When God Shiva speaks through Brahma in the Sakar Murlis, have you ever wondered what is truly happening there?
Do you believe that God is telling Brahma every word to speak it in hindi and Brahma Baba merely repeats those words?
Is that the way you understand it?
Isn’t that another dangerous literal interpretation? 🙂
If we look at the complexity of gyan, without the “easy to understand devotional view,” we will find that there is way more which could not be easily conveyed to a simple devotional story.
Many then, “blame it on God,” for not giving the “full knowledge,” at once; when in reality words are incapable, unable to express a reality which needs to be “realized,” that is “churned,” to be able to understand.
The other day, I had the chance to speak with someone who is capable of “listening” to what appears to be a flower or Nature, speak.
According to this person, he is able to understand exactly what the entity which is perceived as a “flower” is able to say; however, the translation from those thoughts into his words is what seems to be the issue.
He is using his own experiences and understanding (sankaras)to convey the ideas and thoughts in his mind.
No… God Shiva did not speak words in hindi into Brahma Baba’s ear so he could repeat them in the Sakar Murli.
There are some thoughts/ideas which are perceived and the issue comes when it is time to “translate them,” as well as when others “listen to them.”
As a matter of fact, I have experienced that in some of the “churnings,” the idea is fully understood; I can fully view it, but it becomes an issue for me to put that into words. Specially to put that into a language such as English which is not my maternal language in this birth. Then many times, what I try to convey may not be understood fully, so misunderstanding occurs. That is my “karma.” 🙂
On the same token, Sakar Murlis transmit a special power, a special authority which someone who has recognized God could understand when listening. However, we need to be aware that in the translation through Brahma Baba the words may not fully convey the understanding of an idea.
Nevertheless, we cannot complain about “the translation,” when we know it is coming from the ”number 1 soul,” for there is no better intellect than his to do this task, according to the Drama.
The Sakar Murlis that we hear in my understanding, are from the later years of Brahma Baba’s life. This is to assure that a “better” understanding of this knowledge as well as a better connection perhaps, could be conveyed.
I fully understand that. However, let us keep in mind, that the issue most of the time is in “listening.”
There is the force of authority coming on those Murlis combined with devotional feelings, it is not recommended to “filter bhakti,” but to let it in, to accept it so the force of that Murli could touch the soul. BUT, at the same time, it is good to realize that “this is not the type of satsang when we say ‘true,’ ‘true’ to everything we hear.” (My favorite line to quote from a Sakar Murli)
Is this balance which will bring greater benefit for the soul, at the “end of the day;” from my view.
NOTE: Some souls have mentioned that Shiva (God) enters Brahma Baba and speaks directly.
If that was the case, then Brahma Baba should have clearly realized that there was another entity in him who was speaking. But that wasn’t the case in the beginning as we know.
News for you, dear soul: Baba (God) hasn’t created anything. Sometimes I feel like writing 108 times in an article nothing, but GOD DOES NOT CREATE A THING.
When listening to the Murli, I am surprised how still BKs go along with that devotional talk despite “knowing” gyan. 🙂
The Sakar murli says: “Baba is the creator of the Drama.” But yet we know that nothing can be created for everything has always existed. However, we do not remember the Sakar murlis when Baba says that “He is in bondage of the Drama,” or when He says that ” The Drama is more powerful than God.”
None of that is to be taken literally. Please, let us remember this….alright??
Scenes in the Drama are just that, scenes. What you call “bad” may have a hidden benefit in it, for we know in “pure gyan,” that “everything is beneficial.”
Everything that happens is meant to make us experience the full range of life, that is duality, at this time. Brahmin souls become soul conscious, so Brahmin souls can experience a world without duality as well. A Brahmin soul experiences happiness in greater intensity than any other soul, but also the most sorrow than any other soul. There is no ‘free lunch’ here.
Life is to experience. We are imperishable. Nothing lasts forever, but…everything repeats forever! 🙂
Therefore, there is no need for Baba the “lord of mercy” to do anything, but Brahma Baba is doing lots of things for Brahmin souls “up there.”
According to the Sakar Murli, the “Christ soul” will take knowledge at some point.
According to the Sakar Murli, “If someone listen to even a little knowledge , he will go to heaven.” (SM 10/9/12)
We know that the Christ soul will be a “new” soul when coming for the first time. Therefore, according to that “reasoning” if we take things literally (danger! danger!); If Christ takes knowledge, Christ should experience “heaven.” See that? 🙂
However, there is the knowledge of the “special roies” of the religious founders including Brahma Baba. Those souls (including Christ) will take knowledge up to what their roles require when founding a religion. That knowledge is needed. That is how we see the differences in religious thoughts around the world. Christians have the knowledge of God and souls and karma, but not about the cycle of time and the Drama. Buddhists know about the cycle of time, karma, meditation, soul; but their understanding of the Supreme Soul is not there. Taoists, have good grasp on the Drama and karma, but not much about God. A religious founder has to take this knowledge at sometime for their knowledge does not appear “out of thin air,” and that is when this knowledge is available. (Now)
None of those religions have the knowledge of the subtle region, for that is a special part that only Brahma Baba has “now” and it is known by Brahmin souls only.
Thank you for your deep question. It is a “big question” to answer… 🙂
I am not an ‘authority’ in Hinduism nor Indian by birth in this life, therefore; those labels do not have the same “impact” or “importance” to me. Gyan for me is all about self-transformation.
However, based on the points of Sakar Murlis, here is the understanding that I have:
ShivBaba (God) does not create anything. We know in gyan that everything is eternal. Our subtle bodies are eternal as well. No need for “creators.” I am categorically sure about this point. I do not know why there is this mind set of having God as a “creator,” which confuses things when He cannot create anything at all. That is creating from nothingness.
In devotion, the term creation is used to convey that something has “changed or transformed.” However, change is all there is in this Drama.
Why add another layer of bhakti in our knowledge of God?
Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar are merely representations of the 3 “acts of God’ (here goes more devotion) which in reality are simply the 3 states of matter (physical world) in observation. That is something “new” appears from something “old.” That is “creation.”- Brahma. That “creation” will evolve into something “old” gradually. That journey from “new” to “old” is called “sustenance” or Vishnu. Finally, when that “old” thing disappears to become something “new” again, that is called “destruction” or Shankar.
As you can see there is a cycle which repeats. That cycle we can see it in us. We go from babies to elders and then we “die,” just to become babies again. Without “bhakti,” devotion; this is the meaning that I am able to find and share.
There is “Subtle Brahma” also known as “angelical” or just Brahma in the subtle region. There was the “corporeal” Brahma, also known as “Prajapita Brahma” or “Adam,” because of the belief that God “creates” Brahma as His first “creation” and everyone else comes after him (Brahma in Hinduism, Adam in Christianity.) There is a Murli point where is mentioned: ”Prajapita Brahma is here rather than in the subtle region.” Therefore, we can assume that Prajapita Brahma was “sakar” Brahma who became “Subtle Brahma.” Basically we are talking about the same soul in different stages.
Please let us not get caught up in the “titles” and devotional “hierarchies.”
Dear soul, please see that there is an eternal recurrent “circle” (Drama) where there is no possibility for “creation.” There is no “creation” at all. Everything that exists is what has always existed but changes in time (physical form) to become the same form after a cycle.
The soul in Dada Lekhraj awakens through knowledge and his name is changed to Brahma. (Changing names to ‘spiritual names’ was usual back in those days) That same soul meets his angelic form after becoming karmateet and now is playing a role as “subtle Brahma.”
That same soul will take birth as Krishna who will be known as Narayan when he gets married to Lakshmi.
Same soul with different names given to him according to religious traditions and understanding.
Back in the “Sakar” days the idea of “relating” the true bhakti stories was important. To put Shankar instead of Shiva or to make sure that people knew that Jagadamba was the same soul as Lakshmi was of paramount importance. To explain that there are “3 subtle deities up in the subtle region” was part of that as well.
Gyan, can be explained very well without all of those devotional stories. As a matter of fact, depth is reached without that “extra” flavor. However, that “flavor” is needed by most souls… 🙂 I realize that now… I am always learning…
Great question. Thank you!
You are right, many times the words, “Baba,” “BapDada,” are interchanged. Matters could be a bit complex when “God” is referred as “Shiva,” “ShivBaba,” or “BapDada,” as well.
To my amazement, those words are not clearly understood by many BKs, let alone ‘researchers’ in religious topics.
For the sake of clarity and simplicity, the word “Baba” has been used widely to represent God, BapDada or even Brahma Baba.
When that simplicity is not enough, then we could add further depth.
In todays’ Murli (8-28-12) Brahma Baba was speaking saying that “he does not remember Baba all the time.” That means that in the “Sakar” -corporeal days, the difference was there.
There was a “Brahma Baba,” and a “Shiva,” God. When the connection was forged, then that was “BapDada.”
In the avyakt days ( Brahma Baba in his subtle role – angelic role) is known as “BapDada,” for that connection is stable. As a matter of fact, the first avyakt Murli in 1969 mentioned: “In the confluence age, God will be known as BapDada.”
BapDada is God for a BK soul. This is very important because our connection, our relationship with God is through the “middle man.” (Brahma)
That connection manifests through us Brahmin souls, through the sanskaras of Brahma Baba.
In short, Brahma Baba gives “personality” to God, the point of light, Shiva.
In the last post it was stated:
“Baba teaches us to develop the heart but there is no teaching about sexuality. It is a taboo probably because of cultural issues.”
It is important to realize that there are not formal teachings in this topic. I had the chance to read the book titled “Brahamcharya” by Bro. Jagdish. It is a good attempt to teach something but to be honest, i do not see any experience in it, it is all intellectual stuff. It is all about fearing sex lust and how bad, impure, degraded and lowly it is. It is about negation, repulsion, suppression.
I haven’t seen a picture of Bro. Jagdish playing badmington or swimming or being “tan” by just being in Nature. He is the epitome of intellectualism in BKism. He has written most of the books of BK gyan. He was a “head” perhaps mixed with “heart,” but definitely a “head.”
I have seen pictures of Brahma Baba.
I have seen pictures of Brahma Baba wearing shorts or lying down by a river.
I have seen pictures of Brahma Baba “tan” by getting sunlight from his long walks. I have been in Baba’s rock and found the beauty of Nature.
I have seen pictures of Brahma Baba playing badminton.
I have heard stories on how Brahma Baba used to take “the children” to the beach.
That is the teaching of developing sexuality within Spirituality. That is my whole point.
Follow the father.