ADMIN: Good job Tanvir!

[Guest guest]

Hello Tanvir:

 

What SP Tata did is outright crooked and unbecoming of a Jyotish.

 

A real jyotish is the one who above petty jealousy.

 

A real Jyotish is the one who lights a Jyoti into the hearts and

thought-process of the people who consul him/her.

 

Sudeep Suri has clarified on the V-A board and to me personally that

his intent was to figure-out why Sanjay's prediction didn't come true

and not to malign Sanjay in anyway.

 

This fellow named SP Tata used Sudeep's mail to launch an internet-

wide agenda to malign Sanjay--what a shame.

 

Mukund

 

, "Tanvir Chowdhury"

<lord_narayana@l...> wrote:

> Hello Mr. Tata,

>

> I appreciate your concern about your opinion that the private paid

> reading should not be discussed in public. It is good to see that

one

> astrologer hopes that another astrologer would get the fairness he

> deserves. Today the world of astrology is a mess since astrologers

> from different schools envy each other. So your fairness and just

is

> appreciated in this regard.

>

> However, there are also facts in your post that I do not appreciate

> at all. The complaint was made in another list, and it is enough

when

> you protest it right there. However, you have made replies to the

> post to other lists, where even the original post did not appear,

> such as Gjlist, and this list. So what is the point of replying to

> these lists? Only people of the Vedic-Astrology list would know

this,

> seeing the post. But when you have replied to other lists, where

even

> the original posts did not appear, you actually helped the person

to

> announce it even better.

>

> There is no reason in this post to reply here because even the

> original post was not posted here. Rather this is to announce the

> complaint even better.

>

> Also you have pulled in the topic of police cases out of all

sudden,

> out of a stream. He did not mention it anywhere it is you who is

> mentioning it.

>

> So what you did, is rather a better announcement of it than

> protesting it. This is noted, so please do not repeat such

> performances in this list again. No need to reply posts those were

> posted in another list.

>

> Thanks,

> Tanvir.

>

>

> , "Pandit S.P.Tata"

> <sptata@a...> wrote:

> > Dear Mr. Sudeep Suri,

> >

> > As a professional astrologer I find the enclosed mail by you to

> Sanjay

> > Rath (regarding the failure of his prediction in your case) in

very

> > bad taste.

> >

> > First of all let me make it very clear that I have never met

Sanjay

> > Rath, I am not his student and I am not his follower -especially

> in

> > view of his running away from Delhi to avoid police arrest in his

> > famous fraud case.

> >

> > However I do not appreciate your parading his prediction failure

in

> > public. Astrologers maintain client privacy and don't talk about

> > questions asked or advise given. If Sanjay Rath discusses your

> private

> > sex life in public you'll not like it. Similarly we astrologers

> also

> > expect some fairness from the people to whom we give

predictions.

> >

> > The Vedic astrology principles given by our ancient seers are r

> 100%

> > true. It is we astrologers whose knowledge has its limitations.

We

> > don't have the spritual Divya Gyan of our ancients. As there are

> > millions of combinations to study, its impossible to be 100%

right

> for

> > any astrologer. I have been practicing Vedic astrology for more

> than

> > 20 years, studied more than a couple of dozen astrology sashtras,

I

> > run my own astrology website - www.astrojyoti.com - I am

fortunate

> to

> > have a relative like the world famous astrologer K.N.Rao to guide

> me

> > whenever I seek advise, but in spite of all that am only about

75%

> > correct. There are those 25% predictions, which do go wrong. The

> day

> > we are 100% right we'll be in heaven with Rishi Bhrigu and Rishi

> > Parashara and not here.

> >

> > With thousands of the best scientists working and after spending

> > billions of US$, NASA can't guarantee its satellites. The doctors

> make

> > wrong diagnosis even after cat scans and dog scans, the bridges

> built

> > by engineers crash and the accountants and financial advisers to

> > nations flop frequently to cause economic crashes. But their

> > professions and their sciences are not questioned. But the moment

> an

> > astrologer fails people are willing to indulge in sarcastic

> > mudslinging in public.

> > Just a decade ago our doctors and the medical bureaucrats were

> openly

> > ridiculing Ayurveda. But once the Yankees got on to it and

started

> > patenting our formulae, we have an alternate medicine dept. and

> sing

> > international songs about our cultural heritage. I suppose our

> press

> > and public will recognize Vedic astrology only when Harvard

> University

> > starts teaching it!!

> >

> > I am sure you have received some correct predictions also from

some

> > astrologers. Have you acknowledged them in public like this?

> >

> > I sincerely request all group members to refrain from this kind

of

> > mudslinging sarcasm.

> > With regards

> > Pandit S.P.Tata

> >

> > -

> > sudeep suri

> > vedic astrology

> > Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:37 PM

> > [vedic astrology] TO SANJAY RATHJI

> >

> > DEAR SANJAY RATH JI MAHARAJ

> > Reference my astrological consultation with you on 29 JAN 2004

VIA

> > telephone.After the consultation you sent me an audio casette of

> > predictions(OUR TAPED CONVERSATION ).

> >

> > NOW 6 months down the line I find that all your predictions are

> > incorrect.Your most important prediction was that in MAY 2004 in

> KETU

> > pratyantar I will get something fantastic and that in JULY 2004 I

> will

> > be in USA. Sir JULY is finished I am in INDIA and I never got

> anything

> > FANTASTIC as you mentioned in MAY 2004.

> >

> > I am wondering WHY YOU HAVE GONE WRONG because you took lot of

> pains

> > to explain the astrological reasoning behind it.So DOES THIS MEAN

> > ASTROLOGY IS NO SCIENCE OR YOUR REASONING AND ANALYSIS IS

INCORRECT

> I

> > WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW.

> > REGARDS

> > SUDEEP

> >

> >