Astrology is it Vedic ???? to Rajiv - Dont be emotional in search of truth!

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Rajeev ji - Namaste,

 

If you read the mail carefully it is not an attack/assualt

on you but this shows that I as an individual spiritualist

want to go further/deeper in search of truth for the larger

good of mankind just as you are striving.

 

Please do not take the comments emotionally since it is not

good for the sake of realization of real truth.

 

If you read one of my earlier mails on this subject I have

written that you have excellent knowledge of Vedas but only

that is not the ultimate truth. This way you are trying to

discard the further knowledge which the representatives of

Gods like yourself has created/proliferated. This way you

are discarding the faith of other people.

 

At the same time I had written that AmolMandar has got very

good knowledge of sacred scriptures.

 

See Rajeev you believe it or not namewise you are a Libra

and you keep balancing life since libra is the young sign

of the zodiac you have great energy and you are in a way

seeking truth. In other words you are here in this mortal

world to understand truth and go further.

 

You are trying to question the authenticity of the sacred

knowledge astrology while the authenticity of Vedas itself

is not clear. Please and Please I am requesting you once

again not to take this seriously/emotionally.

 

I would be happy to learn Vedas from you but would not like

to challenge the authenticity of another sacred

knowledge/subject until I would have realized truth.

 

You are a representative of God so am I. Vedas are the

limbs/knowledge of God and thus sacred to you to me.

 

If you think deeply without harming other's faith & belief

and killing your ego you will certainly realize truth and

that day I would like to become your "shishya".

 

With sincere regards,

prakash Kandpal

 

--- Rajeev Kumar <satpath1 wrote:

>

> Namaste ,

>

> This is perhaps my last mail to this site , I think I

> gave suffificient time and answered with the best of my

> knowledge and understanding. The fight between right and

> wrong is there since the creation of this universe and

> will remain till the end of it.

>

> If any body wants to still discuss then please send me

> personal mails . I found discussion with AmolMandar Ji

> good , though we have not agreed to each other view.

>

> I wish all of you people to have good health and success

> in truthful endeavours.

>

> I am specially grateful to the site administrator , he is

> a virtuous soul .

>

> May the almighty inspire us to the way of truth

>

> Thanks to all of you again.

>

> Rajeev

>

> Prakash Ji here are my answers.

>

> In many mails I have said that Vedas are from God , so

> the objections raised by you of not taking God as the

> mediator is automatically vanishes. Vedas are eternal as

> God is eternal and Vedas are God's knowledge. The

> attributes of an object which himself is eternal are also

> eternal. And Vedas are not the physical books , as books

> have limited life, but Vedas are the knowledge written in

> them and the knowledge is subject of intellect.

>

> I have belief on God's existence .

> In Yajur Veda chapter 40, God says I am near to the

> learned and far from the fools, Fools consider God moving

> and located at some place whereas for learned God is

> everywhere. The design and engineering within the our own

> body , creation of universe and their control requires

> some universal controller as well as testimony of Vedic

> Rishis .

>

> I am not the only decider of Truth , but you have

> missed the context totally .Its not my fault. But truth

> is one . In Manusmriti its written that Vedas are the

> ultimate authority to decide upon truth other scriptures

> are helpful but

> I don't believe in God's Avtaar , its only you who

> used the word Avtaar for Madan's wife and many people

> consider Adi ShankraCharya as Shiva's Avtaar and also

> many films are there on this. I have infact condemned the

> concept of Avtaar, forget about my accepting it. I don't

> believe in Avtaar, as God cannot take birth.

> As far as use of SatyarthPrakash is concerned so far

> as ,it is in line with truth I will accept it and if

> anywhere any doubt is there I would not accept it. And as

> I said earlier that truth is not a personal property of

> anybody but belongs to all .

> Even I donot know when you were born, if the facts are

> distorted then truth can be derived by using tests of

> truths.

>

>

> Prakash Kandpal <prakashkandpal wrote:

> Namaste Rajeev Ji,

>

> Rajeev Ji you wrote

>

> Yes I have not answered many mails, because most of the

> questions

> raised were either already answered as well as time and

> resources

> (like availability of computer and internet) is also a

> limitation for

> all of us.

>

> My answer

>

> Rajeev ji I didn't see any mails pertaining to the

> questions I have

> raised if I am not mistaken here. Yes, I understand that

> the

> resources are limited with all of us.

>

> Rajeev Ji you wrote

>

> Yes you are right in absence of a true mediator the

> discussion may

> not end up to the true conclusion. That's why in the

> beginning itself

> I have asked that Vedas are the ultimate authority to

> decide.

>

> My answer

>

> You seem to be logical in your approach in accepting the

> truth that

> one need's a mediator to decide on the outcome of a

> debate. Yet, you

> have tried to make it a point that there is no other

> superior

> authority other than Vedas is the deciding faculty.

>

> Alas! You have discarded God whose limbs Vedas are by

> saying that

> Vedas are the only deciding authority and not the God who

> created

> Vedas! Do you believe in this statement or is it your

> faith or you

> have read it somewhere or you have seen someone writing

> this

> statement that Vedas are the ultimate authority of

> decision? Please

> furnish proof.

>

> Rajeev Ji you wrote

>

> I have read about AdiGuru ShankraCharya Ji and I have a

> deep regard

> for him but consider him a pious and virtuous human being

> and so does

> apply to Shri Krishna and Rama and other great

> personalities.

>

> My answer

>

> Yes, you are right that all these great people were born

> as human

> beings first and were pious souls.

>

> Rajeev Ji you wrote

>

> My understanding is based on Vedas which clearly states

> God as

> eternal, conscious, blissful, formless, birthless,

> omniscient, only

> one, omnipresent etc.

>

> My answer

>

> Above you have discarded God wherein you wrote that Vedas

> are the

> only deciding authority. Now you are changing colour

> between words

> and stating that God does exist and trying to give words

> for God! Is

> it your faith or believe? Have you read this before? Have

> you seen

> God? If not how can you define or answer that. Please

> furnish proof

> with respect to the above.

>

> Rajeev Ji you wrote

>

> Where as Atma (jeev) is eternal, conscious etc.

>

> My answer

>

> So, now besides Vedas & God, Atma becomes another

> deciding faculty.

> Isn't it?

>

> Rajeev ji you wrote

>

> And the material beings are eternal without conscious

> etc.

>

> My answer

>

> Yes, you are correct. So, they cann't decide on anything.

>

> Rajeev Ji you wrote

>

> The atma goes through the cycles of death and birth in

> different

> yonis based upon their Karmas. Its possible that we all

> have been

> through dogs or even worse yonis before being human.

>

> My answer

>

> Rajeev ji, consciously you don't remember whether you

> were a dog in

> some earlier birth. Why do you have to include "we all"

> when I asked

> certain questions from you. Are you the decider of all

> our wills

> besides Vedas, God & Atma? Who gave you this right? Can

> you please

> elaborate since few lines above you have written that

> Vedas are the

> only deciding faculty?

>

> Rajeev ji you wrote

>

> Entering of ShankraCharya in the body of a differnet

> human to learn

> knowledge clearly indicates that ShankraCharya was a

> human

=== message truncated ===