Confusing Answers from AIVV.

An open forum for all ex-BKs, BKs, PBKs, ex-PBKs, Vishnu Party and ALL other Splinter Groups to post their queries to, and debate with, any member of any group congenially.
User avatar
shivsena
ex-PBK
Posts: 4339
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To find out the absolute Truth.
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Confusing Answers from AIVV.

Post by shivsena » 17 Jun 2009

arjun wrote: As per the Advanced Knowledge, the living (chaitanya) Delhi is Jagdamba (World Mother). Surrounding (gheraoing) her means giving her the yogdaan/sakaash from everywhere. This does not mean remembering her. If we remember of give the water of love to the seed of the human tree, then it will automatically reach the soul playing the part of living Delhi.
Dear arjun Bhai.

So according to you living Delhi is jagdamba(who has left the Yagya) and living Bharat is Ram's soul (Virendra Dev Dixit) and both are living seperately. In the geographical Bharat, Delhi has always remained as the capital(representative of Bharat) and has never been seperated from Bharat. So i feel that chaitanya Bharat and chaitanya Delhi are same ie. Krishna's soul (jo Delhi ki kahani so Bharat ke 84 janam ki kahani).

Also i do not understand why should children give sakaash to living Delhi(jagdamba); are they giving yogdaan to call her back ??? ... Jagdamba is called asur-sangarni and is very powerful soul and so i see no sense in children(who are weaker in all respects) giving yogdaan to her. Again this is advance knowledge teaching and i have never read in any Murli to give yogdaan to Maa jagdamba. If you can quote any Murli point regarding this, then we can believe that children have to give yogdaan to Maa.

shivsena.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Another confusing answer.

Post by sachkhand » 11 Jul 2009

AUM Shanti.
In the post, Q&A: PBK Murli discussions, page 20, on 29 June,
arjun wrote:Disc. 38a
Date:13-9-05 ; Hospet
Part - 4

...
The Brother: To take out the nectar, the devils had put as much effort as the deities had.
Baba - Yes, but they caught the mouth. They caught the mouth of the snake.
The Brother: Baba, someone... ...
Baba - First, listen... (the devils) caught the mouth of the snake and (the deities) caught the tail of the snake; which means they followed the (direction) of God. And the devils asked, "Why did you say so? Why did God say so? It shouldn’t be like this, it shouldn’t be like that!" They used their intellect more... , is it good to become Vishnu or is it good to become Ravan? Is it good to become several heads or is it good to become several hands (bhuja) like Vishnu. ‘Bhuja’ means helper.
The Brother: This is the point which I cannot digest...
Baba - Why?
The Brother: If a child sits on the Father’s dil-takht (heart-throne) then the child is called sapoot (good and dutiful), he becomes a dutiful child of the Father. But similarly, if the child sits on the Father’s intellect, then he is called a Bhasmaasur . Why is it so?
Baba - (Laughing) your intellect has become upside down. To sit on the Father’s intellect means to control the Father’s intellect.
My question to PBKs is: what did Virendra Dev Dixit do when he joined BKs? Did he become like Vishnu or did he act as Ravan? If Virendra Dev Dixit was confirmed that he is the practical part of ShivBaba, he should have openly said it so, instead of shooting of many questions (heads)of his towards the BKs.
Is he not trying to control the Father's intellect by interpretting even the Avyakt Vanis in his own way?
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11621
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups.
Location: India

Re: Confusing Answers from AIVV.

Post by arjun » 13 Jul 2009

sachkhand wrote:what did Veerendra Dev Dixit do when he joined BKs? Did he become like Vishnu or did he act as Ravan?
Asking questions is not wrong, but arguing simply for the sake of arguement and that too in an angry mood is not good. And that is what the concerned brother (Raghunath Bhai) was doing in Disc.CD-38. I remember seeing the CD long ago. He was talking to ShivBaba (through Baba Virendra Dev Dixit) angrily in the CD. The above Disc.CD-38 has been uploaded on the website www.PBKs.info and can bee downloaded by anyone.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Confusing Answers from AIVV.

Post by sachkhand » 13 Jul 2009

AUM Shanti.
arjun wrote: Asking questions is not wrong, but arguing simply for the sake of arguement and that too in an angry mood is not good. And that is what the concerned Brother (Raghunath Bhai) was doing in Disc.CD-38. I remember seeing the CD long ago.
Dear Arjun,
Although I have not seen the VCD I accept what you said.
But, the example of devils and deities given there is not the first instance of it. This example is given long back by Virendra Dev Dixit in the advance knowledge. Your answer is misleading. I am not talking of that particular VCD. I am talking of that example given by Virendra Dev Dixit. And while giving that example, Virendra Dev Dixit has nowhere said about the manners. He has talked about the difference between devils and deities. He has said nothing about how they ask questions or in what manner they ask question. He has bluntly said that those who raise the heads of doubts and ask questions are like Ravan and those who follow the directions are like Vishnu.
So your answer is not correct and is misleading, although it is a clever answer.
Thanks.
Sanjeev.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Virendra Dev Dixit finally got enlightened?

Post by sachkhand » 22 Feb 2010

From the post:- Re: Extracts of PBK Murlis - as narrated to the PBKs, page 43; by arjun on 29 Jan 2010

VCD* No.560, Audio Cass. No.1046,
Dated 25.11.06 at Nellore GP
Clarification of Murli dated 31.05.67
Part - IV
The Tagore’s Gita says something, the Madhvacharya’s Gita says something else and the Shankaracharya’s Gita says something else. All the explanations conflict with each other. The Shankaracharya’s Gita says: ‘Eko Brahm dutiyo nasti’ there is only one soul and all are the forms of that One. Madhvacharya’s Gita says: there are many souls and all are indestructible, the Supreme Soul is different. Look how much difference keeps taking place. The world degrades to the extent to which duality spreads. Many explanations will certainly be false. God the Father comes and gives one explanation, one truth. What is the truth? If it is said fundamentally [muul ruup men], it is: I am a soul, a point of light and only one Father is mine, there is no one else in this world (for me). All are frauds. He too is a point of light. If you assimilated knowledge in the essence form then there is no need of going into the details later. It is such a simple thing. Human gurus complicate what is simple. And God the Father makes the difficult easy. Om Shanti.
Why for did this same Virendra Dev Dixit made such a simple thing into such a complex so called Advance Knowledge? Is he just another human guru, who has understood his mistake after about thirty years (from 1976 to 2006)?
Has he really?? Or just trying to start another long innings of frauds.

Better late than never, it is good if atleast now Virendra Dev Dixit realises the Truth!?
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Are PBKs confused/ Tired of Answering/ Do not know/ ...?

Post by sachkhand » 26 Feb 2010

As the subject says, I would like to know whether PBKs are:
1) Tired of answering?
2) Think it as waste of time (if they think that the questions raised are silly)?
3) Are themselves confused by the questions raised in the forum and by the views expressed here.
4) Do not know answers to the questions raised.
5) Are not themselves 100% sure about their answers or about the explanations given by Virendra Dev Dixit.
6) Have 100% faith in Virendra Dev Dixit and are just waiting for the right time when Virendra Dev Dixit will give True knowledge (Sachhi Gita).
7) Think that The present Advance knowledge is True but they cannot expalin or interpret it correctly.
8) Busy and hence not getting time to answer.


I expect that the PBKs will clear my doubt.
Their answers may differ from person to person, but what is the official view? PBKs can even write their personal answers.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11621
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups.
Location: India

Re: Are PBKs confused/ Tired of Answering/ Do not know/ ...?

Post by arjun » 26 Feb 2010

Om Shanti. I have already announced on this forum that I will not discuss or debate with Shivsena Bhai, sachkhand Bhai and mbbhat Bhai. I have already given the reasons for the same in different threads. But at that time I did not have the Murli point which says that there is no need to debate with anyone. Now I have it. In fact I have already produced it in the BK Section long ago, but some members do not seem to have read it. I am reproducing the same for their kind information below:

766.

तुम्हें कोई से भी डिबेट करने की दरकार नहीं। देह सहित देह के सब धर्म त्याग अपने को आत्मा, अशरीरी समझना है। भल हमने शास्त्र आदि पढ़े हैं, परन्तु डिस्कस क्यों करें?“(ब्रह्माकुमारियों द्वारा प्रकाशित रिवाइज़्ड साकार मुरली दिनांक ०५.१२.०८, पृ. ३)

"Tumhein koi se bhi debate karney ki darkaar nahi. Deh sahit deh ke sab dharma tyaag apney ko aatma, ashareeri samajhnaa hai. Bhal hamney shaastra aadi padhey hain, parantu discuss kyon karein?" (Brahmakumariyon dwara prakaashit revised Sakar Murli, dinaank 05.12.08, pg 3)

You need not debate with anyone. Renounce all the religions of the body including the body and consider yourself to be a soul, bodiless. Although we have studied scriptures, etc., but why should we discuss?” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 05.12.08, pg 3 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)

But I will continue to present the point of view of PBKs wherever necessary even if the topic has been started by any of the above members and I am ready to discuss knowledge in a cordial atmosphere with any other member on this forum. All other PBKs are free to express their own views or the official view of the PBKs on this forum. I humbly expect that their decision should be independent of mine and not influenced by mine. They are best guided by their own wisdom or by Baba's Shrimat.

Regards,
On Godly Service,
Arjun

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Re: Are PBKs confused/ Tired of Answering/ Do not know/ ...?

Post by sachkhand » 27 Feb 2010

arjun wrote:Om Shanti. I have already announced on this forum that I will not discuss or debate with Shivsena Bhai, sachkhand Bhai and mbbhat Bhai. I have already given the reasons for the same in different threads.
I do not know on what basis this person has come to this conclusion, and what are his reasons for the same.
arjun wrote:But at that time I did not have the Murli point which says that there is no need to debate with anyone. Now I have it. In fact I have already produced it in the BK Section long ago, but some members do not seem to have read it.
The same is applicable to the BKs who are not willing to discuss or debate with any PBKs in any forums.
arjun wrote: "Tumhein koi se bhi debate karney ki darkaar nahi. Deh sahit deh ke sab dharma tyaag apney ko aatma, ashareeri samajhnaa hai. Bhal hamney shaastra aadi padhey hain, parantu discuss kyon karein?" (Brahmakumariyon dwara prakaashit revised Sakar Murli, dinaank 05.12.08, pg 3)

You need not debate with anyone. Renounce all the religions of the body including the body and consider yourself to be a soul, bodiless. Although we have studied scriptures, etc., but why should we discuss?” (Revised Sakar Murli dated 05.12.08, pg 3 published by BKs in Hindi, narrated by ShivBaba through Brahma Baba; translated by a PBK; the words within brackets in the English version have been added by the translator to clarify the meaning)
Better late than never, PBKs too have got the Murli point. It would have been much better if Virendra Dev Dixit had read it in 1970s.
arjun wrote:But I will continue to present the point of view of PBKs wherever necessary even if the topic has been started by any of the above members
Are you the spokesperson of PBKs or can we consider your views as official view of PBKs. Because sometimes you back down and say that it is your personal view.
arjun wrote: and I am ready to discuss knowledge in a cordial atmosphere with any other member on this forum.
Even I do not want a verbal fight or bad atmosphere. But if someone take sides just because someone supports PBKs in their opposition of BKs, what can be said about such persons.
arjun wrote: All other PBKs are free to express their own views or the official view of the PBKs on this forum. I humbly expect that their decision should be independent of mine and not influenced by mine.
And it is better if they mention whether it is their personal or official view.
arjun wrote: They are best guided by their own wisdom or by Baba's Shrimat.
Even BKs are best guided by their own wisdom or Baba's Shrimat which is in ShivBaba's Murlis and it is said in the Murlis that Murli is The Lathi of Baba's children.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

sachkhand
ex-PBK
Posts: 381
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Double Standards of Virendra Dev Dixit and AIVV.

Post by sachkhand » 20 Mar 2010

In the official web site of AIVV, http://www.PBKs.info/
we can see that the Murli classifications are not same for all. Or the knowledge given by them is not same for all.
People are classiffied into :
(1) General public,
(2) BKs,
(3) PBKs only,
(4) New PBKs.

These same people, complain about BKs that the organisation does not give the actual knowledge to the general public. And there are secrets, which are known only to the important BKs.

Now, can Virendra Dev Dixit and his followers tell the people, why they have classiffied God's children into four classes.

The so called religions of the world too does the same thing. Does the pope reveal what is written in the document which is kept in their vaults. It is said that the future of the Roman church has been written by a person (probably some earlier pope). He had a vision in which he saw the future. And it is also said that one of the next pope became unconscious when he read that document (others are prohibited to read). I am not saying that what they are doing is wrong. They have good intentions. They do not want to spread fear and chaos. Can they be blamed of hiding Truth?

God has come not to spread fear, but to make th souls aware of the coming days, and tell them the way to uplift themselves from the misery that is awaiting this world. Can anyone guarantee that he/she is not going to die if destruction of the vicious world does not happen? Including the presidents of the superpowers and the rich people listed in the forbes magazine. Every human being who is born is sure to die. But by the knowledge given by The Supreme Soul, death can be made into a transition from one stage to another in a peaceful and loving way. It is upto the world, what they wish. A painful, uncertain, sorrowful death or a peaceful transition filled with love in their hearts. Choice is left to every individual of this world.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Discussion on PBK Murlis

Post by Sach_Khand » 12 May 2010

arjun wrote:VCD* 813, Reeva (M.P.), Dt. 20.11.07, Mu. 23.2.68
Part - 5


....What does this prove? Whether the soul of Brahma and the other well known Brahmakumar Kumaris recognized the Father or not? They did not recognize Him. That is the reason that the Father Himself has to give His introduction. Neither does Brahma give the introduction of the Father, since he himself doesn’t know, nor do the so-called well known Brahmakumar-Kumaris give the introduction of the Father. They themselves do not know how they will give the introduction to others.
Has really the Father Himself has given His introduction in 1976 or later?
Which Father gave introduction? Prajapita (Virendra Dev Dixit according to AIVV) or Supreme Soul Shiv?
Is this Prajapita Sakar?
If yes then can he not speak to children?
If he speaks then has ever the so called Prajapita (Virendra Dev Dixit) told to any of his so called children that he is Prajapita?
If Shiv gives introduction, then has ever Shiv introduced Himself through Virendra Dev Dixit as The Father of all souls? Virendra Dev Dixit has said that he has not exeprienced Shiv in his body. That means he does not believe or have faith in it. But still, has ever Shiv introduced Himself through Virendra Dev Dixit.
Neither has Virendra Dev Dixit given introduction of himself as Prajapita, nor has Shiv intorduced Himself as Supreme Soul Shiv through Virendra Dev Dixit.
Then on what basis is Virendra Dev Dixit claiming that Father Himslef has given introduction?
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Re: Extracts of PBK Murlis - as narrated to the PBKs

Post by Sach_Khand » 12 May 2010

arjun wrote:VCD* No.842, dated 1.1.08 at Palakode
Clarification of Murli dated 9.3.68
Part-7


...... So, He stopped narrating after 68. After (19)68, the narrator stopped narrating, did He not? Did He not stop? He stopped narrating Murlis, did He not? The body through which Murlis were narrated vanished, did it not? The body was gone. Then that task of narration stopped.

So, (regarding) deep points; this point proves wrong that I narrate deeper points to you day by day. ... Whatever the Father Shiv narrated through the body of Brahma, was indeed read from the papers in practical and heard by someone. He heard it from the papers or through the taperecorder; Baba had narrated Murlis through the taperecorder as well. So, whatever he heard, someone indeed understood the new meaning of whatever he heard, didn’t he? He understood the deep meanings. That deep point did not occur in the intellect of the others. That is why it was said , I narrate new point day by day. I narrate deep point. Well, it depends whether someone pays attention to it or not. Whether someone listens, whether someone listens to the depth or not, I definitely narrate.
Is this explanation complete?

On one hand Virendra Dev Dixit has questioned many times that to narrate deep points day by day Shiv needs a particular Chariot which is called as Brahma. But since after 1968 the narrator stopped narrating because the body was gone. Dada Lekharaj died.

Then how was the narration of new points day by day continued?
Virendra Dev Dixit has said that Shiv has come as Father, Teacher, and Satguru through him. And to explain the Murlis in their true sense Father i.e., Virendra Dev Dixit is the appointed Chariot i.e., Mukarrar Rath

But in the above quote it is said by Virendra Dev Dixit that Murlis through Brahma were read from the papers in practical and heard by someone. He understood the deep meanings and that deep points did not occur in the intellect of others. And that it depends whether someone pays attention to it or not. Whether someone listens, whether someone listens to the depth or not.

Does this not mean that Shiv has said whatever was needed to be said to bring transformation. And does it not mean that Shiv has given the knowledge being a Trikaldarshi. That means at whatever point of time in Sangamyug, those for whom Shiv has said any particular points will be understood by them in the right perspective whereas others will just listen to them. That means there is no need of any teacher to teach. Just reading Murlis is sufficient for all students to understand the knowledge. But yes, only those for whom it is intended will understand those particular points in true perspective. And everyone will understand their part.
You are numberwise speakers of knowledge. It is you who will say this.

Who was number one in narrating knowledge in the best way? A topic of the past was asked. The Murli is dated (19)68. Who was number one in narrating knowledge in the best way? Arey, there was someone; only then did Baba say so. Who was she? (Someone said – Om Radhey Mama.) Om Radhey Mama was the best. Baba’s case is certainly different. Why? It is because Shiv had entered in Baba. Baba’s case is certainly different. Here, it is Bap and Dada combined. Bap means there is the Father Shiv as well as Dada. So, the case of this one is indeed different. Both are together. Mama also used to explain very well. Among the children, Mama used to explain very well.
That means everyone will understand knowledge according to his part and will numberwise give explanation of the knowledge. But will Prajapita also explain knowledge? If Virendra Dev Dixit is that Prajapita has he ever accepted this?
Will Om Radhey Mama also explain knowledge? Has she ever given her introduction through anyone?
Or will everyone start giving explanations. Munde munde matirbhinnah. Jitnee muuah utnii baatein. And no one accepts his/her part.
:neutral:
Sanjeev.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

Yet another confusing answer that needs more explanation.

Post by Sach_Khand » 07 Jul 2010

In the post, Re: Q&A: PBK Murli discussions
by arjun » 05 Jul 2010


Disc.CD No.483, dated 06.01.08 at Mumbai
Extracts-Part-4

Time: 44.05-45.10
Student: Baba, it has been mentioned in the Murli that God is considered to be omnipresent because of inserting the name of Krishna in the Gita. What is the connection of the belief that God is omnipresent with the insertion of Krishna’s name in the Gita?

Baba: Is Krishna a soul or a Supreme Soul?
Student: He is a soul.
Baba: When one soul reaches such a stage and when it acts in such a way, when he speaks and sees as if it is God of the Gita, as if it is God, then won’t others act like him? They will. He is the first soul, when he becomes sinful everyone becomes sinful and when he becomes pure everyone becomes pure. He is the first leaf of the entire human world; the responsibility of taking him to a high stage lies with his Father.
The words made bold need more explanation as they are confusing.
Who is that Krishna and who is the Father taking him to a high stage? Is that Father not responsible for taking other human souls to be taken to the higher stage or is it that just by taking Krishna to the higher stage all others too are taken to the higher stage.
Anyway, who is this Krishna and who is his Father?

:neutral:
Sanjeev.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11621
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups.
Location: India

Re: Confusing Answers from AIVV.

Post by arjun » 07 Jul 2010

Krishna = Soul of Dada Lekhraj or Brahma Baba
Father = ShivBaba (i.e. Shiv+present corporeal medium) (Present corporeal medium = Baba Virendra Dev Dixit, according to PBKs)

User avatar
shivsena
ex-PBK
Posts: 4339
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To find out the absolute Truth.
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Yet another confusing answer that needs more explanation.

Post by shivsena » 11 Jul 2010

Student: Baba, it has been mentioned in the Murli that God is considered to be omnipresent because of inserting the name of Krishna in the Gita. What is the connection of the belief that God is omnipresent with the insertion of Krishna’s name in the Gita? .
The omnipresence of God and insertion of Krishna's name in Gita are two seperate issues and the subtle shooting of both is done in the bk-pbk family in Sangamyug.

BKs are preaching the knowledge of omnipresence of God (sarvavyapi ka Gyan) by saying that nirakar bindi shiv is ShivBaba (GOD).....while PBKs are doing the shooting of preaching that Nirakar shiv in the body of Baba Dixit is god of Gita, but in the end Baba Dixit will be revealed as Krishna's soul (not Ram's soul) and so Krishna will be remembered as God of Gita in Bhakti marg (for 2500 years).

shivsena.

Sach_Khand
Posts: 571
Joined: 02 May 2010
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Seeking Truth and Truth only.

About the PBK section.

Post by Sach_Khand » 10 Mar 2011

Dear members,
I am not follower of Virendra Dev Dixit now. But I have taken that knowledge in 1993 and have followed it to my best for some years i.e., till 2006. I have stopped following Virendra Dev Dixit now.

I have been writing in the PBK section. But recently many issues have come up regarding asking questions about Virendra Dev Dixit and his explanations of Murlis by someone who does not accept them as total truth.
Some followers of Virendra Dev Dixit are not happy by such questioning.

Also there is the issue of sharing our views regarding Murlis and Avyakt Vanis based on our churning. Everone has the right to churn them and try to understand them to the best of their capabalities. No one can still prove himself/herself as True totally based on explanations or making others experience what he/she says.
Some people consider it as propagating personal views through this forum. And oppose this and so are not happy with it.

The unhappy feeling is making some of us to oppose personally rather than based on principles. And this is hindering the progress in the process of churning and gaining knowledge.

So, I think that those who would like to question BK interpretation or AK interpretation of Murlis and Avyakt Vanis or would like to give their own interpretations need another group or section. There is commonroom group. If that is made only for discussing such things, then it would be helpful. I have myself posted a topic (split personality) in commonroom which I think is not actually related to Murlis or Vanis, but is a general scientific topic.
And so I wish that commonroom group is made totally dedicated for common discussion of Murlis and Vanis without any stamps like BK or PBK. And that anyone can share our personal views and personal interpretations and also question and discuss the interpretations given by BKs and PBKs. I think that this would solve the problem of cold war and even sometimes hot war within the members of this forum.

I hope Admin writes his view regarding the above suggestion and I beleive that by making such arrangements the forum will gain, and will also help the members who are inquisitive.

Views of all active members is requested.

Sanjeev.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests