Guest guest Posted November 20, 2006 Report Share Posted November 20, 2006 Dear Ashutoshiji, Before jumping to assertive premature conclusions it would be wise to verify your facts. The mistake (a very easy one to make) was due to the fact that we share the same laptop and Maniv is automatically signed in to Groups (I am boarding at Maniv's house as I am in the UK for further studies). It is unfortunate that you are making such absurd accusations at him - if you have any issues with my messages please direct them at me. I cannot comment on his past contributions. As recent member of this group, I have no motivation to 'provoke' Mr Ranjan as you put it and have no idea that a gallery section for this site exists. Besides I have apologised for my error and given a sufficient explanation. Please also note that my original query was related to astrological principles - I was not targeting anyone or looking for an argument - but the subsequent response from Mr Ranjan was inappropriate, and he has not refrained from prolonging the argument. He could have easily ignored my query. Why is such a protective/overly paranoid stance adopted for Rohiniji? I find it astounding that you have only highlighted my response and apparent `impoliteness' to Rohiniji and have chosen to overlook the unnecessary personal digs he has made which were far worse (i.e is the querent looking for a wife or mother). So Ashutoshji alias Fan of Rohini Ranjan are you humble enough to apologise for your mistake and allow the flow of this group to continue without indulging in overly bias moderating? Sincerely, Krishnan , "astrologerashutosh" <astrologerashutosh wrote: > > Maniv alias Krishnan, > > You made a mistake by sending the same reply using your two ids. one, maniv1321, second, krishnan2804 . Earlier, you have been involved in serious arguments with some members of this group, using your maniv id and signing yourself as Maniv. Now, you are Krishnan and still arguing. You are using two different ids to send replies to this group. > > You are a member of this group using maniv1321 since September 13, 2005. You are well aware that Rohini Ji is an active member and is a Man. Rohini Ji's photograph is also uploaded in the photo section of this group. Still, you tried to provoke him by questioning his gender, through this new id posing as Krishnan. > > Astrological knowledge and intellect apart, if you lack the basic politeness and seek only arguments, then there is no reason why you should be here in this group. > > If you do not give a suitable explanation within 24 hours, you will be banned from this group. > > > Moderator, JR group > > > > > > > > - > krishnan2804 > > Monday, 20 November, 2006 00:33 > Re: Opposites Attract? > > > Mr Ranjan, > > It seems that confusion has arrested your usually sharp intellectual > faculties, proving that you are human after all! It's all too easy > to believe in ones self-created image (Rahu) and become intoxicated > by the knowledge one acquires after years of perseverance. Wisdom > (Jupiter) as with all excesses, has its drawbacks........ > > You say you was "right in asking the source of the statement" but if > you had paid due attention to my original message, it would have > been easy to derive that the source were those astrologers that I > have come across. The logic here is, as put in your own words - > 'simple'. > > I haven't criticsed your writing style as such, rather its content > and depth (lack of). You may have published ever-so-many articles > but your contributions on this forum - by which you will be judged > solely in this arena - borders on extreme irellevencey. You have > truly demonstrated how powerfully English literature can be > applied 'politically' in jyotish, for answering everything but the > question (a very recent example: Do you have Saturn in > Gemini/Virgo?). > > Oh and thank you for *sharing* your pearls of wisdom, it is > enlightening to learn that the Moon is the karak for Mother. The > Moon was mentioned as an example. Please re-read the message with > due attention. > > So there we have it another wasted message, responding to your > irrational, irrelevant and 'complex' communications, which could > have been better spent discussing and *sharing* knowledge. > > auf weiderdsehn > > Krishnan > > P.S. Nice to learn that I can also deliver vocabulary that you have > difficulty relating to!Vensuian grammar rules the day............ > > The Moon was mentioend as an example. Please re-read the message > with due attention. > > Oh and thnak you for *sahring* your pearls of wisdom,it is > engliheting to learn that the Moon is the karak for Mother. > > Nice to learn that I can also delivr volcablary that you have > diffculty relating to! > > , "Rohiniranjan" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > Neither statistics black and white or coloured version, nor > > philosophy is involved, Mr Krishnan2804. When someone says "often" > it > > means simply that it is a frequently occuring or observed > phenomenon. > > And since it is observed, it has got to have come from a survey or > > personal observation. > > > > And since you made the observation that <<astrologers often > > recommended...>> I was right in asking the source of the statement > > and should not have to go to the astrologers who were being > observed > > and reported about! Simple logic, no run-on sentences! And I have > > gone on record many a times that my english is very poor. Still if > > you must pick on that and criticise my writing style, well > obviously > > I cannot stop you from doing that, now, can I? > > > > Does this make sense or it is too complex still ;-) > > > > RR > > > > <Oh now that the gender misconception has been corrected from your > > mind, let us address another misconception: I do not play games! > You > > may say I am a perfect couch potato!> > > > > > > , "krishnan2804" > > <krishnan2804@> wrote: > > > > > > Apologies for my error in assuming your gender. However one can > be > > > easily mislead by the name 'Rohini' which is generally > associated > > > with females and of course your grammatical style which is very > > > Venusian. > > > > > > So Rohiniji your queries pertaining to the use of 'often' would > > have > > > to be directed at the practising astrologers that make such > > > recommendations. One assumes they are based on vast experience > or a > > > basic blind adherence to a rule that they may have read in some > > text. > > > It is due to this very ambiguity that I have raised this point. > > > > > > I also don't think Jyotish can be 'proved' or measured by > > > statistical inference. Statistics, as you may know, are very > black > > > and white and leave out the oh-so colourful details which are of > > > topmost importance Jyotish. Not leaving forgetting their > > > unreliability which is represented by the standard error. In > this > > > context I would not label Joyitsh as an exact science, but more > of > > > an art based on intuition and the observations of patterns > combined > > > with a highly refined level of synthesis - all of which cannot > be > > > quantified. > > > > > > And there it is purely philosophical response (two can play that > > > game! ). > > > > > > P.S. do you have Saturn in either Gemini/Virgo? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Question not being asked on behalf of Rohini Devi (who's dat?) > > > > > > > > How did you arrive at the qualifier "OFTEN"? > > > > > > > > Based on how many observations? Over what time period, etc > > > > > > > > If astrology must be touted willy-nilly as a science, we > better > > > > collect and put our facts across seriously! > > > > > > > > Sounds reasonable, fellow 'scientists'? > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > , "krishnan2804" > > > > <krishnan2804@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Members & experianced Jyotishis (Ashutoshki, > Prashantiji, > > > > > Rohini Devi ) > > > > > > > > > > This is probably a very elementary query but it's causing me > > > some > > > > > confusion. > > > > > > > > > > Astrologers often recommended that one should not marry a > > person > > > of > > > > > the opposite rising sign/ Chandra rasi. For example a native > > > with > > > > > the Moon in Capricorn should not marry someone with the Moon > in > > > > > Cancer/Cancer ascendant and vice versa, or a Taurus > ascendant > > > > should > > > > > avoid marriage with a Scorpio ascendant. > > > > > > > > > > However would not the 7th house from the ascendant/Moon > > > represent > > > > > the partner type of person one is attracted to?) > > > > > > > > > > Comments would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2006 Report Share Posted November 20, 2006 Dear Members, Krishnan and Maniv have same writing styles, same astrological interests and same laptop. They criticise and argue in exactly similar ways. Anyone who has any doubts about it can search through posts of maniv1321 (AT) (DOT) co.uk In this reply Krishnan has shown disrespect even to the moderator. This group has achieved peace with difficulty. To maintain the peace both these ids are banned. Regards, Moderator, JR group - krishnan2804 Monday, 20 November, 2006 17:26 Re: Opposites Attract- Moderator's warning Dear Ashutoshiji, Before jumping to assertive premature conclusions it would be wise to verify your facts. The mistake (a very easy one to make) was due to the fact that we share the same laptop and Maniv is automatically signed in to Groups (I am boarding at Maniv's house as I am in the UK for further studies). It is unfortunate that you are making such absurd accusations at him - if you have any issues with my messages please direct them at me. I cannot comment on his past contributions. As recent member of this group, I have no motivation to 'provoke' Mr Ranjan as you put it and have no idea that a gallery section for this site exists. Besides I have apologised for my error and given a sufficient explanation. Please also note that my original query was related to astrological principles - I was not targeting anyone or looking for an argument - but the subsequent response from Mr Ranjan was inappropriate, and he has not refrained from prolonging the argument. He could have easily ignored my query. Why is such a protective/overly paranoid stance adopted for Rohiniji? I find it astounding that you have only highlighted my response and apparent `impoliteness' to Rohiniji and have chosen to overlook the unnecessary personal digs he has made which were far worse (i.e is the querent looking for a wife or mother). So Ashutoshji alias Fan of Rohini Ranjan are you humble enough to apologise for your mistake and allow the flow of this group to continue without indulging in overly bias moderating? Sincerely, Krishnan , "astrologerashutosh" <astrologerashutosh wrote: > > Maniv alias Krishnan, > > You made a mistake by sending the same reply using your two ids. one, maniv1321, second, krishnan2804 . Earlier, you have been involved in serious arguments with some members of this group, using your maniv id and signing yourself as Maniv. Now, you are Krishnan and still arguing. You are using two different ids to send replies to this group. > > You are a member of this group using maniv1321 since September 13, 2005. You are well aware that Rohini Ji is an active member and is a Man. Rohini Ji's photograph is also uploaded in the photo section of this group. Still, you tried to provoke him by questioning his gender, through this new id posing as Krishnan. > > Astrological knowledge and intellect apart, if you lack the basic politeness and seek only arguments, then there is no reason why you should be here in this group. > > If you do not give a suitable explanation within 24 hours, you will be banned from this group. > > > Moderator, JR group > > > > > > > > - > krishnan2804 > > Monday, 20 November, 2006 00:33 > Re: Opposites Attract? > > > Mr Ranjan, > > It seems that confusion has arrested your usually sharp intellectual > faculties, proving that you are human after all! It's all too easy > to believe in ones self-created image (Rahu) and become intoxicated > by the knowledge one acquires after years of perseverance. Wisdom > (Jupiter) as with all excesses, has its drawbacks........ > > You say you was "right in asking the source of the statement" but if > you had paid due attention to my original message, it would have > been easy to derive that the source were those astrologers that I > have come across. The logic here is, as put in your own words - > 'simple'. > > I haven't criticsed your writing style as such, rather its content > and depth (lack of). You may have published ever-so-many articles > but your contributions on this forum - by which you will be judged > solely in this arena - borders on extreme irellevencey. You have > truly demonstrated how powerfully English literature can be > applied 'politically' in jyotish, for answering everything but the > question (a very recent example: Do you have Saturn in > Gemini/Virgo?). > > Oh and thank you for *sharing* your pearls of wisdom, it is > enlightening to learn that the Moon is the karak for Mother. The > Moon was mentioned as an example. Please re-read the message with > due attention. > > So there we have it another wasted message, responding to your > irrational, irrelevant and 'complex' communications, which could > have been better spent discussing and *sharing* knowledge. > > auf weiderdsehn > > Krishnan > > P.S. Nice to learn that I can also deliver vocabulary that you have > difficulty relating to!Vensuian grammar rules the day............ > > The Moon was mentioend as an example. Please re-read the message > with due attention. > > Oh and thnak you for *sahring* your pearls of wisdom,it is > engliheting to learn that the Moon is the karak for Mother. > > Nice to learn that I can also delivr volcablary that you have > diffculty relating to! > > , "Rohiniranjan" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > Neither statistics black and white or coloured version, nor > > philosophy is involved, Mr Krishnan2804. When someone says "often" > it > > means simply that it is a frequently occuring or observed > phenomenon. > > And since it is observed, it has got to have come from a survey or > > personal observation. > > > > And since you made the observation that <<astrologers often > > recommended...>> I was right in asking the source of the statement > > and should not have to go to the astrologers who were being > observed > > and reported about! Simple logic, no run-on sentences! And I have > > gone on record many a times that my english is very poor. Still if > > you must pick on that and criticise my writing style, well > obviously > > I cannot stop you from doing that, now, can I? > > > > Does this make sense or it is too complex still ;-) > > > > RR > > > > <Oh now that the gender misconception has been corrected from your > > mind, let us address another misconception: I do not play games! > You > > may say I am a perfect couch potato!> > > > > > > , "krishnan2804" > > <krishnan2804@> wrote: > > > > > > Apologies for my error in assuming your gender. However one can > be > > > easily mislead by the name 'Rohini' which is generally > associated > > > with females and of course your grammatical style which is very > > > Venusian. > > > > > > So Rohiniji your queries pertaining to the use of 'often' would > > have > > > to be directed at the practising astrologers that make such > > > recommendations. One assumes they are based on vast experience > or a > > > basic blind adherence to a rule that they may have read in some > > text. > > > It is due to this very ambiguity that I have raised this point. > > > > > > I also don't think Jyotish can be 'proved' or measured by > > > statistical inference. Statistics, as you may know, are very > black > > > and white and leave out the oh-so colourful details which are of > > > topmost importance Jyotish. Not leaving forgetting their > > > unreliability which is represented by the standard error. In > this > > > context I would not label Joyitsh as an exact science, but more > of > > > an art based on intuition and the observations of patterns > combined > > > with a highly refined level of synthesis - all of which cannot > be > > > quantified. > > > > > > And there it is purely philosophical response (two can play that > > > game! ). > > > > > > P.S. do you have Saturn in either Gemini/Virgo? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Question not being asked on behalf of Rohini Devi (who's dat?) > > > > > > > > How did you arrive at the qualifier "OFTEN"? > > > > > > > > Based on how many observations? Over what time period, etc > > > > > > > > If astrology must be touted willy-nilly as a science, we > better > > > > collect and put our facts across seriously! > > > > > > > > Sounds reasonable, fellow 'scientists'? > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > , "krishnan2804" > > > > <krishnan2804@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Members & experianced Jyotishis (Ashutoshki, > Prashantiji, > > > > > Rohini Devi ) > > > > > > > > > > This is probably a very elementary query but it's causing me > > > some > > > > > confusion. > > > > > > > > > > Astrologers often recommended that one should not marry a > > person > > > of > > > > > the opposite rising sign/ Chandra rasi. For example a native > > > with > > > > > the Moon in Capricorn should not marry someone with the Moon > in > > > > > Cancer/Cancer ascendant and vice versa, or a Taurus > ascendant > > > > should > > > > > avoid marriage with a Scorpio ascendant. > > > > > > > > > > However would not the 7th house from the ascendant/Moon > > > represent > > > > > the partner type of person one is attracted to?) > > > > > > > > > > Comments would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2006 Report Share Posted November 21, 2006 Dear Sir, That was no dig that I made. If you had asked your question as a nativity, I would not have made that statement but from your original posting it was clear that you were asking a hypothetical question about spouses and their chandra signs. My response, which I have astrologically explained earlier was simple and no jyotishi could have missed and not get overly upset by. Moon is the karaka of mother and not of spouse. I was merely pointing out that individuals with moon in saptama from each other should not get concerned about their being unsuitable as partner. On the other hand if the indicator of conjugal relationship venus are in disharmony and other malefic factors are at play, then there could be problems. Instead of paying attention to my explanation, you chose to make fun of me and my writing and unfortunately prolonged this matter way beyond it was necessary. I am glad that through all this, Ma (moon) gave me the wisdom and composure to not get sucked into the drama that going on in cyberspace! RR , "krishnan2804" <krishnan2804 wrote: > > Dear Ashutoshiji, > > Before jumping to assertive premature conclusions it would be wise > to verify your facts. > > The mistake (a very easy one to make) was due to the fact that we > share the same laptop and Maniv is automatically signed in to > Groups (I am boarding at Maniv's house as I am in the UK for further > studies). It is unfortunate that you are making such absurd > accusations at him - if you have any issues with my messages please > direct them at me. I cannot comment on his past contributions. > > As recent member of this group, I have no motivation to 'provoke' Mr > Ranjan as you put it and have no idea that a gallery section for > this site exists. Besides I have apologised for my error and given a > sufficient explanation. Please also note that my original query was > related to astrological principles - I was not targeting anyone or > looking for an argument - but the subsequent response from Mr Ranjan > was inappropriate, and he has not refrained from prolonging the > argument. He could have easily ignored my query. Why is such a > protective/overly paranoid stance adopted for Rohiniji? > > I find it astounding that you have only highlighted my response and > apparent `impoliteness' to Rohiniji and have chosen to overlook the > unnecessary personal digs he has made which were far worse (i.e is > the querent looking for a wife or mother). > > So Ashutoshji alias Fan of Rohini Ranjan are you humble enough to > apologise for your mistake and allow the flow of this group to > continue without indulging in overly bias moderating? > > Sincerely, > > > Krishnan > > > , "astrologerashutosh" > <astrologerashutosh@> wrote: > > > > Maniv alias Krishnan, > > > > You made a mistake by sending the > same reply using your two ids. one, maniv1321@, second, > krishnan2804@ . Earlier, you have been involved in serious > arguments with some members of this group, using your maniv id and > signing yourself as Maniv. Now, you are Krishnan and still arguing. > You are using two different ids to send replies to this group. > > > > You are a member of this group using maniv1321@ since > September 13, 2005. You are well aware that Rohini Ji is an active > member and is a Man. Rohini Ji's photograph is also uploaded in the > photo section of this group. Still, you tried to provoke him by > questioning his gender, through this new id posing as Krishnan. > > > > Astrological knowledge and intellect apart, if you lack > the basic politeness and seek only arguments, then there is no > reason why you should be here in this group. > > > > If you do not give a suitable explanation within 24 hours, > you will be banned from this group. > > > > > > Moderator, JR group > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > krishnan2804 > > > > Monday, 20 November, 2006 00:33 > > Re: Opposites Attract? > > > > > > Mr Ranjan, > > > > It seems that confusion has arrested your usually sharp > intellectual > > faculties, proving that you are human after all! It's all too > easy > > to believe in ones self-created image (Rahu) and become > intoxicated > > by the knowledge one acquires after years of perseverance. Wisdom > > (Jupiter) as with all excesses, has its drawbacks........ > > > > You say you was "right in asking the source of the statement" > but if > > you had paid due attention to my original message, it would have > > been easy to derive that the source were those astrologers that > I > > have come across. The logic here is, as put in your own words - > > 'simple'. > > > > I haven't criticsed your writing style as such, rather its > content > > and depth (lack of). You may have published ever-so-many > articles > > but your contributions on this forum - by which you will be > judged > > solely in this arena - borders on extreme irellevencey. You have > > truly demonstrated how powerfully English literature can be > > applied 'politically' in jyotish, for answering everything but > the > > question (a very recent example: Do you have Saturn in > > Gemini/Virgo?). > > > > Oh and thank you for *sharing* your pearls of wisdom, it is > > enlightening to learn that the Moon is the karak for Mother. The > > Moon was mentioned as an example. Please re-read the message > with > > due attention. > > > > So there we have it another wasted message, responding to your > > irrational, irrelevant and 'complex' communications, which could > > have been better spent discussing and *sharing* knowledge. > > > > auf weiderdsehn > > > > Krishnan > > > > P.S. Nice to learn that I can also deliver vocabulary that you > have > > difficulty relating to!Vensuian grammar rules the day............ > > > > The Moon was mentioend as an example. Please re-read the message > > with due attention. > > > > Oh and thnak you for *sahring* your pearls of wisdom,it is > > engliheting to learn that the Moon is the karak for Mother. > > > > Nice to learn that I can also delivr volcablary that you have > > diffculty relating to! > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > Neither statistics black and white or coloured version, nor > > > philosophy is involved, Mr Krishnan2804. When someone > says "often" > > it > > > means simply that it is a frequently occuring or observed > > phenomenon. > > > And since it is observed, it has got to have come from a > survey or > > > personal observation. > > > > > > And since you made the observation that <<astrologers often > > > recommended...>> I was right in asking the source of the > statement > > > and should not have to go to the astrologers who were being > > observed > > > and reported about! Simple logic, no run-on sentences! And I > have > > > gone on record many a times that my english is very poor. > Still if > > > you must pick on that and criticise my writing style, well > > obviously > > > I cannot stop you from doing that, now, can I? > > > > > > Does this make sense or it is too complex still ;-) > > > > > > RR > > > > > > <Oh now that the gender misconception has been corrected from > your > > > mind, let us address another misconception: I do not play > games! > > You > > > may say I am a perfect couch potato!> > > > > > > > > > , "krishnan2804" > > > <krishnan2804@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Apologies for my error in assuming your gender. However one > can > > be > > > > easily mislead by the name 'Rohini' which is generally > > associated > > > > with females and of course your grammatical style which is > very > > > > Venusian. > > > > > > > > So Rohiniji your queries pertaining to the use of 'often' > would > > > have > > > > to be directed at the practising astrologers that make such > > > > recommendations. One assumes they are based on vast > experience > > or a > > > > basic blind adherence to a rule that they may have read in > some > > > text. > > > > It is due to this very ambiguity that I have raised this > point. > > > > > > > > I also don't think Jyotish can be 'proved' or measured by > > > > statistical inference. Statistics, as you may know, are very > > black > > > > and white and leave out the oh-so colourful details which > are of > > > > topmost importance Jyotish. Not leaving forgetting their > > > > unreliability which is represented by the standard error. In > > this > > > > context I would not label Joyitsh as an exact science, but > more > > of > > > > an art based on intuition and the observations of patterns > > combined > > > > with a highly refined level of synthesis - all of which > cannot > > be > > > > quantified. > > > > > > > > And there it is purely philosophical response (two can play > that > > > > game! ). > > > > > > > > P.S. do you have Saturn in either Gemini/Virgo? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Question not being asked on behalf of Rohini Devi (who's > dat?) > > > > > > > > > > How did you arrive at the qualifier "OFTEN"? > > > > > > > > > > Based on how many observations? Over what time period, etc > > > > > > > > > > If astrology must be touted willy-nilly as a science, we > > better > > > > > collect and put our facts across seriously! > > > > > > > > > > Sounds reasonable, fellow 'scientists'? > > > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > , "krishnan2804" > > > > > <krishnan2804@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Members & experianced Jyotishis (Ashutoshki, > > Prashantiji, > > > > > > Rohini Devi ) > > > > > > > > > > > > This is probably a very elementary query but it's > causing me > > > > some > > > > > > confusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > Astrologers often recommended that one should not marry > a > > > person > > > > of > > > > > > the opposite rising sign/ Chandra rasi. For example a > native > > > > with > > > > > > the Moon in Capricorn should not marry someone with the > Moon > > in > > > > > > Cancer/Cancer ascendant and vice versa, or a Taurus > > ascendant > > > > > should > > > > > > avoid marriage with a Scorpio ascendant. > > > > > > > > > > > > However would not the 7th house from the ascendant/Moon > > > > represent > > > > > > the partner type of person one is attracted to?) > > > > > > > > > > > > Comments would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.