sakar Murli was reprinted by the Brahmakumari Institution on 15.05.07, then the portion that has been underlined in the above mentioned Murli dated 14.05.72 was cut off (shown as dotted lines in the revised Murli). Besides, 500 crores was changed to 600 crores.

- Prior to 1969, the part of Shankar had not commenced in the Confluence-Aged world of us Brahmins. That is why ShivBaba had asked Kumarka Dadi as to why does she leave out Shankar? But when the part of Shankar got revealed in 1976, after that whenever this Murli was revised and reprinted, the above portion was cut off. Was it done by the bodily Gurus of our Confluence-Aged world to save their throne, in order to keep the Brahmakumar-kumaris deprived of the information about the corporeal part of the Supreme Father Shiv being played through Shankar?


With regards,
On Godly Service,
Arjun

Note: The English translations of the above Muris have been done by a PBK, so, if anyone wishes to check the authenticity of the above statements, they can check their own record of the above Murlis published by BKs in Hindi or in English. I have the scanned copy of the original Sakar Murli dated 14.05.72, which I have sent to the Admin. See, here, for larger version of below.

|Image|

bansy

  • Posts: 1593
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Post22 Jun 2007

ShivBaba had asked Kumarka Dadi as to why does she leave out Shankar?

Arjunbhai,

By what action or how did Dadiji leave out Shankar? Was it from all the Avyakt Vanis given in daily morning classes between 19.01.69 to that dated 14.05.72? Was it dropped from the BK course? Shankar removed from a picture? Could this be clarified by ShivBaba?

I am not so bothered as to about the crores as numbers are always symbolicly interpreted, though I prefer such shouldn't be changed as it causes confusion. More seriously, however, the missing of one of the 3 dieties (Trimurti), is of uptmost concern given that Dadiji is the head of the BKWSU. It also could show that the BKWSU ("management") knew about the formation of the PBKs (not called by that name at that time but aka Shankar Party") as early as 1972.

Thanks.
User avatar

arjun

PBK

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

Post23 Jun 2007

Sister Bansy wrote:By what action or how did Dadiji leave out Shankar? Was it from all the Avyakt Vanis given in daily morning classes between 19.01.69 to that dated 14.05.72? Was it dropped from the BK course? Shankar removed from a picture? Could this be clarified by ShivBaba?

Actually, just as ShivBaba through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit keeps asking questions to the PBKs during Murli classes and during discussions, ShivBaba through Brahma Baba also used to ask questions to the BKs during the Sakar Murli classes. So, in one such class ShivBaba (through Brahma Baba) must have asked Kumarka Dadi as to how many children ShivBaba have?

I don't know the exact answer that she might have given, because the BKs do not indicate the words spoken by the BKs during Murli classes, just as it is mentioned in the PBK Murlis. She must not have included Shankar in her reply. Or she might have said that Brahma is the only child of ShivBaba. So, ShivBaba must have asked her in the class as to why does she leave out Shankar?

Now, the words "Is Shankar not a child? Then whose child is Shankar? This is also a possibility. I say ShivBaba has two children, because as regards Brahma, he becomes Vishnu. Remaining is Shankar. So, there are two (children), are there not? Why do you leave Shankar?" which appeared in the Sakar Murli dated 14.5.72 was probably deleted when it was revised after every five years by the BKs.

I don't have the record of the above Murli when it might have been revised in 1977, 82, 87, 92, 97, 2002, but I do have the revised Murli dated 15.05.07 where these sentences were deleted. But in all probability the above lines began to be deleted after 1976, when the role of ShivBaba (through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) was revealed in the Brahmin world.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10463
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Evidence of Murli re-writing.

Post03 Jul 2007

Thank you for posting clear evidence of the extent of the Murli re-writing.
User avatar

arjun

PBK

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

Post04 Jul 2007

Dear Admin.,
Thanks for posting the scanned copy of the revised Sakar Murli.
Regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

arjun

PBK

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

Post08 Jul 2007

Omshanti.

If we observe the scanned Sakar Murli dated 14.05.72 carefully we would find that there are 36 lines with an average of 20 words per line, which brings the average number of words per page to about 720. If anyone has seen the Sakar Murlis both published by BKs, both pre-1969 and post 1969 (till late 1970s) one would observe that each Murli used to consist of 3 to 4 pages. If we consider that the Murlis used to be of 3 pages each, then the average number of words per Murli could be around 2160 and if the Murlis were 4 pages long, then the average number of words per Murlis could be around 2880.

But if we compare the size of these original Sakar Murlis/revised Sakar Murlis from 1970s with the revised Sakar Murlis being published by the BKs now, one would be astonished at the reduction in the number of words per Murli.

The revised Sakar Murlis being published by the BKs now consists of an average of 100 lines (or even lesser) and the no. of words per line is around 17. So, the average number of words per Murli comes to 1700. I will try to send a scanned copy of the present revised Sakar Murlis being published by BKs in Hindi. Meanwhile if anyone has a sample, they can send it to the Admin. I have not included in my calculations the number of words contained in the essence, Q&A, dharna points, blessings, etc. which normally accompany a present day revised Sakar Murli published by BKs.

If you compare it with the original 3 page Murlis, the reduction is around 460 words per Murli and if you compare it with the original 4 page Murlis, the reduction is around 1180 words per Murli.

So, one can imagine the extent to which an average devout BK is losing in terms of Godly versions.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Note: I did not notice initially, but I am fortunate enough to have made the 3000th post in the Commonroom Section today. Thanks to one and all for their valued contributions to this forum. I hope the journey contiues till 2036 :D :P :lol:
User avatar

alladin

no label

  • Posts: 917
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2007

skinny Murlis

Post10 Jul 2007

I wonder if many of you, like me, due to drowsiness or to the way the center-in-charge was reading the Murli in front of us (tone of the voice, lack of feeling, lots of interruptions, using points to "hammer" students ...), although forcing yourselves to attend to class after insufficient hours of sleep, commuting, etc ... were hoping the Murli was "over soon", as short as possible?

We may have not admitted it, and I don't think we did not "love the Murli", just we found it difficult to maintain concentratio. We heard too many times the same point already/before ...

So, now, the desire for the Murli being shorter, has been fulfilled. Both sakars and Avyakt Murli, have become short. They loss weight!! How and why, the whole editing question, the change in tone and lenght of Avyakt Murli, remains a mystery to me?
User avatar

joel

ex-BK

  • Posts: 529
  • Joined: 01 May 2006

Re: skinny Murlis

Post10 Jul 2007

alladin wrote:I wonder if many of u, like me, due to drowsiness or to the way the sister in charge was reading the Murli in front of us ( tone of the voice, lack of feeling, lots of interruptions, using points to "hammer" students ...), although forcing yrselves to attend to class after insufficient hrs of sleep, commuting, etc... were hoping the Murli was "over soon", as short as possible. We may have not admitted it, and I don't think we did not "love the Murli", just, we find it difficult to maintain concentration, we heard too many times the same point already before ... So, now, the desire for the M being shorter, has been fulfilled. Both sakars and Avyakt Murli, have become short. They loss weight!! How and why, the whole editing question, the change in tone and lenght of Avyakt Murli, remains a mystery to me.

I remember feeling impatient with Dadi Janki classes in Madhuban. I'd be all juiced with intoxicating Murli points, ready to attack the world, and then another hour of numb listening to her.

Later, I discovered that I did not enjoy watching each moment of the Avyakt meetings. I've written about how frustrating it was to sit in the audience watching helplessly as others had their moments of Avyakt love.

I recall one Murli I was typing directly onto a tiny portable computer, tandy model 200 on my lap in Om Shanti Bhavan. In previous months, I had been re-examining emotions (is anger categorially harmful?) in light of reading John Bradshaw's famous work, "Healing the Shame that Binds Us". Probably I have written about it, search for " anger" by joel.

In Avyakt BapDada's words, there was absolutely no sign of any shift in the paradigm toward all-embracing acceptance of self. I understood that I had a choice to change how I responded to my own feelings, to enlarge myself, that BapDada and the Seniors were not about to suddenly reverse direction.

For an audience member, those long meetings were all about fulfillment through adoration, through Unlimited adoration. Perhaps at least as worthy a cultural pursuit as watching baseball or NASCAR.

I am thinking the reason they edit the Murlis is that Lehkraj was all over the map with what he said. He spoke to those who were there that day. It was his unique form of creativity, probably developed out of his experiments with automatic writing, which the Murlis refer to.

Lehkraj would give these lectures and bring such intense pleasure chemicals in his listeners. He was all over the map, could be grand, adversarial, affectionate, admonitory in turn. He did not speak to social needs of the future organization to maintain its following.

I remember that "Shankar is a child, too" Murlis. I remember how every morning at our small second-floor classroom in Tokyo, we would argue after class. Certain people, mainly unpartnered, men would always argue their own interpretation. "is not Shankar better than Brahma?".

The difficulty of controlling an inherently unruly following would certainly motivate the BKWSU Seniors to remove some Murli points. Why include stuff that will alienate people or encourage the idea of splinter sects?

I have been thinking about the plastic nature of human reward systems. Variation - the unusual - is needed to hold someone's attention. Some find it in BK life, just as others do in baseball, or NASCAR or BK.info! Parents generally continue to find their children lovable, adoring them.

That is a legitimate love. Adoring God, yes, why not? I find suspect the idea that one use of the reward system is intrinsically good and another intrinsically bad.

We see a similar adoration, ecstasy among cult and BKWSU followers. is not that BK's business; to secrete pleasure chemicals and cause other people to secrete pleasure chemicals? I am remembering how Dadi Kumarka would come and glow at us white-dressed double foreigners, sitting respectfully in those cool plastered concrete buildings.

Di's posts about addiction emphasize how the same pleasure circuitry is involved. How her ex was high as a kite coming out of BK classes. As high as people she'd seen in her work at a hospital. Timothy Leary wrote about "pleasure circuitry", part of his philosphy of seven neural circuits.

To "die to the world" is to manipulate my own reward system. Dying is part of the Skull and Bones initiation ceremony, too, IIRC.

I believe that no use of the human reward system should be penalized unless there is clear evidence of harm. I think there could be instances that adults and children would be mutually attracted an interact without harm. The NAMBLA guys ask "how can something this good be bad?" Thus quoted they become targeted and hated as predatory pedophiles. Yet intergenerational sexual abuse is much more common for within families and established social institutions than as the result of a predatory outsider.

Intergenerational relationships including sexuality are common in human history, and some proportion have been mutually consenting. Previous cultures have accepted adults have sexual or erotic interactions with children. On my desk I have "The Satyricon" by Petronius, a man that Emperor Nero considered as his Arbiter of Style. The story is the comic bawdy adventures of the perpetually frustrated middle-aged Encolpius, a younger traveling companion, and Giton, a boy who is the lover of both. Inventive and mischievous, he plays the two off against each other.

In conclusion, considering the neurochemical rewards involved, it is inconceivable that a population of humans as large as the BKWSU's followers would be without sexual couplings and liaisons, philosophy and Shrimat notwithstanding.

Thanks for reading!
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10463
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post10 Jul 2007

One of your better posts, Joel. Top marks.

Its only a same you/we have not got a bigger audience who can make any sense or relevence of all this stuff!

alladin wrote:We may have not admitted it, and I don't think we did not "love the Murli", just we found it difficult to maintain concentratio. We heard too many times the same point already/before ...

So, now, the desire for the Murli being shorter, has been fulfilled. Both sakars and Avyakt Murli, have become short.

What may appear to be hypocritical is that I understand the big split that happened in Germany with Suman was because she was experimenting with just that, making Murlis essenceful and experimenting with one season's Avyakt Murli for the whole year rather than following drill with the Madhuband/London releases.

As I understand it, Janki was OK with the idea but that it was Jayanti that took or went on the offence (... or perhaps that her supreme authority was being challenged by another Western Sister).

These elements, Suman/Surya's departure and the closing of the center were never properly discussed, as usual. Only the usual slander of gossip circulated about others from fairly Seniors source, as far as I am aware.

So, I would find it deeply hypocritical that the editing down of the Murlis that has happened since might have been inspired at the cost of this or these respected BK's Brahmin life. BUt it would be typical of middle management-type bureaucracies. Suppress a good idea, destroy the individual who had it or the courage to try it out, reinvent it in a dilute fashion at some point later ...?

I am not saying that this is how it did happen but I am opening the discuss up to include this. I would not trust the editing of the current leadership whatsoever, hence my desire for all the originals to be posted in public.

Yes, I agree very strongly with Joel's analysis of Lekhraj Kirpalani rhetorical style.

I find it one of the more frustrating elements of the whole PBK thing that some of them seem to insist that EVERYTHING said FOREVER was pregnant with some deep and meaningly secret ... rather than just Lekhraj Kirpalani making some general effect. Yes, I agree with metaphorical interpretations but, no, not of everything. Equally, the BKWSU appears to have drowned in habitual Bhakti of their Krishna's spoken word now preserved in aspic as it is.

Academics have pointed out its the Murli is ripe to become an "offical scripture". Actually, that time has already passed along time ago and we not only have a "scripture" but we have a corrupt Popery, and now their devoted and uninformed junior scribes, whittling away at a truth they do not understand for their own gain. What a sham.
User avatar

pilatus

non-BK

  • Posts: 114
  • Joined: 26 May 2007

Post11 Jul 2007

joel wrote:I remember feeling impatient with Dadi Janki classes in Madhuban

I had that with numerous classes/sharing fests. I know it's cultural - I joke with my Indian-bodied other half about how long-winded some (if not most) of these people are/can be. We shouldn't forget that traditional education is based on a lot of repetition, rote learning and story telling. An effect we see most clearly with the Murlis ...
alladin wrote:I wonder if many of you, like me, ... were hoping the Murli was "over soon", as short as possible?

Oh yes - definitely. I always had a problem with the long, rambling repetitive nature of the Murlis. If I had time/energy/motivation they might be entertaining but too often they just sent people to sleep. I often found myself looking desperately forward to the page being turned and hoping that today's was only 2.5 pages long ...

I experimented with different ways to get the most out of Murli reading, including the way I'd look for the essence/conclusions in a professional document, but this drew some disapproving looks and I never found a method I was comfortable with.
ex-l wrote:Academics have pointed out its the Murli is ripe to become an "offical scripture". Actually, that time has already passed along time ago and we not only have a "scripture"

Although we're told that the BK doesn't have a scripture like "religions" (accompanied by a dismissive look), it was clear to me from the start that the Murlis are exactly that. It's also fair to say that holy scripture like e.g the Old Testament is full of long, rambling, "tall" stories.

However, given that I'd have preferred the Murlis to be shorter, I am more ambivalent than some of you older hands about the ongoing efforts to shorten/distill them.

Best wishes to you all.

peter de

BK

  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Post01 Aug 2007

I always get a newcomerstext here. Although I posted several times.

I live 15 km away from my centre. Last year in september the teacher offered me to give a weakly murlipacket. Since then I could read the daily Murli, and I did. So maybe I am more lucky then the one's here?

I never felt it controversial that the Murlis are not published. Because for someone who is not properly introduced to this knowledge, reading a Murli can be very confusing and misinterpreted. For the same reason they send no Murli's by e-mail. It is to protect the ones who read it when not ready for it.

Maybe I have an exceptional loyal teacher but she loves to give Baba's words to everyone. But with the proverb in mind: "Don't throw pearls to the pigs (or swines?)". And actually, Murlis - some avyaktyears - are published in bookform. Once on a BK Christmas Party (in another centre but still in Belgium) they brought a big box in with material to distribute for free and I took a stock of books because I love books. So don't give the impression that the BK hide Murlis (as a general attitude) because then we speak about two different organisations.

Om Shanti
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10463
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post01 Aug 2007

As you will start to become aware as you explore this forum, not just the secrecy with which the Murlis are withheld but also the re-writing or re-editing of them is a controversy.

If you look above, most if not all or those individuals consider themselves BKs or have the love of the Murli and yet they cannot access them. We have also documented the gradual limiting of access to the Murlis, even to regular students. In some centers, for example, they only allow students access to read the Murlis in some specific area or another. In some cases, one has to ask for the privilege rather than it be a natural right.

I agree that it was not always like this and I am glad to hear that it is not always like this but equally I found it somewhere between comical to despicable that, given the re-writing that is going on, one had to jump through hoops to get them.

I think this typical line within the BKWSU that you repeat, "to protect those that are not ready", is almost complete bullsh**. The Murlis are hidden because they are very likely to cause deep offence and cause controversy. It also appears to me that the early Murlis and original versions of the currently recycled Murlis are also hidden to protect the position and status of the current leadership.

Part of our continued discussion of the Murli editing and re-writing are the anomalies, the multiple predictions that either "God" got wrong, of the BKWSU misinterpreted. These anomalies are consistently being edited out to keep the BKWSU and its god looking good. The BKWSU wants to hide its god, his inexplainable foibles and their relationship with it. They have become far happy to talk vaguely, deceive and push forward their sainted version of Lekhraj Kirpalani or his followers such as Dadi Janki instead.

To suggest that a person of average intelligence or an academic is "not ready" or would be confused by the Murlis is as a ridiculous insult as many of the ridiculous insults contained within the Murlis. What we are really say here, from a BKWSU point of view, is that only those that have been initiated or brainwashed are unlikley to react negatively to them.

Needless to say, I support making copies of all Murlis public from the most original ones onwards. Individuals should have the right to know this god before they are hooked or inducted and academics to study it.
User avatar

john

reforming BK

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

Post01 Aug 2007

peter de wrote:But with the proverb in mind: "Don't throw pearls to the pigs (or swines?)"

It is said in Murli, only Brahmins will be interested in Gyan. Ask anyone who is not into the BK ideas or meditation and they will not show any interest, they will just dismiss it. Therefore I think the reasons given for keeping Murlis hidden is a total fallacy.

BKSWU simply want every potential Brahmin to be dependant on them alone. It should be a choice, even so I think most potential BK's will want to be part of the organisation. It is like a government being paranoid and wanting to hold onto it's power.
I never felt it controversial that the Murlis are not published.

Murlis should at least be available to all who have taken Bhatti and followed the BK lifestyle whether they choose to part of the organisation or not, i.e. ex-BKs, which also includes PBKs, and other splinter groups.

It is our birthright. It is our right to have access to all Murlis including all originals.
Maybe I have an exceptional loyal teacher but she loves to give Baba's words to everyone.

Your teacher seems to understand what Baba wants and that is for all to have access to knowledge, did he come to this world to keep it all a secret!!!

This should be the norm, not the exception though.

peter de

BK

  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Post01 Aug 2007

Hello BK-l,

What does 'despicable' mean?
PreviousNext

Return to Commonroom