Extreme karma

1. Is sin a 'sanskar' or an 'action'?
2. So when in Murli it says Sins are absolved, to me that means karma is absolved.

Shanti.
1. In the Murli word sin used in the meaning of bad sanskar. So it is not karma.
As I said: is it OK if you caused sufferings to smb, but in this birth meet Baba and He will completely forgive you. He forgives us anyway, but this world have his material laws. God doesn't go across material laws. He is acting in accordance with material laws, with Drama.
2. If you understand something in some way it doesn't mean that you understand it right.
There wasn't much interpretations in the Murlis. Now there will be new Murlis with details about this world. There will be nothing which goes across previous words of Baba. When He will speak directly? Don't know exactly, but I suppose (and my mind hopes) that it will be in this year.

Jay Shri Hari.

But in the Law of Karma what makes sense is the intention or the feeling behind the act. We receive accordingly not to the act, but to the motive we have behind. One kills out of anger, one kills for to protect, according to your law both are killed in return. Is it fair?

Haribol. It seems to me that you can read something which wasn't written. As far as I remember there wasn't written: if one kills he will be killed. There was written that you achieve so much sufferings, as much you did.

As for motive, it plays role. But it doesn't mean that killing under motive of protection is better (you achieve less sufferings) than killing out of anger. The difference is in the realisation of causing sufferings. If you know that your action will lead to sufferings and nevertheless perform that action, you will receive bonus sufferings.

Om Tat Sat.

1. Is sin a 'sanskar' or an 'action'?
2. So when in Murli it says Sins are absolved, to me that means karma is absolved.

Shanti.
1. In the Murli word sin used in the meaning of bad sanskar. So it is not karma.

OK, so please show me where in the Murli.

andrey wrote:
But in the Law of Karma what makes sense is the intention or the feeling behind the act. We receive accordingly not to the act, but to the motive we have behind. One kills out of anger, one kills for to protect, according to your law both are killed in return. Is it fair?

Haribol. It seems to me that you can read something which wasn't written. As far as I remember there wasn't written: if one kills he will be killed. There was written that you achieve so much sufferings, as much you did.

BKDimok, how do you know this, have you read all the Murlis?
Have you read the original ones?
As a PBK, Andrey may have had access to some quotes from original (uncut) Murlis.

It seems to me you are mixing ideas from the Hare Krishna movement and the Gyan of ShivaBaba?
This forum is BK specific and also caters for the splinter groups, which I don't think Hare Krishna movement is one.

2. If you understand something in some way it doesn't mean that you understand it right.

Yes and by the same token it doesn't mean I understand it wrong.

1.OK, so please show me where in the Murli.

2.BKDimok, how do you know this, have you read all the Murlis?
Have you read the original ones?
As a PBK, Andrey may have had access to some quotes from original (uncut) Murlis.

3.It seems to me you are mixing ideas from the Hare Krishna movement and the Gyan of ShivaBaba? This forum is BK specific and also caters for the splinter groups, which I don't think Hare Krishna movement is one.

Om.
1. If you know NLP, there is one usefull thing: "frame". In two words : all we are doing at the moment depends on in what frame we are. For example if I know that I'll die tommorow I'll do another things, than if I know that I'll die somewhere in the future. I suggest you to change your frame for a second. Look on this situation from the positions, that all I am describing here is true (Shiva plays role through that body). It is just an exersise for mind (frame changing). May be after that something will be more clear.

2. All I know is from Murlis and from logical understanding. Also some information came directly to this mind through the air (by thoughts).

3. You asking me to leave this forum? As for Hare Krishna knowledge: there is usefull knowledge only for creating of the Golden Age.

With best wishes, Shankar

1. Can you please re read my question and answer appropriately

2. Can you please re read my question and answer appropriately

3. No I am not asking you to leave the forum at all, please don't get that idea, besides it is not my position to ask that.
What I am saying is that we are specifically discussing BK matters and also matters of the splinter groups. I am saying discussions involving Hare Krishna matters is for their own forum, or maybe the 'All and Everything' part of this forum. I think it is possible to get confused enough in discussions without adding matters from other spiritual groups of knowledge.

1.OK, so please show me where in the Murli.
2.Have you read all the Murlis? Have you read the original ones?

1. Have no opportunity and I suppose it won't appear. Also I suppose it's not nesessary for Him.
2. No. Had a thought came to your mind that there is no original Murlis any more?

Shankar.

2. No. Had a thought came to your mind that there is no original Murlis any more?

It is claimed that some in India have thousands of old, original Murlis , now the 5 year BK circulation equals approximately 1560 Murlis.

It is claimed that some in India have thousands of old, original Murlis , now the 5 year BK circulation equals approximately 1560 Murlis.

Om. Claimed by who?

It is claimed that some in India have thousands of old, original Murlis , now the 5 year BK circulation equals approximately 1560 Murlis.

Om. Claimed by who?

http://brahmakumaris.info/forum/.php?t=931