"Russia" and atheism.

Damn ... I keep trying to escape this orbit but keep getting pulled back in as big, screamingly open and obvious questions are left unasked by others ...

Please correct the details on this, because I do not have Advanced Knowledge, but recently it was written something to the effect that according to Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs, "atheism" is the tenth (?) religion and it is invented in Russia.

Can someone clarify this?

Now, if he means "Communism", Marx was a German Jew and he and Engels basically put together their Communist Manifesto in England under the commission of the German Communist League. Lenin lived and developed his ideas all over Western Europe and the majority of the Bolsheviks were also Jewish.

Who was the Chariot souls that the religions Father incarnated into ... Lenin, Stalin or Trotsky ... and when, what incident should we look for?

And who and where did the religious Father of communisim then go on and incarnate to, in order to look after his "religion" as per Christianity, Buddhism etc?

Please tell me what the Russian connection was and what makes "Russia" so godless in comparison to the drug addled, guns and porno addicted, Mammonistic, Dollar fuels state of America? Did atheism in the West alone not have its roots in The Enlightenment of the 18th Century (or indeed back in some schools of Ancient Greece)?

Again, similar to the issues I raised about the concept of what is "India" or "The West" ... who is "Russia"? It is a person and the story entirely a metaphorically allegory? Is "Russia" the state, a region, or the people?

I find this difficult to swallow because within the Russian people there is great faith in God through the Byzantine Church and in America as many active aethists. Indeed, the liberal intellectual tradition of America could be seen as just as godless as the Communist State of Russia ... which, of course, no longer exists. The church challenging science of The Enlightenment also took root in Europe not Russian.

I hope that you can see what I am scraping at here; a whole mishmash of superficial, illogical inaccuracies in the name of "The Truth". I apologises in advance, and I do not want a one line answer back from Baba, but hope you can see my higher expectations of a God soul. We accept such pithy one liners as truths. In my opinion, they are just mental plugs aimed at gullable individuals, uneducated enough or drugged up on Yoga to accept them unquestioningly.

Would i be happier just to forget the details and join in the "intoxication"? Probably on the surface but not deep down. Do the children have the right to expect reasonable answers from the parents? Does it matter? Of course! As with the Yagya, if it is true, it should be able to easily prove it from recent historical material.

Can someone clarify this? Now, if he means "Communism", Marx was a German Jew and he and Engels basically put together their Communist Manifesto in England under the commission of the German Communist League. Lenin lived and developed his ideas all over Western Europe and the majority of the Bolsheviks were also Jewish.

Who was the Chariot souls that the religions Father incarnated into ... Lenin, Stalin or Trotsky ... and when, what incident should we look for?

And who and where did the religious Father of communisim then go on and incarnate to, in order to look after his "religion" as per Christianity, Buddhism etc?

Please tell me what the Russian connection was and what makes "Russia" so godless in comparison to the drug addled, guns and porno addicted, Mammonistic, Dollar fuels state of America? Did atheism in the West alone not have its roots in The Enlightenment of the 18th Century (or indeed back in some schools of Ancient Greece)?

Just a a few notes in brief on this topic.

what incident should we look for?

I guess the killing off of the Russian royal families is a fairly good indicator.

what makes "Russia" so godless in comparison to the drug addled, guns and porno addicted, Mammonistic, Dollar fuels state of America

One of the main differences that Baba/Virendra Dev Dixit has mentioned is the way children are brought up to be owned by the state under the communist rule. When the children are born they become property of the State. They are educated according to State doctrines. When old enough that personality is sent to work for the State. The worst part according to Baba is that when the personality is ready to marry, there is no recognition of other family members, e.g. mother or Father. Sons and daughters could be breeding with parents. Such things happen, according to ShivBaba/Virendra Dev Dixit. There is no recognition of the family path.

It would appear strange that the athiest religion should have a religious founder. Baba has mentioned that all religeous founders have an otherworldly expression. It is an indication of the subtle soul in its nirikari stage, i.e. bodiless. I am not aware of any athiest/communist founder who has this expression.

Other communist countries are presently in existance since the demise of communist Russia, I guess any athiest founder soul could be present and sustaining its religion there in some form. Not an entirely conclusive reply, for you ex-l, but an interesting topic none the less and worthy of more research.

Omshanti.

Buttonslammer Bhai has already given a good reply to ex-l's query. Although Lenin is considered the founder of communism, but actually communists got power first of all only in Russia after they overthrew the Czars under the leadership of Lenin. So, Lenin could be considered the Father of Communism.

On the one side Maharshi Dayanand came and started Aryasamaj; and on the other side Lenin & Stalin came and established atheism in Russia. They had the Czars (kings) of Russia executed. So both the religions, i.e. Aryasamaj and the Communism (atheism) of Russia are such religions, which do not like kingship at all. They neither like kings nor do they like living among their subjects.

Even during the time of the English Government, there were some kings who were at least allowed to retain their fame by granting them pension or title. But ever since this Kaurava Government has come, the situation is such that they have exterminated even the name of the kings. Thus the tenth or last religion is atheism. They neither believe in the soul nor the Supreme Soul; neither heaven nor hell. They consider just the body and the elements of body to be everything.

Their intellect is busy in the analysis of the five elements of the body. Body means soil. So they analyzed every atom of the elements through their intellect and prepared the atomic bomb, i.e. they created danger for the world. These souls are not constructive even for the self and are rather destructive. They do not become cooperative in the task of the Supreme Soul.

But the Supreme Soul is also a clever person. He makes such souls only instrumental in the physical task of Destruction. On one side when the Supreme Soul comes, he sows the seed of knowledge in the souls of ancient deity religion and for that he makes the special souls instrumental in India. And on the other side the preparation of atomic energy starts in Russia. This invention is also of these people only. So they are the egoistic Russians, whose main feature is "body-consciousness".

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

Such a broad subject ...

So Virendra Dev Dixit, or Shiva Baba through Virendra Dev Dixit, equates the "Divine Right to rule" and a nation having royal families with theism? A bit strange given so many royal families worldwide got there on the basis of murdering off other royal families, or members thereof. (A memorial of the Confluence Age, I suppose ...).

Are France, America etc also atheistic as they too had revolutions to depose of royal families and separate religion from the state? Is being a subject is better than being a citizen? I think that of the modern democracies, it is only the Great Britain whose population are still "subjected" to a throne. Were Stalin and Mao not just other usurping rival kings, as kings and Emperors had despoded of each other throughout History? What premises do we have for the "Divine Right" of pre-exisitng kings?

I can, however, see the attraction of the USA to the BKs ... on each Dollar and coin is printed "In God We Trust" ... and their religions says, "In Dollars We Trust". But what is superior to its people pledging loyalty to a flag?

We must look this two ways, from the lokik and alokik. I am at a disadvantaged because I am not an advance student, and who am I to argue against Virendra Dev Dixit, but the history does not match reality. America rather obviously invented nuclear weapons first and foremost, with the Germans and British close seconds but even then it was an international effort. The scare stories of Russian state control making fathers marrying daughters etc, are ridiculous, I am sorry to say.

Has no PBK ever visited any of the former Soviet states, met a Russian or read any literature on it? Or even, say, visited Kerala State in India where they vote in Communist Governments. Kerala has the one of the highest rates of literacy, education and quality of life in India. It is also very pluralistically religious. It is hurtful of me to say but I can appreciate how some uneducated villagers in India might be taken in my all this ... but, honestly, as written it does not add up.

Stalinism was not Communism. Russia was not the birth place of Newton nor the scientific Englightenment. The West was just as or more scientific and materialist. In fact, I would say that the Soviet was even more open and advance than The West for investigating psychic and spiritualistic science. And why no mention of China in Gyan at all? 1 Billion people ... and (theoretically) no God or Religion through the same period of Marx inspired Maoism.

So, let us try and look at the Gyani/metaphorical view of it. So, is "Russia" the geographical Russia as we know it? If it is a "religion" and has a seed soul, who are its founder and Chariot? If India/Bharat is a person, do the metaphors not extend to Russia and America too?

It must also have some virtue to have had its Golden Age, and some part of the final, perfect completion of the human soul. My thought is that the virtue of Western democracy (which had its roots in Greece 2,000+ years ago and "Celtic/Germanic" societies before that) is not that it is "the rule of people over people" but that (in theory);

a) it recognizes the rights and equality of every individual,
b) that the rulers are held to represent the interests of the nation as a whole and accountable to the people for their errors, excesses and abuses, and
c) even the rulers are subject to the law. These are good concepts largely still alien and unknown to medieval rural India, that only came with and after the British.

It seems to be that the medieval system of fiefdoms still rules within the minds of the BKWSU ruling caste. The political system is unspokenly feudalist. The West sees that as being something socially and spiritually unevolved.

So, the BKWSU World is an invading Feudal State run by a Spirit Emperor ... now there is a good idea for an essay or Sci Fi novel. It is easier to say that the BK spirit, either group spirit or channelled spirit, opposes communist or democratic models because they are a challenge on its own power structure and the personal values of its leaders.

The BKWSU model, and its leaders including Shiva Baba, if feudal and wants or insists that leaders have absolutely no liability, no responsibility, no accountability over their followers ... even if they are happy to take their time, money and personal power.

Lots of deep threads here to pick at.

In the Murlis it is said that Bharat has become fully atheist now. An atheist is one that does not have hope in anyone, he does not have even hope in himself. If someone says, hi ... you are prajapita - he will say hm ... Prajapita!!! Nonsense. It is said that an atheist has no dharna. He will do whatever he has thinks to do. He does not accept anyone as authority. Only he is the final authority.

There is a lot of worship of the idol person and also for the bright future. Everything is done in the name fof the bright future. The task of Destruction, that is done is also beneficial, in the name of the bright future.

In the Communism, the main idea is that religion is opium for the masses, and it is man-made. Man has made up god. This idea has spead to take over the whole world now. Each religion spreads its influence. In the forum also such ideas that man has created god are here.

The main thing in Communism is the community. Community takes care. For example, here the case was that each person has a right for certain square meters of place for living. Then if you are three, four people and live in bigger appartement than if you calculate it will come more square meters per person then you have to sell one room or rent it and generally it is not you who can decide whom to take and whom to sell.

Everything is decided for you ... Maybe also this practice of putting children in the kindergarden, also collective work of woman and man. In schools also campus are organised where a lot of corruption happens. Also brigades where from school it is organised to stay for some 15 days or month or two to work in a field or factory. Maybe also public transport, the elevators are such places that become instrumental for a lot of corruption.

In comparison, you have the personal rickshaw, taxi, having a babysitter at home.

An atheist is one that does not have hope in anyone, he does not have even hope in himself ... an atheist has no dharna. He will do whatever he has thinks to do ... In the Communism, the main idea is that religion is opium for the masses, and it is man-made. Man has made up god. This idea has spead to take over the whole world now. Each religion spreads its influence.

No Andrey, Communist theory is an economic theory of social reform that set about the address the excesses of unaccountable political and financial forces for whom the common people and the commonewealth were disposable tools at the person whim of despots. Of course Marx, by PBK lore, was not a communist at all, so we should discard his opinions. So I suppose he was just a merely an Islamic reformer. The PBKs have said earlier that Lenin and Stalin were the Communist religious fathers.

So what about the Humanists? Humanists do not believe in God but believe in human virtues. Buddhists are atheists. The ancient Romans and Greeks had athestic schools, e.g. Socrates, Epicurus etc ... all of these predate Leninism and Stalinism. The Hindu Carvaka School of 6th century BC was the most explicitly atheistic school in India but Jainism also displays some athetist schools. The Renaissance gives us plenty of thinkers to mention; Ockham, Hume, Hobbs. By the time we reach the 18th Centure folk like pacal Ocham and Holbach are talking out, e.g., "All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God". 1772. And let us not exclude the pure natural forms of communalism, Proudhon in the 19th century, "For my part, I deny your God, your authority, your sovereignty, your judicial State, and all your representative mystifications", or "the Satan which surrounds us, this Satan, it is you." (Of "God").

Of course, the main problem with the history of atheism, and the reason that in Europe at least you do not hear even more about it, is that if you were an intelligent outspoken atheist, i.e. questioned the Church. They killed you. As easy as that. And they killed or imprisoned 100s of 1,000s.

What Marx and Engels argued, influenced by the earlier Feuerbach, is that belief in God and religion were social functions, used by those in power to oppress the working class. YES, there are many on this forum and quite a few BK in the BKWSU that will agree with this statement.

In fact, it is impossible to see how one could NOT agree with it ... history in on our side! Is Gyan any different?

Maybe also this is attributive to communism - the mass production, the big stores, and big buildings where diferent people who has no connection with one another live together, hostels etc. where you can hear through the walls when the neighbour switcehs on the tv, when he opens and closes doors, when they talk amongs themselves when he swithces on the tap.

Maybe also this is attributive to communism ...

No, that is just bad central planning in a northern nation that had not yet developed out of a medieval feudal state before a post-industrial society was forced upon it and the people called upon to make the sacrifices to catch up with an England and America that similar peasants had made even greater sacrifices a hundred years before ...

If they had left you to your kings and counts and venerated bishops, you would have still been living in mud huts with pig fat for candles, sleeping with your Sister, not able to read and write, and dying on a field for some army whose language and whose war you could not understand ... welcome to the 18th and 19th Century In Europe.

There was nothing noble about the intentions of the nobility back then. Am I wrong?

A man dies and goes to hell. There he discovers that he has a choice: he can go to capitalist hell or to communist hell. Naturally, he wants to compare the two, so he goes over to capitalist hell. There outside the door is the devil, who looks a bit like President Bush. "What's it like in there?" asks the visitor. "Well," the devil replies, "in capitalist hell, they flay you alive, then they boil you in oil and then they cut you up into small pieces with sharp knives."

"That's terrible!" he gasps. "I am going to check out communist hell!" He goes over to communist hell, where he discovers a huge queue of people waiting to get in. He waits in line. Eventually he gets to the front and there at the door to communist hell is a little old man who looks a bit like Karl Marx. "I am still in the free world, Karl," he says, "and before I come in, I want to know what it's like in there."

"In communist hell," says Marx impatiently, "they flay you alive, then they boil you in oil, and then they cut you up into small pieces with sharp knives."

"But ... but that's the same as capitalist hell!" protests the visitor, "Why such a long queue?"

"Well," sighs Marx, "Sometimes we're out of oil, sometimes we don't have knives, sometimes no hot water ..."

Written version of ShivBaba’s Murli VCD* 589

Maya doesn’t leave anyone. Some may say: She left Ram; she left Krishna ... No! Maya and Ravan don’t leave anyone, no matter who and how great maharathi a soul is. Who are Maya and Ravan? [Students are saying something.] Maya and Ravan exert influence. They don’t leave anyone. Maya and Ravan don’t leave even those, who are recognized as Trideva (three deities) – the highest deities among 330 millions deities. They seize all in their clutch. They seize some in their clutch at the very beginning of 63 births.

Abraham came, they got converted under his influence and went away. And some didn’t become converted. Or must all have been converted? When Abraham came, did all get converted or were some saved? Some were saved. Not all were converted. After this Buddha came. Many got converted. Nevertheless many were saved. They didn’t become converted even under other’s attack. They didn’t get converted when the first attack of vidharmis took place. Christ - the third religious Father came. Many got converted. Many went to the land of Christian religion and became Christian. In this way whichever religious Father came, the residents of Bharat kept on getting converted.

There are such, who kept on being converted from the beginning. Whichever religious Father came, that’s it! they came under their influence. When Abraham came, they got under the influence of Abraham, when Christ came; they got under the influence of Christ. When Muslims came, they got under the influence of Muslim. No matter, whether they belong to religions of right or left side. They got influenced by anyone, who came and influenced them. They became of the last one - Arya Samaj 43 40. They went on being influenced by every religion.

At the end their stage becomes such that they don’t have veneration for any religion. They become atheists. Where did this atheist dharm emerge from? It is the creation (srijan) of those souls in the atheist religion, who don’t remain fixed in any religion. They stick to where they see the opportunity. Opportunists. Where they saw: “something good came”, they chose that path. What do today’s politicians do? They check which party has more power they get converted immediately, they change the wing.

So it was said that not all out of 16 000 surrendered are elevated. Among them there are mostly such, who get converted, they betray the residents of Bharat. What will such traitors become in the first birth? [Students: Servants.] They will become servants. So many become surrendered but those can receive good position, who practice properly, make other practice, prepare many subjects.

Written version of ShivBaba’s Murli VCD* 589
Christ - the third religious Father came. Many got converted. Many went to the land of Christian religion and became Christian.

Are we talking of the "real" Jesus Christ, Buddha etc or the individual within the PBK community that is symbolised as being the founder Father soul?

Its does not make sense history. Frankly, I do not actually think there was a historical figure called Jesus Christ. The evidence goes against it and for a made up character used politically to control by the Romans.

So when did the early Christians reach India and where is the historical evidence of Indians joining Christ of Abraham etc?

Symbolically, yes, I could accept it. Souls come to the PBK and then drag other PBKs away from Virendra Dev Dixit. Realistically, does not really work. And, if we look at it realistically, what is such a big deal about sticking it out on Indian turf? There were no such geographical divisions until the European Imperialists came along.