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

dear Brother new_world,

Where do you have this Murli from? If you scan it and mark the passage to see, then i may believe. 2-3 years less for Radha does not mean 2-3 births less. So how many births? 84.

After leaving the body in 1969, Brahma Baba plays a part by entering into other bodies.

Dear new world Bhai.

Once this mystery of the 84th birth of Krishna is solved, then the whole Godly knowledge will become crystal clear. At present, neither the BKs nor the PBKs have any idea, which is the 84th birth of Krishna.

shivsena.

Once this mystery of the 84th birth of Krishna is solved, then the whole Godly knowledge will become crystal clear. At present, neither the BKs nor the PBKs have any idea, which is the 84th birth of Krishna.

I think that we all have many other lessons to learn, and that precise knowledge of another can never substitute for learning to accept the dimensions, emotions and voices of own's own being.

Avyakt BapDada is always saying knowledge won't be revealed until children's stages are ready to be exhibited on the World Stage. Turning that around, as I know myself more fully, and live the truth of "Know Thyself", I no longer need the support of knowing the final birth of another soul.

Your fellow explorer ...

Amongst other things

... Avyakt BapDada is always saying knowledge won't be revealed until children's stages are ready to be exhibited on the World Stage. Turning that around, as I know myself more fully, and live the truth of "Know Thyself" I no longer need the support of knowing the final birth of another soul. Your fellow explorer ...

Abek says,"Thank you Brother".

Once this mystery of the 84th birth of Krishna is solved, then the whole Godly knowledge will become crystal clear. At present, neither the BKs nor the PBKs have any idea, which is the 84th birth of Krishna.

In the Murli it is said that, "this is this one's (Brahma Baba's) 84th birth". As long as he is alive in the body this is his 84 birth then in 69 he leaves the body.

We know there is also unlimited birth and death of having faith. Although he could have left the body it need not mean he has lost faith. He used to have faith he will be taking birth in Godlen age as prince Krishan still from the beginning of the Yagya. Then this will be his first birth. But we know that a child cannot give birth to himslef, a Father is needed, so the soul of Krishna will also have to develop faith in the Father. Then it could be said his 1st birth in subtle way.

Dear bro andrey, why is it said in the Murli that if the horoscope of Krishna is received, the horoscope of drama who'll be received? Actually, the mystery of Krishna's birth is not solved. The Murli does not say about the horoscope of Ram. Why?

Because no one can take his horoscope. Shankar is not shown to take birth nor die.

Well. Dear bro Andrey, now you are on the write track. Read the following 3 statements:

1) The Ladder picture depicts the story of 84 births of Bharat.
2) We can find several Murli points about 84 births of Krishna.
3) We also say about 84 births of Narayan.

But ... but about Rambap (in the form of Shankar), PBKs view him as not taking birth nor death. Nobody tells the story of 84 births of Rambap. But the story of 84 births of Bharat/Narayan/Krishna is famous.

Thus we come to the conclusion that Rambap is not Bharat/Krishna/Narayan.

He is also Krishna in the Sangam Yuga. Bharat, Narayan all the names are for one. All the praise is for Sangam Yuga. There is no mention for the Krishna in the Golden Age, so 'which' horoscope is important. Ram, Krishna, Shankar, Narayan are all one and the same, and even then the praise goes to the Supreme Soul Shiva that enters.

Then if Rambap is all-in-one part-holder, then there should be no contradiction among the Murli points related to his verious parts. Murlis describe 84 births of Bharat/Krishna/Narayan, but Rambap is viewed as not to take births nor die. Then if Rambap is Sangamyugi Krishna/Bharat/Narayan, then what about contradictory Murli points?

Now if the Murli point about 'horoscope of Krishna' is about Sangamyugi Krishna (Rambap/Shankar according to you), then, (in the form of Sangamyugi Krishna), we can take the horoscope of Shankar/Rambap. But in the previous article you stated that we cannot take his horoscope. Thus you say one thing in one article & the other thing in the other article.

I mean which personality is more important, since you also have said you accept superiority of Ram, then where is the discussion going and why? Why, why, why? What is this way of discussion. This is said for Krishna why is it not said for Ram. Why should it be said for Ram. It is said for Krishna. He takes complete 84 births along The Cycle, the point is correct. It does not give any information about the soul of Ram whether he takes or not.

“No matter how knowledgeable someone is, if they don’t have love in the heart, they would not have an enjoyable Brahmin life. It would be a dry, tasteless, life. On the path of knowledge, if there is knowledge without love, the questions arise in knowledge” Why, what?” However if there is love with knowledge, then that person would always remain absorbed in love. Someone who has love does not have to make effort to remember the one he loves. If someone is just knowledgeable but doesn’t have love, then he has to labor. That one eats the fruit of labor and this one eats the fruit of love. Knowledge is the seed and love is the water. If the seed doesn’t receive the water of love, the fruit cannot emerge" Avyakt Vani 15.11.2005

Yes andreybhai. We both agree that Ram is superior to Krishna. Let's stop dispute here & discuss friendly.

Though 'ONLY' Krishna is said to take complete 84 births & Ram (Shankar) is said to neither take birth nor to die, we both accept superiority of Ram. And Krishna's horoscope is a puzzle. Please churn abnut it. If it's about Sangamyugi Krishna (i.e, Shankar) then we can take Shankar's horoscope, which is contradictory. Why Ram is not described to take complete 84 births? Instead he is described beyond The Cycle of birth & death. Why in the horoscope of Krishna is the horoscope of the drama is hidden? I am 100% sure about superiority of Ram to Krishna. Then I am in confussion why.....why Ram is not said to take COMPLETE 84 births & why Murlis give so importance to Krishna's horoscope instead of that of Ram??..

Now read this Murli statement. 'Srikrishna ko to puray 84 janam hee kahengay' (Murli date: 4-1-67 P-2). This Murli statement indicates that only Srikrishna takes complete 84 births.

The Sri Krishna referred to in the above Murli point is the Confluence-Aged Krishna/ Confluence-Aged Ram and not the soul of Krishna, i.e. Brahma Baba, whose part gets reduced in this drama by about 50 years.

Then if Rambap is all-in-one part-holder, then there should be no contradiction among the Murli points related to his verious parts. Murlis describe 84 births of Bharat/Krishna/Narayan, but Rambap is viewed as not to take births nor die. Then if Rambap is Sangamyugi Krishna/Bharat/Narayan, then what about contradictory Murli points?

Actually, there is no contradiction. Depending on one's karmic accounts with the soul of Ram or Krishna one may interpret the Murli points in different ways. Father Ram not taking 84 births or not entering The Cycle of birth and death refers to him not passing through The Cycle of faith and faithlessness (on God and his own part).

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

The Sri Krishna referred to in the above Murli point is the Confluence-Aged Krishna/ Confluence-Aged Ram and not the soul of Krishna, i.e. Brahma Baba, whose part gets reduced in this drama by about 50 years.

Dear arjun Bhai.

You have mentioned that Krishna's soul (Brahma) part has been reduced by 50 years. Can you give any Murli date which says that Krishna takes 50 years less birth in 5000 years; or this is again the teaching of Krishna who has invented the Advanced Knowledge and this has been hammered to students who take the Advance Course? Brahma Baba left his body in 1969 and i suppose (according to Advanced Knowledge) that he is destined to take birth as child Krishna in the year 2018. This is how the PBKs derived that Krishna has 50 years less in 84 births. Now this assumption has many flaws.

First, we are told not to be date-conscious and then a prediction is made that child Krishna will take birth in the year 2018. Now the revelation of Father and the coming of the third murti has still not materialised and the year of the birth of child Krishna is predicted; this is what perplexes me. Also, do the PBKs think that by the year 2018, the whole world will be destroyed and the first pure child of the Golden Age will be born (obviously all the impure 600 crore souls have to return to Soul World)? This is most unlikely as the things stand today. And finally how many years will it take for the whole world (600 crore souls) to realise that Godfather has come to redeem the world (considering that even the BKs at present have no idea about the role of BapDada in Sakar)?

Can arjun Bhai please give his views on the above?

shivsena.

Respected Arjunbhai.

Murli says that day & night of Brahma are only that of Vyakt Brahma (& obviously not that of Avyakt Brahma). Day & night occures in the corporeal world & not in Subtle Region. So the Brahma to whome day & night are related, must be a corporeal being as a Vyakt Brahma.

Now if Virendra Dev Dixit is that Vyakt Brahma to whome day & night are related, then some questions crop in my mind. Virendra Dev Dixit is supposed to be enlightened in 1976. Thus he experiences day within himself. And therefore period after 1976 may be called as day of Brahma. But according to PBKs, the period after 1976 is Brahma's night. Thus Virendra Dev Dixit is not that Vyakt Brahma to whome night of Brahma is related.

Then if night of Brahma is related to soul of Krishna, then during Brahma's night he must be a corporeal being & not in Subtle Region. Being Avyakt how he can be instrumental to bring Brahma's night? He must be present here even after 1969. Then how can you say that he is 50 years less?