Ashutosh and Haizen and Tanvir [fundamental democratic Matter]

[Guest guest]

Respected Arjunji and others,

 

it is my observations and just offtrack...as i cannot resist my

temptations..

 

1. about heramb : the whole issue starts with his reading request..i

have seen as many as 3 jyotishi's have helped him but still he kept

on pressing his request ..haizen is the last one.....which i feel is

not correct (forget abt ethics) in a open forum like this...there

should be some way to moderate reading requests....why cant some

standard format of reading request can be put up ..which can work as

a data base also..

I once again reiterate that moderators need to look at this reading

requests clouding the space...

 

2. Definitely there are certain things which an astrologer may not

like to put in public forums due to his own belief and i feel we

need to respect that belief. Opinions and views are subject to

verification as it involves jyotish priniciples and it could be

mutually beneficial too...

 

3. RR ji and you are right in asking for accommodating all

systems...but when the preamble and framework of JR is clearly

states it is not open to SA....then is it right to ask for amendment

as knowing well we are joined here..please dont misintrepret this

view of mine ..i am open to all ..but it is just my thought..

 

3. I really liked your approach in telling your customer..//POLITELY

TOLD HIM THAT IT IS HIS BELIEF AND I RESPECT HIS BELIEF BUT I

PRACTICE MY OWN BELIEF WITHOUT CRITICISING HIS BELIEF.// but the

problem arises when someone questions other's belief and way..

 

4. In the lighter vein, Indian constitution does not provide

complete no holds barred freedom of religious practice (also

astrology practice?) and freedom of expression... rather it is

subject to various parametric conditions...but it is different

subject altogether..

>

> with respects,

 

sriganesh

[Guest guest]

dear ganesh ji

 

the indian constitution has been amended umpteen number of times not

by the owners or the moderators (read government or party in

power). when people demand something and government feel that they

have to respect the sentiments of the public to avoid any friction,

an amendment is done. similar amendments have taken place in all

legal acts and rules and regulations of various governing bodies

periodically.

 

we cannot refer manusmriti and say that all have to live like that

as some of its rules are barbaric and inhuman. i can quote some

rules which are highly oppressive, petrifying and ossifying for

women.

 

if some members ask the owner or moderator to accommodate all

systems, it is up to the owners and moderators whether to heed this

request or reject. this reminds me of his holiness sri bharathi

krishna tirthaji maharaja's sermons. once he visied rajamundry few

decades ago and all self proclaimed pandits visited him to

participate in friendly academic discussion. seeing the arrogance

of the self proclaimed pandits, the shankarachrya started revealing

ex tempore what bible preaches, what koran preaches and what

capitalism or socialism preaches citing verses and their numbers

besides all holy vedic classics. then the arrogant pandits

prostrated at the feet of the shankaracharya and realised that their

knowledge is very little. then the shankaracharya requested the

pandits to accommodate all religions, all scriptures and LEARN ALL

SYSTEMS. very few know that this shankaracharya did eight MAs in

various subjects all with distinction at a very tender young age.

so my request to other members is that one shall not trash other

systems and shall respect all.

 

with best wishes

pandit arjun

 

, "sriganeshh"

<sriganeshh wrote:

>

> Respected Arjunji and others,

>

> it is my observations and just offtrack...as i cannot resist my

> temptations..

>

> 1. about heramb : the whole issue starts with his reading

request..i

> have seen as many as 3 jyotishi's have helped him but still he

kept

> on pressing his request ..haizen is the last one.....which i feel

is

> not correct (forget abt ethics) in a open forum like this...there

> should be some way to moderate reading requests....why cant some

> standard format of reading request can be put up ..which can work

as

> a data base also..

> I once again reiterate that moderators need to look at this

reading

> requests clouding the space...

>

> 2. Definitely there are certain things which an astrologer may not

> like to put in public forums due to his own belief and i feel we

> need to respect that belief. Opinions and views are subject to

> verification as it involves jyotish priniciples and it could be

> mutually beneficial too...

>

> 3. RR ji and you are right in asking for accommodating all

> systems...but when the preamble and framework of JR is clearly

> states it is not open to SA....then is it right to ask for

amendment

> as knowing well we are joined here..please dont misintrepret this

> view of mine ..i am open to all ..but it is just my thought..

>

> 3. I really liked your approach in telling your

customer..//POLITELY

> TOLD HIM THAT IT IS HIS BELIEF AND I RESPECT HIS BELIEF BUT I

> PRACTICE MY OWN BELIEF WITHOUT CRITICISING HIS BELIEF.// but the

> problem arises when someone questions other's belief and way..

>

> 4. In the lighter vein, Indian constitution does not provide

> complete no holds barred freedom of religious practice (also

> astrology practice?) and freedom of expression... rather it is

> subject to various parametric conditions...but it is different

> subject altogether..

> >

> > with respects,

>

> sriganesh

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Sriganesh ji,

 

You wrote:

"3. RR ji and you are right in asking for accommodating all

systems...but when the preamble and framework of JR is clearly

states it is not open to SA....then is it right to ask for amendment

as knowing well we are joined here..please dont misintrepret this

view of mine ..i am open to all ..but it is just my thought.."

 

Absolutely! It is not only right, but our right to request changes in

policies if something is not clear. Especially on a mature and

progressive forum like this which is built on very democratic

principles that the moderators have generally not interfered with.

Over the last several months you have seen many quite confrontational

situations and the moderators have let the 'participants' figure it

out amongst themselves and we all did, quite successfully! Against

the backdrop of this experience, it is natural for participants to

ask moderators and moderators/owners to reconsider. Democracy always

comes with questions and expectations for answers and explanations.

 

I think Ashutosh ji provided a hint as to why Systems Approach has

been prohibited. Probably based on a negative experience in SA forums

where other schools might have been not welcome and put down (I am

guessing since I have not visited those forums). If this is indeed

the case, then it would tell me that this was the attitude of some

individual practitioners and not the philosophy of SA system! In fact

who is to say that there are not many SA system practitioners who are

already members of this forum? They have obviously not made trouble

here or it would have been noticed!

 

That is why I requested Tanvir to test-open the gates even to SA

system and if it is felt that things have not improved, the gates can

be closed again. It would be the progressive and right thing to do.

It bothers me when the large tent of Astrology becomes selective and

if this becomes so due to the behaviour of one or several

practitioners then while convenient (who really wants fights and

disharmony?) banning an entire system is simply not right.

 

Do you still feel that you must curb my right to ask the moderators

what is bothering me? Not having been adversely affected by SA or its

followers and never gained from SA either, you can say I am neutral

about SA.

 

RR

 

 

 

 

 

, "sriganeshh"

<sriganeshh wrote:

>

> Respected Arjunji and others,

>

> it is my observations and just offtrack...as i cannot resist my

> temptations..

>

> 1. about heramb : the whole issue starts with his reading

request..i

> have seen as many as 3 jyotishi's have helped him but still he kept

> on pressing his request ..haizen is the last one.....which i feel

is

> not correct (forget abt ethics) in a open forum like this...there

> should be some way to moderate reading requests....why cant some

> standard format of reading request can be put up ..which can work

as

> a data base also..

> I once again reiterate that moderators need to look at this reading

> requests clouding the space...

>

> 2. Definitely there are certain things which an astrologer may not

> like to put in public forums due to his own belief and i feel we

> need to respect that belief. Opinions and views are subject to

> verification as it involves jyotish priniciples and it could be

> mutually beneficial too...

>

> 3. RR ji and you are right in asking for accommodating all

> systems...but when the preamble and framework of JR is clearly

> states it is not open to SA....then is it right to ask for

amendment

> as knowing well we are joined here..please dont misintrepret this

> view of mine ..i am open to all ..but it is just my thought..

>

> 3. I really liked your approach in telling your

customer..//POLITELY

> TOLD HIM THAT IT IS HIS BELIEF AND I RESPECT HIS BELIEF BUT I

> PRACTICE MY OWN BELIEF WITHOUT CRITICISING HIS BELIEF.// but the

> problem arises when someone questions other's belief and way..

>

> 4. In the lighter vein, Indian constitution does not provide

> complete no holds barred freedom of religious practice (also

> astrology practice?) and freedom of expression... rather it is

> subject to various parametric conditions...but it is different

> subject altogether..

> >

> > with respects,

>

> sriganesh

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Ranjan ji

 

Lot many astrologers on this forum (including me), find SA (and many other systems) as quite rationalized approach. How one mixes it in conclusive judgement of a chart, is entirely upto respective astrologers. Hence, request to moderator is quite reasonable approach.

 

regards / Prafulla Gang

 

Let not the sands of time get in your lunch.

 

 

>

> jyotish_vani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com

> Sun, 09 Jul 2006 13:33:05 -0000

>

> Re: Ashutosh and Haizen and Tanvir [fundamental democratic

> Matter]

>

> Dear Shri Sriganesh ji,

>

> You wrote:

> "3. RR ji and you are right in asking for accommodating all

> systems...but when the preamble and framework of JR is clearly

> states it is not open to SA....then is it right to ask for amendment

> as knowing well we are joined here..please dont misintrepret this

> view of mine ..i am open to all ..but it is just my thought.."

>

> Absolutely! It is not only right, but our right to request changes in

> policies if something is not clear. Especially on a mature and

> progressive forum like this which is built on very democratic

> principles that the moderators have generally not interfered with.

> Over the last several months you have seen many quite confrontational

> situations and the moderators have let the 'participants' figure it

> out amongst themselves and we all did, quite successfully! Against

> the backdrop of this experience, it is natural for participants to

> ask moderators and moderators/owners to reconsider. Democracy always

> comes with questions and expectations for answers and explanations.

>

> I think Ashutosh ji provided a hint as to why Systems Approach has

> been prohibited. Probably based on a negative experience in SA forums

> where other schools might have been not welcome and put down (I am

> guessing since I have not visited those forums). If this is indeed

> the case, then it would tell me that this was the attitude of some

> individual practitioners and not the philosophy of SA system! In fact

> who is to say that there are not many SA system practitioners who are

> already members of this forum? They have obviously not made trouble

> here or it would have been noticed!

>

> That is why I requested Tanvir to test-open the gates even to SA

> system and if it is felt that things have not improved, the gates can

> be closed again. It would be the progressive and right thing to do.

> It bothers me when the large tent of Astrology becomes selective and

> if this becomes so due to the behaviour of one or several

> practitioners then while convenient (who really wants fights and

> disharmony?) banning an entire system is simply not right.

>

> Do you still feel that you must curb my right to ask the moderators

> what is bothering me? Not having been adversely affected by SA or its

> followers and never gained from SA either, you can say I am neutral

> about SA.

>

> RR

>

>

>

>

>

> , "sriganeshh"

> <sriganeshh wrote:

>>

>> Respected Arjunji and others,

>>

>> it is my observations and just offtrack...as i cannot resist my

>> temptations..

>>

>> 1. about heramb : the whole issue starts with his reading

> request..i

>> have seen as many as 3 jyotishi's have helped him but still he kept

>> on pressing his request ..haizen is the last one.....which i feel

> is

>> not correct (forget abt ethics) in a open forum like this...there

>> should be some way to moderate reading requests....why cant some

>> standard format of reading request can be put up ..which can work

> as

>> a data base also..

>> I once again reiterate that moderators need to look at this reading

>> requests clouding the space...

>>

>> 2. Definitely there are certain things which an astrologer may not

>> like to put in public forums due to his own belief and i feel we

>> need to respect that belief. Opinions and views are subject to

>> verification as it involves jyotish priniciples and it could be

>> mutually beneficial too...

>>

>> 3. RR ji and you are right in asking for accommodating all

>> systems...but when the preamble and framework of JR is clearly

>> states it is not open to SA....then is it right to ask for

> amendment

>> as knowing well we are joined here..please dont misintrepret this

>> view of mine ..i am open to all ..but it is just my thought..

>>

>> 3. I really liked your approach in telling your

> customer..//POLITELY

>> TOLD HIM THAT IT IS HIS BELIEF AND I RESPECT HIS BELIEF BUT I

>> PRACTICE MY OWN BELIEF WITHOUT CRITICISING HIS BELIEF.// but the

>> problem arises when someone questions other's belief and way..

>>

>> 4. In the lighter vein, Indian constitution does not provide

>> complete no holds barred freedom of religious practice (also

>> astrology practice?) and freedom of expression... rather it is

>> subject to various parametric conditions...but it is different

>> subject altogether..

>>>

>>> with respects,

>>

>> sriganesh

>>

 

__________

Inbox.com Photos - Share your photos with your friends and family!

Visit http://www.inbox.com/photosharing to find out more!