John wrote:By preaching that a human soul is Shiva or that God is omnipresent, the preachers have led mankind astray from me
Hi John,
I tell you how I get my head around this, and it might be good advice to the PBKs. In the West, we are very word conscious. Words have tight meanings like trademarks and I think we conceive, or our consciousness demands that 'Shiv' or 'Shiva' has one fixed specific meaning. We are also frustrated by the Indian mind that seems to be able to hold two entirely different and even contradictory concepts at the same time and also embrace ambiguities as if they don't exist. I put it down to cultural difference created by one people with many religions living in one land together that have not had the Romans or Roman Catholic Church ride roughshod over their tribal religions and install One God and One truth and then evolve via The Enlightement into the Scientific Industrial Revolution. Largely, the village mentality is still tribal-medieval.
OK. This is a "20 word or less" summary of thought. In short the ambiguities they do not even see, frustrate the hell of of us. And, of course, a large part of The Knowledge is infantile because it was meant for women, children and entirely uneducated individuals as the Yagya largely consisted of at the time. We have come along way in 50/60 years.
I have start to think around this and question if "God's" name actually is Shiva. Whether Shiva is not a name as such, a trademark, but a description. And in that ShivBaba is fine because it is just a description as well. Shiva meaning " The Benefactor", ShivBaba meaning the Beneficial Father. A sort of junior beneficial one, a capital S and a lower case s scenario. I have no idea if what the PBKs are saying is true, I just wish that they would get over the Murlis, finding "proofs" or justifying themselves, and move on. Largely, that too is cultural. Punditry. Lengthy abstract scriptural debate. Mostly it is pointless because it is not the way that other folks are convinced.
I agree with you that you just cannot take one line out of the context of a Murli and apply it 30 years. The truth is, some of these quotes just do not resonate; some seem to be pretty desperate band aids to hold faith together. May be neither the BKs nor the PBKs and their respective channels really understand the nature of the Shivas whilst both are channelling it, him or they. Human conscious is limited. The BKs are obviously going to highly defensive and completely resistant to any challenge to their authority. I think what would erode their position more is accurate documentation of the history of Yagya.
Did PBKs see the post I stuck up on the BK forum?
Murlis: 15 June 1969, 28 May 1969, 2 June 1975, 28 May 1974
“At the beginning of the Yagna there were two female children who used to even direct Mama and Baba, used to be teacher and used to play superb part. They left their mortal coils.”
Murli: 23 July 1969
“The (male) person who was with him for 10 years, she (the female) used to go in trance, used to drill Baba (Dada Lekhraj) also. Entering into them Father (ShivBaba) used to give direction. How much status did they have! Today they were no more. (Because) at that time there was not so much of knowledge.”
Murli: 23 July 1969
“He was associated there for 10 years. (She) often used go into the trance. They even tutored Mama and Baba. Father (Supreme Soul) entering them used to give directions. So high was their status. Today they are no more. At that time so much of knowledge was not there”.
I do not know what or why the last "(She)" is put into brackets or who the other two female children were, what was going on then?