Questions for June 1st, 2013
om shanti… dear brother i dont know how much you are known to indian epics like “RAMAYANA” and “MAHABHARATA” which according to bk gyan were simply the mythical stories of KRISHNA and RAMA but i am trying to sort out some confusion in my mind which is related to places which actually exist like MATHURA ,VRINDAVAN which has been described in those epics and related construction till exist there , if gyan says there they irelavant , then what is your opinions abt this existance…
Thank you for your question!
If to know that those places existed help you in your self transformation; then those places exist. If you can’t find them, then scientists will do that some day. Let us have hope … 🙂
So I think that the existence of those places are relevant as long as they help you some way to self transform.
Dear brother Another lesson from 7.4.2013 of Denise on Maduban Jewles , See Father follow Father ,-B.B has said” I am with you at every step” Denise said “For Bk Baba is omnipresent ” “Always put Baba between you and another soul ” It doesn’t mean Baba is in pebble stones or fish or physical things but with awareness if we tune in we can feel His presence subtly.
Thank you for sharing your findings. Let me add more stuff in this about the word “omnipresence.”
I have written an article “The dividing omnipresent mind in the Ocean of life.” (a couple days ago) Basically in that article it is explained how a person can have different experiences on the same “object” according to its state of consciousness.
According to knowledge, there is no such a thing as “the right consciousness” but rather, numberwise. For an “effort maker” that is according to time. We change. It is the natural process.
The only thing that matters is the experience of how that helps you to self transform.
Being caught up in concepts is a waste of time. I have mentioned already that “Omnipresence” as explained in Sakar Murlis is the equivalent of “pantheism,” in English.
Shiva or Brahma Baba now, are incorporeal and Subtle entities. For them, there are no physical boundaries like time and place.
In BK history, the belief of omnipresence came first. Is it because Shiva didn’t want to say that He wasn’t everywhere and allowed this for many years to happen? Perhaps Brahma Baba wouldn’t be able to understand this simple concept “logically”? 🙂
It is just a state of consciousness. It has nothing to do with not being able to grasp the “knowledge.” There is nothing difficult about it especially if we make it dogmatic; although paradoxically it could be very deep and “out of range” for many souls’ understanding. Numberwise.
It is our consciousness which changes according to an experience and to explain that in “logical” terms is “illogical.” To put something which is not “black or white” into “black and white” words so anyone could understand those words, is a challenge.
That simplicity pays the price in accuracy.
This is something that we may need to understand rather than being caught up in the word “omnipresence.”
So, we have the BK trip of going from Omnipresence into a personal God.
To believe that the Sakar Murlis had all the knowledge in the last 5 years of Brahma Baba’s life is to be misinformed.
Avyakt Murlis have the “continuation” of those experiences that Brahma Baba had from a different conscious state of being.
Here a sample:
The concept of Karmateet was updated.
The concept of “detached observer” is explained in great extent in avyakt Murlis. That is the single most important piece of information to imbibe in my view.
The concept of remembrance was updated as well in avyakt Murlis. (Read Avyakt Murlis from 1969 as shared in this blog.)
The knowledge of the advanced party was imparted in Avyakt Murlis.
The concept of being present in the “now” and not in the future “golden castle” was updated in avyakt Murlis.
The concept of hearing the Murlis only at the center, was updated in Avyakt Murlis to a more “open” state according to time and circumstances, etc, etc…
As we can see according to consciousness there is a different perception and according to that perception, a different explanation. Consciousness is not only individual but collective. The Drama supports this. In other words, many individuals will believe the same thing at one point in time. The way of the Drama to get someone out of “old stuff” is a gradual process; like night changes into day.
Now, we have an omnipresent phrase:
“For a BK Baba is omnipresent.” 🙂
I thought that for a “real BK” the word “omnipresent” was poison. 🙂 It is a very hurtful concept.. 🙂 to even mention that word should be penalized… 🙂
As we can see, that word is being used as a reminder that Baba should be everywhere in a BK vision and experience.
Paradoxically, that makes Baba omnipresent….
Regarding “RAMAYANA” and “MAHABHARATA” there is something supportive to bkgyan their essence-wise, not details-wise (Just like the Shakespearean verse: see the forest, not the trees)
RAMAYANA presents that part of the history where doing righteousness was the norm, and doing unrighteousness was the exception.
MAHABHARATHA presents that part of the history where doing unrighteousness was the norm, and doing righteousness was the exception, which is typical of our period—iron age.
Hence, details-wise, they are irrelevant; but essence-wise of course relevant