Board index BK Section (BKs & New BK students only please) Murli Points Discussion Is there any second capital – Dwarika?

Is there any second capital – Dwarika?



Posts: 2493
Link with BKs: BK
It is like there was no soul of Islam religion before the birth of Ibrahim. The father of Ibrahim was of Devi Devta religion. The soul of Ibrahim came and some deity souls converted to be Islamic following the teachings of Ibrahim and gave birth to other souls of Islam religion.

26) Does not tally. Because soul of ram plays role in Golden Age as well. Baba has said- Soul of Ram and Sita will come in Golden Age itself, but will have lower positions. Post No. 172- viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1167&p=14891&hilit=172#p14891

We can take example of Indian history that the Maurya Dynasty was founded in 322 BCE by Chandragupta Maurya, who had overthrown the Nanda Dynasty. Chandragupta was a noble member of the Kshatriya caste (the warrior-ruler caste). He was related to the Nanda family, but he was an exile.

27) If Chandragupta Mauray was related to Nanda family, then the possibility of the child of last LN himself to be just renamed as Ram (and hence chandravamshi) gets more support, is it not?

However it is necessary to read the previous lines to understand the context. तुम बच्चे भी ड्रामा को अभी समझते हो। मनुष्य कहते हैं-वर्ल्ड की हिस्ट्री-जॉग्राफी का यह चक्र फिरता रहता है। परन्तु कैसे फिरता है, यह किसको पता ही नहीं। नाम भी लिखे हुए हैं- सतयुग, त्रेता, द्वापर, कलियुग फिर संगमयुग। परन्तु मनुष्यों ने समझ लिया है-युगे-युगे आते हैं। सतयुग त्रेता का भी संगम होता है। परन्तु उस संगम का कोई महत्व नहीं है। वहाँ तो कुछ होता नहीं। यह बातें तुम जानते हो-सतयुगी सूर्यवंशियों ने फिर चन्द्रवंशियों को राज्य कैसे दिया? ऐसे नहीं कि चन्द्रवंशियों ने सूर्यवंशियों पर जीत पाई। नहीं, जो चन्द्रवंशी का राजा होता है तो सूर्यवंशी राजा-रानी उनको राज्य भाग्य का तिलक दे तख्त पर बिठाते हैं। राजा राम, रानी सीता का टाइटिल मिलता है। किसने दिया? कहेंगे सूर्यवंशियों ने ट्रासंफर किया, अब तुम राज्य करो। जो सीन तुम बच्चों ने साक्षात्कार में देखी है। Here our sweetest Baba tells the history of Bharat and so the words “जो चन्द्रवंशी का राजा होता है”.

28) Here is the difficulty. If we believe parents of ram are Suryavamshi, then Ram cannot be raja/राजा. He can be only rajkumar/prince. This was the point. Ok, it is not a big issue. But, I believe it cannot be ignored blindly under such discussions.

I understand that Sri Sita should be available at that time, because the transfer of kingdom / coronation of Sri Ram cannot be performed without the presence of Sri Sita.

29) Here it draws more attention. Then how the coronation of first Ram and Sita would occur? There would be three Kings (royal families) then.
-Parents of last LN,.
-Parents of first Ram,
-Parents of first Sita-
[All belonging to different places.]

How the sequence would be? Who is going to invite whom?
---Is it parents of Ram and Sita first meet to discuss about marriage of their children, and then the last LN come there to give the authority?
---Or is the whole process initiated by last LN themselves? [= Last LN invites Sita to place of ram and gives power to ram at the place of Ram? ]

My brother has given many explanations for his understanding. But our sweetest Baba has told us for the name Sri Krishna that the same feature and body shall be for one birth only.(murli point is not readily available but my knowledgeable brother should accept it) If Sri Krishna shall be the name of all the prince of Satyug then our Baba would have not told like that.

30) Yex, Mostly the murli point says- Sri Krishn kaa usee feature phir kalp baad may hee milegaa = One will see the same feature of Sri krishna in only in next kalpa) . I believe it is said for the first Krishn there. [I believe it means the other Krishnas will not have same feature.]

Actually, the murli point applies to everyone, not just to Sri Krishna. Every person's feature changes. No two people can have same feature as well as feature of any soul cannot be identical in its next births. Is there any doubt here?

---Ok, if we believe the murli point is applicable just to Sri Krishna, do LN I and LN II have same feature then? They all have the same name. And, if we believe there would be 8 sets of LN at the same time, would the feature of all of them be identical?

---Also- if you think it applies to only Sri Krishna (as it seems from your point), then do you think it need not apply to Radha?

So- I believe- To explain the fact, Baba has taken example of one person, obviously number one soul.
Last edited by mbbhat on Sat Sep 23, 2017 3:32 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Murli Pt:- Gambheerataa se full marks jamaa hota hai. Mamma toh gambheerataa kee devi thi. = The virtue seriousness gives full marks. Mamma was a deity of seriousness.


Posts: 2493
Link with BKs: BK
Further there should be understanding between bodily name and title / surname / designation.

I understand that Sri Narayan, Sri Laxmi are the titles for the maharaja and maharani of Satyug and Sri Ram, Sri Sita are the titles for Raja and Rani of Tretayug. Do you agree with me on this point?

For example my surname is choudhury and the surname is continuing from my grand-father only. It was not the title of my great-grand father. The title was given by the local king as the chief my village at that time. Similarly the surname / title “choudhury” can be found in many states. But the name of my body is Atulya. My father’s name is Naresh and my grand father’s name is Brindavan. But all the three names, the surname is choudhury. I cannot say that my name is choudhury.

31) Difficult to agree. Because classification in heaven and hell do not tally fully.

In this world, some people's name have three or even more parts**,
---name of self
---father's name.
---Surname,
---and sometimes family name too,
----some have name of the place too],

Some people's surname reflects name of their caste, but not of others.

Of the above parts, some may have/keep two parts, some three parts, some four, as per their interest/tradition.

For example - M K Gandhi. M =Mohandas (name of self), K = Karamchand (name of father) , G = Gandhi (surname).

--And, in some cases, name of bride changes after marriage.
--And, in many cases, surname of both husband and wife would be same - say Choudhri, Singh, Bhat, Poojari, etc.

---------But, here, at any point of time, there is only one part in the name (or we do not know all the parts. Baba is yet to reveal**). Krishna(before marriage), Narayan(after Marriage). If we believe Narayan is the surname, then is the child fit for the surname only after marriage?

** - But, I believe in heaven, there may not be so many parts. It will not be so complicate there. So- you could be right, since the same name continues - throughout the age. But, I can say that also as just a POSSIBILITY only at present.

Similarly there must be different name for the son of Sri Narayan the 1st. The mother Sri Laxmi, should not call her son by the name of her husband.

32) Obviously her son would definitely get the name of her husband (Narayan II/next), when the son marries, is it not? Then?
And what should be the name the daughter? There shall be 8 gaddi (kingdom) from the beginning of Satyug. So do you think all the kings shall give the same name to their children?

33) If all the 8 gaddis can have same name LN, why not even during their childhoods?

As per your thinking the 2nd Sri Krishna should marry with 2nd Sri Radha. But who shall be the 2nd Sri Radha. His sister’s name shall be sri Radha.
So it is not at all possible that all the prince and princess of Satyug would be named as Sri Krishna and Sri Radha.

34) No. Second (or any) Sri krishna and second Sri Radha would be of different Kingdoms, not children on same parents. Baba has already said- Krishna and radha would be from different Kingdoms/parents.
---------------
35) To say- "Every male child of every LN would be named as Krishna" is a little bit awkward.
But, I have already expressed my doubt regarding - what would be names of sister of Krishna as well as brother of Radha. We are yet to know about it.

36) But, Baba has said- Krishna is more praiseworthy than Narayan because he is child.
So- if first prince only gets the name Krishna, and the rest princes in Golden Age have different names, then what about yaadgaars/memorials of other princes/princess? These questions arise.

So- until Baba reveals , it is difficult to know these things.
Murli Pt:- Gambheerataa se full marks jamaa hota hai. Mamma toh gambheerataa kee devi thi. = The virtue seriousness gives full marks. Mamma was a deity of seriousness.


Posts: 142
Link with BKs: BK
Om Shanti
My dear divine Brother mbbhatji,

You have logic / explanations to your points / thoughts and you have explanations / logic to discard my logic.

My logic may be wrong / not acceptable for you but I am in doubt whether you have understood my point of view. So I am writing my point of view again. Just reply in Agreed / Not agreed. Please do not reply with “I doubt / there is possibility / it may be both”. The answer should be based on your understanding of knowledge till date. It may be right / wrong. You are my elder brother in knowledge. You have written so much of your churning for which I can not think of. Whenever I do not understand any point I remember you for explanation. But I am never in doubt about my teacher’s versions. I never say that sometime Baba says this and sometime Baba says the opposite. As per my understanding my teacher never says like that. Since our loving Baba uses same word in different context with different meaning, we do not understood properly. That’s why brothers and sisters says in that way. Any way let us continue. Let me put my view point again for your answer.

1. The soul of 1st Sri Ram does not take birth in the family of Sri Laxmi & Sri Narayan of Delhi (Capital of Bharat). It can never be a possibility that the child of last Sri Narayan would be simply named as Sri Ram. Agreed / Not Agreed

2. No murli says Sri Krishna 1st, 2nd 3rd or Sri Radha 1st 2nd 3rd . Our supreme teacher has not taught us that the son of any Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan is named as Sri Krishna or daughter is named as Sri Radha. Agreed / Not Agreed

3. Suryavansh starts from the coronation day of 1st Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan not from the birth of Sri Krishna. Similarly Chandravansa starts from the coronation day of 1st Sri sita and Sri Ram not from the birth of the soul of 1st Sri Ram (body name not known) Agreed / Not agreed

4. Sri Sita and Sri Ram are titles of Kings of Treta Yug and Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are the titles of Maharaja and Maharani of Satyug Agreed / Not Agreed

5. There is difference in title and surname. To explain my viewpoint in the earlier post let me quote the same example. Now my surname is choudhury. But the same was the title for my grand father given by the local king before independence as the chief of my village. Similarly Sri Narayan is the title for the Maharaja of Satyug and Sri Ram is the title for Raja of Tretayug. Agreed / Not Agreed
I feel there is something missing in your understanding to understand my view point in every point. So to quote again on the point of Chandra Gupt Maury was to be “related” to Nand Family but he overthrew the Nand dynasts and established Maury dynasty does not support the point that the possibility of the child of last LN himself to be just renamed as Ram, because the ward related / relative is quite different in this context of discussion “vansavali”/ dynasty. Only son and grandson are said to be in one vansavali / dynasty. Now agreed / Still Not agreed on the point example of Maury dynasty.

6. As far as the 1st, 2nd, 3rd Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are concerned they are for the titles for the maharaja and maharani of Capital Delhi. But I do not know exactly about the titles for the other 7 gaddis / king family. Whether they are also maharaja and maharani? If you know please write. But as per my understanding of knowledge there shall be many raja / rani in Satyug. So why not Raja Ram ( in his body name) in Satyug? Agreed / Not agreed.

7. Coronation of any Raja / Maharaja can not take place before marriage in Satyug and Tretayug as a tradition and so there must be presence of 1st Sri Sita along with 1st Sri Ram while coronation. Agreed / Not Agreed

8. You have again quoted that the son of 1st Sri Laxmi shall be named as Sri Narayan, the name of her husband. But my point of view is completely different. I am trying to say firmly that Sri Narayan is not a bodily name, but the name of title / designation like president of india / any country. So it does not matter when her son to be the 2nd Sri Narayan means 2nd Maharaja of Bharat. I understand that Sri Laxmi can not forget her own name to be Sri Radha being Sri Laxmi (maharani) and similarly she can not forget the name of her husband Sri Krishna though all the members of family and the subjects shall know Sri Krishna as Sri Narayan and so it is not practicable to give the same name SriKrishna to her 1st son. It was only a point of thought. Not a firm proof for the discussion. There is nothing to be agreed or not agreed but I wanted to explain my earlier view point.

9. In your point no. 33 :- If all the 8 gaddis can have same name LN, why not even during their childhoods?
Again I am to express my same view point which I think you have not understood that there must be different bodily name of all the maharaja and maharani of 8 gaddis but they are known to be the Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan for their subjects. Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are the name of the post / position not the name of individual. Agreed / Not agreed

Finally I want to know that which murli points make you to think that the names of all prince and princess shall be Sri Krishna and Sri Radha. Though you write that you are not sure about it, still you are giving explanations and logics for the possibility. So please put the murli points which made you to think in this direction as a possibility.

One question for my knowledge, you have put the murli point for the soul of Sri Ram to be in Satyug. I have no doubt about it because unless the soul to take birth in Satyug and brought up from childhood to marriage, how he can be the 1st king of Chandravans / Tretayug. I can not think of about the soul to take birth from the starting of Satyug or after some hundred years. What is your opinion about when the soul of 1st Sri Ram should take birth?

And for the murli point of service (bhari dhoeng), do you think that the soul of Sri Ram shall take birth as Das / Dasi and serve to Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan? I do not think so. The words of our sweetest Baba must be to encourage we children to study more or to make more effort. I don’t think that the soul of Sri Ram shall be a servant to any Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan, but as per my understanding the soul of 1st Sri Ram can never take birth in the family of Das Dasi, but the soul shall take birth in royal family not less than that. As our Baba has said higher position in subject is Sahukar, similarly there must be other royal family in the end of Satyug and the soul of Sri Ram should take birth in that family. Please put your point of view.

Regards
BK Atulya


Posts: 2493
Link with BKs: BK
acc01775 wrote:
Just reply in Agreed / Not agreed. Please do not reply with “I doubt / there is possibility / it may be both”.

37)Not possible for every question, as already expressed.

2. No murli says Sri Krishna 1st, 2nd 3rd or Sri Radha 1st 2nd 3rd . Our supreme teacher has not taught us that the son of any Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan is named as Sri Krishna or daughter is named as Sri Radha. Agreed / Not Agreed

38a) Even though in murli, Baba has not said first Krishna, second Krishna, baba's comparison of saying Edward !st, Edward 2nd does not tally fully/ditto. Because that mu point says- 8 gaddi chalti hai. But, in case of Edward, it is generation. But, if we take generation, it is not 8. It is more- 15/16 as you have already calculated. So, I have assumed so as a possibility.

Also- if you think there is only one RK, and many LN, Baba should have said RK become first LN, is it not? So, if we can take it for granted here, why not we take the same for RK too ?

Few more examples-

38b) SM 12-5-82(3):- Ab RK aur LN ki hai khit khit. Krishn ko dwapar may LN ko Satyug may dikhaate hain. Is bhool ko samjhaanaa padey. LN KE NEECHE SRI RK KA BHI DENAA PADEY. TO SAMHJHE YAHI PHIR LN BANTE HAIN. Krishn to sabko bahut pyaaraa lagtaa hai. Parantu unhon ko yah pataa hee nahin ki yah hee Narayan bantaa hai. Ab yah yukti se kaise dikhaave? Tumhaaraa yah golaa to bahut badaa honaa chahiye. Ekdum chath jitnaa ho. Jismey LN ka bhi chitr ho, Krishn ka bhi ho. Badi cheez manushy achchee reeti dekh saktey hain. -13- [chitr, RK, service, pbks]

SM 19-2-76(1):- Yahi Bharat hai jismey behad ka sukh thaa. YAH LN ka raajy thaa. YAH LN chotey pan may RK hain. Phir swayamvar baad LN naam padtaa hai. Is Bharat may 5000 varsh pahley Devi Devtaavon kaa raajy thaa. Sivaaye LN ke koyi kaa raajy nahin thaa. Koyi khand nahin. -72


Baba says- "in the picture of LN, there should also be picture of RK". Do you think this applies to only first LN, and not to others? I believe logically it applies to other LN too.

38c) SM 11-3-10(3):- Gyan se bhi jaante hain ki hum beggar to prince ban rahe hain. HUMAARI AIM OBJECT HI RADHE KRISHN BAN_NE KI HAI. LN NAHIN, RADHE KRISHN. Kyonki poorey 5000 varsh to inkey hi kahenge. LN ke toh phir bhi 20- 25 varsh kum ho jaate hain. Isliye Krishn ki mahimaa jaasti hai. Yah kisko pataa nahin ki Radhe Krishn hi phir so LN bante hain. –[RK, WOT]

= From knowledge, we know that we become beggar to prince. Our aim object is to become Radha Krishna(RK) and not Lakshmi Narayan. Because full 5000 yrs is of RK. There is shortage of 20 to 25 yrs of LN. Hence praise for Krishn is more. Nobody knows this that RK themselves become LN.

In this murli point, there is room to argue both sides. This is an interesting murli point. Many times, Baba says- aim is to become nar se narayan. Even while giving knowledge, we all speak the word- "Nar se Narayan". But, here Baba says- aim is to become RK, and not LN.
Now- Is there any other route to become LN without passing through RK? Definitely for the first LN (who take full 5000 yrs) it is through RK only, is it not? Then why should Baba say so?

But, if we believe this applies to all the FIRST GENERATION of the 8 LNs (if we believe there would be 8 sets of LN at any time), then it implies all the 8 LNs would have the same name RK during their childhood, is it not?

Or, do you think Baba is talking about only the one/main set of LN (B Baba and Mamma) here? That seat is already fixed. Then how can anyone keep aim to become RK then? Then why should Baba speak to others to keep that aim? (become RK)? Or do you think Baba is not saying this to others, but only to B Baba and mamma (even when their rank is already fixed)? - :?

3. Suryavansh starts from the coronation day of 1st Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan not from the birth of Sri Krishna. Similarly Chandravansa starts from the coronation day of 1st Sri sita and Sri Ram not from the birth of the soul of 1st Sri Ram (body name not known) Agreed / Not agreed

39) Agreed.

4. Sri Sita and Sri Ram are titles of Kings of Treta Yug and Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are the titles of Maharaja and Maharani of Satyug Agreed / Not Agreed

40) Agreed. But, regarding titles, Baba has said- even in Satyug, there would be both many Maharaja as well as Rajas. [said in Post No. 42 and 43 of the other topic/link].
So, I believe even in Silver Age, there would be both many MahaRajas as well as Rajas. Even in Iron Age, some Kings have title Maharajas. So, even in Silver Age, there can be title Maharaja too. [But, of course, the Maharaja of Silver Age would be lesser than even the Raja of Golden Age].

5. There is difference in title and surname. To explain my viewpoint in the earlier post let me quote the same example. Now my surname is choudhury. But the same was the title for my grand father given by the local king before independence as the chief of my village. Similarly Sri Narayan is the title for the Maharaja of Satyug and Sri Ram is the title for Raja of Tretayug. Agreed / Not Agreed

41) Agreed. But, there would be both Maharajas as well as Rajas, as already said in 40). So, still there are other things to know.

I feel there is something missing in your understanding to understand my view point in every point. So to quote again on the point of Chandra Gupt Maury was to be “related” to Nand Family but he overthrew the Nand dynasty and established Maury dynasty does not support the point that the possibility of the child of last LN himself to be just renamed as Ram, because the word related / relative is quite different in this context of discussion “vansavali”/ dynasty. Only son and grandson are said to be in one vansavali / dynasty. Now agreed / Still Not agreed on the point example of Maury dynasty.

42) But, if CG Maurya he is a relative of Nanda, then it definitely supports my view point. Because son is also a relative. But, I agree my argument is weak there.
[So, if you like to take only the other/vansavali context, then you are right. I agree].

6. As far as the 1st, 2nd, 3rd Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are concerned they are for the titles for the maharaja and maharani of Capital Delhi. But I do not know exactly about the titles for the other 7 gaddis / king family. Whether they are also maharaja and maharani? If you know please write. But as per my understanding of knowledge there shall be many raja / rani in Satyug. So why not Raja Ram ( in his body name) in Satyug? Agreed / Not agreed.

43) I believe some would be Maharaj, some maharaj, and one Vishw maharaj.
From the murli point, it almost implies- the souls of Ram and Sita will play role in G Age for at least few births. (see next post)
7. Coronation of any Raja / Maharaja can not take place before marriage in Satyug and Tretayug as a tradition and so there must be presence of 1st Sri Sita along with 1st Sri Ram while coronation. Agreed / Not Agreed

44) Agreed.

8. You have again quoted that the son of 1st Sri Laxmi shall be named as Sri Narayan, the name of her husband. But my point of view is completely different. ..........

45) Now, I got your view point. I had failed to understand that. Thank you.
Last edited by mbbhat on Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:15 am, edited 2 times in total.
Murli Pt:- Gambheerataa se full marks jamaa hota hai. Mamma toh gambheerataa kee devi thi. = The virtue seriousness gives full marks. Mamma was a deity of seriousness.


Posts: 2493
Link with BKs: BK
9. In your point no. 33 :- If all the 8 gaddis can have same name LN, why not even during their childhoods?
Again I am to express my same view point which I think you have not understood that there must be different bodily name of all the maharaja and maharani of 8 gaddis but they are known to be the Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan for their subjects. Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are the name of the post / position not the name of individual. Agreed / Not agreed

46) In democracy, SEAT/post has more value than the person, and in Kingdom, the person/King has more value than the seat. In heaven, it is Kingdom.

LN are worshipped. Just seat would not be worshipped. So LN cannot be name of just seat/position. But here it is the case of vamshavali. So it is name of the vamshavali/dynasty. So, what you had said is right, because it has conveys the same meaning.

Finally I want to know that which murli points make you to think that the names of all prince and princess shall be Sri Krishna and Sri Radha. Though you write that you are not sure about it, still you are giving explanations and logics for the possibility. So please put the murli points which made you to think in this direction as a possibility.

47) There are no direct murli points, but I have given some examples - see post No. 129 in the other link, and also point no. 38 above. [Also- see the point No. 50 below. When it is difficult to realize them, I have taken that case also a possibility.

One question for my knowledge, you have put the murli point for the soul of Sri Ram to be in Satyug. I have no doubt about it because unless the soul to take birth in Satyug and brought up from childhood to marriage, how he can be the 1st king of Chandravans / Tretayug. I can not think of about the soul to take birth from the starting of Satyug or after some hundred years. What is your opinion about when the soul of 1st Sri Ram should take birth?

48) I believe Ram and Sita souls will take at least few births in G Age. say at least 5 to 6. Else, Baba would not have said so (bhari dhoyenge). They will be subordinates to LN in G Age. If not servants, say at some other positions. See next point.

And for the murli point of service (bhari dhoeng), do you think that the soul of Sri Ram shall take birth as Das / Dasi and serve to Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan? I do not think so. The words of our sweetest Baba must be to encourage we children to study more or to make more effort. I don’t think that the soul of Sri Ram shall be a servant to any Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan, but as per my understanding the soul of 1st Sri Ram can never take birth in the family of Das Dasi, but the soul shall take birth in royal family not less than that. As our Baba has said higher position in subject is Sahukar, similarly there must be other royal family in the end of Satyug and the soul of Sri Ram should take birth in that family. Please put your point of view.

49) The murli points is already given in Post No. 172- Murli Point No. 02) I repeat here-

2)SM 5-3-75(3):- Baap kahte hain is gyaan say tumko bahut sukh milega. Isliye achchee reeti padhkar paas ho jaavo. Ram Sita to naapaas huye na. Isliye tretaa may raajy mila. Pahle padhe huye aage bhari dhoyenge. Daas Daasiyaan banenge. Purusharth kar full paas honaa chaahiye.

= Father says, you will get a lot of happiness from this knowledge. So study well and get passed. Ram and Sita failed is it not? Hence (they) got Kingdom in Silver Age. First they will serve those who had studied well, will become servants. One should put effort to pass fully.

50) See another difficulty here. Given in Post No. 194 (mu point 1 and 5) in the other link.. I am reproducing here.

1)SM 12-11-82(2):- Baap kahte hain main sangam par rajayog sikhaataa hun. Jo pass hote hain vah sooryavamshi bante hain. Jo fail hote hain vah chandravamshi bante hain. SOORYAVAMSHI KI PRAJAA SOORYAVAMSHI MAY JAAYEGI. CHANDRAVAMSHI KI PRAJA CHANDRAVAMSHI MAY JAAYEGI. Tum bachchon ki buddhi may saare chakr kaa gyaan hai. -84- [sv-cv]

= Father says, I teach rajayog during Conf. Age. Those who pass, will go to Sun Dynasty. Those who fail will go to Moon Dynasty. Citizens of Sun Dynasty will go to Sun Dynasty. Citizens of Moon Dynasty go to Moon Dynasty.

As per this murli point, all the citizens of G Age fall in SV (Suryavamshi). So, even Ram and Sita would fall into that category- even if he takes birth in the end of G Age. Because for at least the small period (till his coronation become he would be a citizen in Kingdom of SV). But if we accept RS play at least few births in G Age (which has the highest probability as murli point put above), we will have to accept that R and S fall into the category of SV praja.

5)SM 25-2-76(2,3):- Golden age (may missing) they. Phir Silver Age may aaye. Do kala kum huyi. Isliye naam pada hai CV. Kyonki naapaas hote hain. YAH BHI PAATHSHALA HAI. 33 MARKS SE JO NEECHE HOTE HAIN VAH FAIL HO JATE HAIN. RAMSITA AUR UNKI DYNASTY SAMPOORN NAHIN BANI. ISLIYE SOORYAVAMSHI BAN NA SAKE. NAAPAS TO KOYI HONGE NA. KYONKI IMTIHAAN BHI BAHUT BADA HAI. {= SM 4-3-81(2, 3) }

= ......Those who get lesser than 33 marks are failures. The dynasty of Ram and Sita could not become complete. Hence could not come into Sun Dynasty. Someone will fail, is it not. Because the exam is very tough..........

But, here, Baba says- R and S could not come in Sun Dynasty. So, difficult to explain.

But we can find some satisfactory explanation. In one context Baba may be saying in general, and in the other context for royal families. But we can only assume/guess the things here on possibilities.
--------------------------
51) But, I have already expressed my inability to understand a murli point at the end of the Post No. 172 and 194.
[See Baba says those who get 33 marks come in top 9 lakh souls, and those who become prince-princess by the end of Silver Age their number is 16108.

So- obviously, 16108 would be better than 9 lakh souls, is it not? Then why does Baba say Ram and Sita get lesser than 33 marks? I have not been able to understand this ].

If you have explanation, kindly put. Let us see in drama.
Murli Pt:- Gambheerataa se full marks jamaa hota hai. Mamma toh gambheerataa kee devi thi. = The virtue seriousness gives full marks. Mamma was a deity of seriousness.


Posts: 142
Link with BKs: BK
Om Shanti
My dear divine Brother mbbhatji,

Thanks for your reply and the related murli points.

I am happy that you have understood my point of view and agreed to my Point No-4 that
Sri Sita and Sri Ram are titles of Kings of Treta Yug and Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are the titles of Maharaja and Maharani of Satyug.


Since Sri Narayan and Sri Laxmi are the name of TITLES, naturally there shall be many LN and we know the number to be 108.

You are not agreed to my Point No-2 that
No murli says Sri Krishna 1st, 2nd 3rd or Sri Radha 1st 2nd 3rd . Our supreme teacher has not taught us that the son of any Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan is named as Sri Krishna or daughter is named as Sri Radha.


You have posted 3 murli points and your understanding for those murli points to be many Sri Krishna and Sri Radha too.

I want to put some questions to accept your point of view.

Q1. Since Sri Krishna and Sri Radha are the names from childhood, must be named by their parents and they are the names of body. Not the name of any TITLE. Agreed / Not agreed?

Q2. To be clear about your point of view, I repeat the question as “Do you think Sri Krishna and Sri Radaha are name of TITLES ? YES / NO

Q3. If you agree with me that Sri Krishna and Sri Radha are bodily name, then only one possibility remains that every Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan are to name their children as Sri Krishna and Sri Radha to have many Sri Krishna and Sri Radha in Satyug. It is very difficult to be acceptable to me. But do you think it will be like this only? Or any other acceptable possibility to have many Sri Krishna and Sri Radha?

Q4. Not only the children of 8 gaddis / dynasty of satyug, but also it apply to initial 16 souls to be 8 jodi (couple). So do you think that there are 8 Sri Krishna and 8 Sri Radha from the beginning of Satyug? Again it is very difficult to be acceptable to me. Anyway, please put your opinion.

For your question :-
if you think there is only one RK, and many LN, Baba should have said RK become first LN, is it not?

My answer: - I think only one RK and many LN. Our sweet Baba says “Sri Radha and Sri Krishna become Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan. As per my understanding this line is complete to give understanding of the point of knowledge. Since Sri Krishna and Sri Radha are the 1st prince and princess of Satyug, It is understood that they shall become 1st LN. It is not required for our sweet Baba to say RK become 1st LN.

My understanding for the quoted murli points are as follows:-

38b) SM 12-5-82(3):- Ab RK aur LN ki hai khit khit. Krishn ko dwapar may LN ko Satyug may dikhaate hain. Is bhool ko samjhaanaa padey. LN KE NEECHE SRI RK KA BHI DENAA PADEY. TO SAMHJHE YAHI PHIR LN BANTE HAIN. Krishn to sabko bahut pyaaraa lagtaa hai. Parantu unhon ko yah pataa hee nahin ki yah hee Narayan bantaa hai. Ab yah yukti se kaise dikhaave? Tumhaaraa yah golaa to bahut badaa honaa chahiye. Ekdum chath jitnaa ho. Jismey LN ka bhi chitr ho, Krishn ka bhi ho. Badi cheez manushy achchee reeti dekh saktey hain. -13- [chitr, RK, service, pbks

The above murli point does not indicate at any point to have many RK. Our sweet Baba has said to put the photos of Sri radha and Sri Krishna below the photo of Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan in a big picture of GOLA (World Drama / Shristi Chakra) to make understand that Sri Krishna does not come in Dwapar. I have not seen the service picture of PBKs.

SM 19-2-76(1):- Yahi Bharat hai jismey behad ka sukh thaa. YAH LN ka raajy thaa. YAH LN chotey pan may RK hain. Phir swayamvar baad LN naam padtaa hai. Is Bharat may 5000 varsh pahley Devi Devtaavon kaa raajy thaa. Sivaaye LN ke koyi kaa raajy nahin thaa. Koyi khand nahin. -72

Our sweet Baba is telling story of Bharat before 5000 years, that means the story of 1st LN and they were RK. I do not find any relation for many Sri Krishna and Sri Radha.

Brother mbhatt writes Baba says-
"in the picture of LN, there should also be picture of RK". Do you think this applies to only first LN, and not to others? I believe logically it applies to other LN too.


I do not think so. Our ocean of knowledge Baba has said the point to have picture of RK below the picture of LN in GOLA to show that Sri Krishna comes in Satyug not in dwapar.

38c) SM 11-3-10(3):- Gyan se bhi jaante hain ki hum beggar to prince ban rahe hain. HUMAARI AIM OBJECT HI RADHE KRISHN BAN_NE KI HAI. LN NAHIN, RADHE KRISHN. Kyonki poorey 5000 varsh to inkey hi kahenge. LN ke toh phir bhi 20- 25 varsh kum ho jaate hain. Isliye Krishn ki mahimaa jaasti hai. Yah kisko pataa nahin ki Radhe Krishn hi phir so LN bante hain. –[RK, WOT]

As I understand this limited portion of murli point our sweet Baba emphasises the point to take birth from the very beginning along with Sri Krishna not even 20-25 years less. Hence Baba says aim should be to RK not LN. I do not think the meaning of this murli point to have many RK in Satyug. Or the intention of our sweet teacher to say that whoever takes birth along with Sri Krishna shall be named as Sri Krishna.

You have analysed the above murli point in many ways and asked many questions to comply many RK. But I understand my sweet teacher’s only intention to say this murli point to aim for RK means to take birth along with RK, not after 20-25 years. I do not have the full murli to understand any other intention. But I do not agree with your logic to have more RK from this murli point. It is not a minor point of discussion as far as the original history of Bharat is concerned. If that would be the fact, I think our sweet Baba would have told it in more clear manner, not in this way.

Another way to be clear, our sweet Baba has said to get clear understanding of knowledge, we may ask to our teacher (centre in charge). I shall request you to ask any other BK Sister. Though we are discussing in an open forum, still I feel there are very limited sisters and brothers, who take interest to read, understand and post opinion on the issue.

Anyway irrespective of difference in opinion, I respect my elder brother for so much of churning, and hope for clearing the point by our most loving BAPDADA.

Regards
BK Atulya


Posts: 2493
Link with BKs: BK
Q1. Since Sri Krishna and Sri Radha are the names from childhood, must be named by their parents and they are the names of body. Not the name of any TITLE. Agreed / Not agreed?

52) In one way, it can also be name of title- "Rajkumar/prince" - if we take prince/princess as title.
Baba usually says- name of childhood, and name after marriage/coronation.
Baba does not say LN are name of title and RK are names of body. Baba says- RK are names during childhood and LN are names after coronation.
But, this argument is weak, so I have to agree with you more than I agree with myself.

53) BTW- Baba has not said anything about childhood names of Ram and Sita- whether they would be same or different. But, logically, it seems they would be different. So, your point of views are right and far better than mine.
The above murli point does not indicate at any point to have many RK. Our sweet Baba has said to put the photos of Sri radha and Sri Krishna below the photo of Sri Laxmi and Sri Narayan in a big picture of GOLA (World Drama / Shristi Chakra) to make understand that Sri Krishna does not come in Dwapar.

54) That also is a valid point. So, I have to step back for other questions also. Thanks to Baba and divine brother for these points.

You have analysed the above murli point in many ways and asked many questions to comply many RK. But I understand my sweet teacher’s only intention to say this murli point to aim for RK means to take birth along with RK, not after 20-25 years. I do not have the full murli to understand any other intention. But I do not agree with your logic to have more RK from this murli point. It is not a minor point of discussion as far as the original history of Bharat is concerned. If that would be the fact, I think our sweet Baba would have told it in more clear manner, not in this way.

55) That is also good point. But, I am yet to know the full significance.
But, I believe even here, it is not in clear/direct manner. And, points no. of 49, 50, 51- do you think they are clear to understand?

There are lots of murli points which are not clear. At what age do RK become LN? For example - post No. 95 - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1167&start=130#p12324
[Most beloved Baba is highest authority. He can speak in anyway, and he knows that these things are minor, not necessary to put effort, so in his dance of knowledge, he may say any/many things/ways.

[Now- when Baba has said differently - in the above post- sometimes as "15 to 20 yrs", sometimes as "20- 25 years", it also gives room to assume possibilities of more sets of Radha in G Age.
The life span during beginning would be higher, so the initial RK would take 20 to 25 years to become LN, later would take lesser. There is room for such thoughts to arise*].

56) Baba uses the word - Krishnpuri. There are also murli points which say- Krishnpuri kaho, vaa Vishnupuri kaho, baath ek hee hai. I think it is said for whole of G Age. So, name krishna is attached to whole of G Age, not just to first prince. But, of course, it can also be argued like- Brahma is name of just one person,
but connected to whole of humanity
So, finally your view points may be right.

*57) But, I still like to keep the case in the transfer of Kingdom from SV to CV as a possibility, because already given the reasons and also the points 50 and 51. So, sometimes I like to write different possibilities with highest probabilities.
[See- even though the same RK become LN, sometimes Baba discriminates them more than necessary. So, I believe there is also possibility that the children of the last LN could be just named as RS. Of course, the probability is much lesser. We will know only later. ]

If we see the age of B baba during ShivBaba's entrance, there is no clarity. You may refer to Post No. 84 and 85 in the other topic. So, it/murli is also dance of Shivbaba, not just like a pure lecture.

58) Regarding point No. 49. Do you at least believe now that Ram and Sita would play role of servants in Golden Age? Or is there any different meaning for it like above?
And, do you believe soul of Ram comes in mala of 16108 still gets lesser than 33 marks?
--------------
59)
The mother should not call her son by the name of her husband.

Just a thought -
When RK become couple LN, the husband Narayan is no longer Krishna. That name vanishes for him. So it is not a big issue.

60) But, this is just churning. I am not sure about how actually it would be.
Murli Pt:- Gambheerataa se full marks jamaa hota hai. Mamma toh gambheerataa kee devi thi. = The virtue seriousness gives full marks. Mamma was a deity of seriousness.

Previous

Return to Murli Points Discussion