1941 Gutka : Contradictions / a step ahead?

[Guest guest]

Gurudev; i was stressing time and again that the original version

could have misprints that could not have not been reviewed, u r the

only one who accepted my view. i gave instance of darusti of 1939

and 42 pt ji himself. some mistakes must have skipped his notice.

what is the harm if we correct it now?

prabhakar ji didn't REVIEW it , he printed as it is, the process of

revision is challenging. till date u have pointed 3-4 mistakes in

the original volumes.

i am time and again saying; learned members should expressly object

to errors pointed by u. or accept them as they are rectified.

prabhakar ji for present should be left to himself to correct the

printing.

we have moved a step ahead.

kulbirbance

 

, " varun_trvd "

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Dear Kulbir bhai,

>

> I have quoted these lines from the urdu edition. Prabhakar ji has

> not added or dropped any word.

>

> Regards.

>

> varun

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

, " kulbir bance "

> <kulbirbance@> wrote:

> >

> > gurudev; khana no. shukar shanichar dono khanna no 4 aur suraj

> khanna no 10.

> > khanna no 10 ka suraj khanna no 4 ke grahon ko kaise dekhega.

lk

> aspects;

> > line 9-10 dono no10 suraj 4; yani 1-2 ke anusar dono ko suraj

> > dekhe.parphaladesh me kitni badi contradiction. ARTH KA ANARTH

> > bhai ji kahin printing me gadbad hai;

> > line no 14 page 283 aur line 9-10 page no 284 me adla badli ho

> gayi.

> > main to kab se kah raha hun misprints or wrong words insertion

ho

> sakte hai

> > par manata hi koi nahin.

> > sincerely

> > kulbirbance

> >

> >

> >

> > On 3/27/08, varun_trvd <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Respected members,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Do you think that there are contradictions in the following

> statements

> > > made in the 1941 gutka ?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > The context is combination of Saturn + Venus:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Statement 1*

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Page 283 lines 1-2 says,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Dono ko sooraj dekhe* :

> > >

> > > sanichar ka purjor bura asar, maut purdard hogi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Statement 2*

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Page 284 lines 9-12 says

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Dono # 10 aur sooraj # 4* :

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > sanichar ka bura asar na hoga balki jaydad banegi . maut bhi

> purdard na

> > > hogi, balki lambi umra hogi, naqad rupia paisa beshak kam hi

> hove.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > * statement 2 mein bhi sooraj dono ko dekh raha hai. Don't you

> think

> > > statement 1 and statement 2 are in contradiction with one

> another? *

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > The Gutka further says

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Statement 3*

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Page 283/4 lines 13-15+

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Dono # 4 aur suraj #10 : *

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > nihayat purdard maut hove, nihayat kareebi ristedar karobar

mein

> shamil

> > > hokar ya vaise hi uska dhan kha pee jayenge.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > *Although it is the otherway round and still talking

of 'purdard

> maut'. *

> > >

> > > *Does it mean irrespective of the fact whether the sun aspects

> this

> > > combination or this combination aspects the sun 'nihayat

> purdard maut' is

> > > certain?*

> > >

> > > **

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Kulbir bhai,

 

In such matters we have to be very careful. Before declaring that

there is a printing mistake in the book we have to seek the opinion

of all the scholars of the Lal Kitab. We should declare that there

is a mistake only after an unanimity is reached. In case there is no

unanimity, we would prefer that it is left as such and let

individual scholars interpret it the way they want. We should, under

no circumstances, force our views on others.

 

Some of our senior members are very sensitive or touchy about the

word 'mistake'. For them the Lal Kitab is so sacrosanct that they

can not even think of printing mistakes could have occurred in the

book. If you notice, that is why I used a question mark after the

word contradiction, signalling that to me it appears to be a

contradiction, does it appear the same to you also.

 

I am grateful that you seem to be as concerned about it as I am.

 

Have a nice day,

 

Varun

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " kulbirbance "

<kulbirbance wrote:

>

> Gurudev; i was stressing time and again that the original version

> could have misprints that could not have not been reviewed, u r

the

> only one who accepted my view. i gave instance of darusti of 1939

> and 42 pt ji himself. some mistakes must have skipped his notice.

> what is the harm if we correct it now?

> prabhakar ji didn't REVIEW it , he printed as it is, the process

of

> revision is challenging. till date u have pointed 3-4 mistakes in

> the original volumes.

> i am time and again saying; learned members should expressly

object

> to errors pointed by u. or accept them as they are rectified.

> prabhakar ji for present should be left to himself to correct the

> printing.

> we have moved a step ahead.

> kulbirbance

>

> , " varun_trvd "

> <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Kulbir bhai,

> >

> > I have quoted these lines from the urdu edition. Prabhakar ji

has

> > not added or dropped any word.

> >

> > Regards.

> >

> > varun

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " kulbir bance "

> > <kulbirbance@> wrote:

> > >

> > > gurudev; khana no. shukar shanichar dono khanna no 4 aur suraj

> > khanna no 10.

> > > khanna no 10 ka suraj khanna no 4 ke grahon ko kaise dekhega.

> lk

> > aspects;

> > > line 9-10 dono no10 suraj 4; yani 1-2 ke anusar dono ko suraj

> > > dekhe.parphaladesh me kitni badi contradiction. ARTH KA ANARTH

> > > bhai ji kahin printing me gadbad hai;

> > > line no 14 page 283 aur line 9-10 page no 284 me adla badli ho

> > gayi.

> > > main to kab se kah raha hun misprints or wrong words insertion

> ho

> > sakte hai

> > > par manata hi koi nahin.

> > > sincerely

> > > kulbirbance

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > On 3/27/08, varun_trvd <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respected members,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Do you think that there are contradictions in the following

> > statements

> > > > made in the 1941 gutka ?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > The context is combination of Saturn + Venus:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Statement 1*

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Page 283 lines 1-2 says,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Dono ko sooraj dekhe* :

> > > >

> > > > sanichar ka purjor bura asar, maut purdard hogi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Statement 2*

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Page 284 lines 9-12 says

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Dono # 10 aur sooraj # 4* :

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > sanichar ka bura asar na hoga balki jaydad banegi . maut bhi

> > purdard na

> > > > hogi, balki lambi umra hogi, naqad rupia paisa beshak kam hi

> > hove.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > * statement 2 mein bhi sooraj dono ko dekh raha hai. Don't

you

> > think

> > > > statement 1 and statement 2 are in contradiction with one

> > another? *

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > The Gutka further says

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Statement 3*

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Page 283/4 lines 13-15+

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Dono # 4 aur suraj #10 : *

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > nihayat purdard maut hove, nihayat kareebi ristedar karobar

> mein

> > shamil

> > > > hokar ya vaise hi uska dhan kha pee jayenge.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *Although it is the otherway round and still talking

> of 'purdard

> > maut'. *

> > > >

> > > > *Does it mean irrespective of the fact whether the sun

aspects

> > this

> > > > combination or this combination aspects the sun 'nihayat

> > purdard maut' is

> > > > certain?*

> > > >

> > > > **

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Varun ji;

 

 

i have observed that only a very very few people have the

approach towards this book; which we can call approach of study.

a person picks up some basics of the book; read some referance

material and picks a handbook of upayas that they apply to their own

horoscopes and also recommend to others.

pt ji recommended to study and review the book again and again;

but i doubt that only a few would have read the whole volume as a

subject text, let alone reviwing.

you have started an era of new approach; ur mails force people to

pick up; open and read lalkitab as a subject text.

otherwise only and only remedial portion was read and it was

convenient to skip through difficult part.

but by ur approach the learning of lalkitab will start, it will help

understand basis of upayas. then upayas will be further improved or

atleast the ones written in the book will be recommended effectively.

then the stigma of totka book will be wiped out.

may pt ji's soul bless you and the fragnance of ur knowledge, study

and research spread far and wide.

 

kulbirbance.

 

 

, " varun_trvd "

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Dear Kulbir bhai,

>

> In such matters we have to be very careful. Before declaring that

> there is a printing mistake in the book we have to seek the

opinion

> of all the scholars of the Lal Kitab. We should declare that there

> is a mistake only after an unanimity is reached. In case there is

no

> unanimity, we would prefer that it is left as such and let

> individual scholars interpret it the way they want. We should,

under

> no circumstances, force our views on others.

>

> Some of our senior members are very sensitive or touchy about the

> word 'mistake'. For them the Lal Kitab is so sacrosanct that they

> can not even think of printing mistakes could have occurred in the

> book. If you notice, that is why I used a question mark after the

> word contradiction, signalling that to me it appears to be a

> contradiction, does it appear the same to you also.

>

> I am grateful that you seem to be as concerned about it as I am.

>

> Have a nice day,

>

> Varun

>

>

>

>

>

, " kulbirbance "

> <kulbirbance@> wrote:

> >

> > Gurudev; i was stressing time and again that the original

version

> > could have misprints that could not have not been reviewed, u r

> the

> > only one who accepted my view. i gave instance of darusti of

1939

> > and 42 pt ji himself. some mistakes must have skipped his

notice.

> > what is the harm if we correct it now?

> > prabhakar ji didn't REVIEW it , he printed as it is, the process

> of

> > revision is challenging. till date u have pointed 3-4 mistakes

in

> > the original volumes.

> > i am time and again saying; learned members should expressly

> object

> > to errors pointed by u. or accept them as they are rectified.

> > prabhakar ji for present should be left to himself to correct

the

> > printing.

> > we have moved a step ahead.

> > kulbirbance

> >

> > , " varun_trvd "

> > <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Kulbir bhai,

> > >

> > > I have quoted these lines from the urdu edition. Prabhakar ji

> has

> > > not added or dropped any word.

> > >

> > > Regards.

> > >

> > > varun

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " kulbir bance "

> > > <kulbirbance@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > gurudev; khana no. shukar shanichar dono khanna no 4 aur

suraj

> > > khanna no 10.

> > > > khanna no 10 ka suraj khanna no 4 ke grahon ko kaise

dekhega.

> > lk

> > > aspects;

> > > > line 9-10 dono no10 suraj 4; yani 1-2 ke anusar dono ko suraj

> > > > dekhe.parphaladesh me kitni badi contradiction. ARTH KA

ANARTH

> > > > bhai ji kahin printing me gadbad hai;

> > > > line no 14 page 283 aur line 9-10 page no 284 me adla badli

ho

> > > gayi.

> > > > main to kab se kah raha hun misprints or wrong words

insertion

> > ho

> > > sakte hai

> > > > par manata hi koi nahin.

> > > > sincerely

> > > > kulbirbance

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > On 3/27/08, varun_trvd <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Respected members,

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Do you think that there are contradictions in the

following

> > > statements

> > > > > made in the 1941 gutka ?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > The context is combination of Saturn + Venus:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Statement 1*

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Page 283 lines 1-2 says,

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Dono ko sooraj dekhe* :

> > > > >

> > > > > sanichar ka purjor bura asar, maut purdard hogi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Statement 2*

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Page 284 lines 9-12 says

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Dono # 10 aur sooraj # 4* :

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > sanichar ka bura asar na hoga balki jaydad banegi . maut

bhi

> > > purdard na

> > > > > hogi, balki lambi umra hogi, naqad rupia paisa beshak kam

hi

> > > hove.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > * statement 2 mein bhi sooraj dono ko dekh raha hai. Don't

> you

> > > think

> > > > > statement 1 and statement 2 are in contradiction with one

> > > another? *

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > The Gutka further says

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Statement 3*

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Page 283/4 lines 13-15+

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Dono # 4 aur suraj #10 : *

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > nihayat purdard maut hove, nihayat kareebi ristedar

karobar

> > mein

> > > shamil

> > > > > hokar ya vaise hi uska dhan kha pee jayenge.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > *Although it is the otherway round and still talking

> > of 'purdard

> > > maut'. *

> > > > >

> > > > > *Does it mean irrespective of the fact whether the sun

> aspects

> > > this

> > > > > combination or this combination aspects the sun 'nihayat

> > > purdard maut' is

> > > > > certain?*

> > > > >

> > > > > **

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>