Makan kundali / Umesh sharma ji , Thakur Iqbal Chand ji , Yograj ji

[Guest guest]

Aadarneeya Sharma ji, Thakur saheb, Yograj ji

 

jo kamare makan mein dakhil hote waqt dahine hath ki taraf honge vah

bahar nikalte waqt bayeen taraf ho jayege.

Ya to Lal Kitab ke is ansh mein kuchha galat chhapa hai ya fir ham

log samajh nahi pa rahe.

 

hoobahoo yahi bat 1942 urdu ed page 347 lines # 14 onwards bhi likhi

hai. 1952 urd ed page 206 aur 1942 ki text bikul hi samajh mein nahi

aa rahi.

 

kripaya is par prakash dalen, aap log to is kitab ko bahut arse se

parh rahe hai.

 

Adar sahit,

 

Varun Trivedi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " Umesh Sharma "

<mudit982001 wrote:

>

>

> Respected Lalkitabee Ji,

> In my view this statement has Two different terms.

> 1. KUNDALI KE KHANA NO. 1 SE CHALKAR AGAR NAUVAIN KO

> JAYAIN YA MAKAAN SE BAAHAR KO NIKALAIN TO JIS TARAF -DAYAAN (right)

> HAATH HOGAA- US TARAF MAKAAN KE TAMAAM GRAH JO KHANA NO. 1 SE 8

TAK HO

> APNA SABOOT DENGEY.

> 2. ISI TARAH AGAR 12 NO. KHAANE SE APNE AAPKO KHANA

> > NO. 9 KI TARAF AATEY HUVE GINE YA MAKAAN MAIN BAAHAR SE AAKAR

DAAKHIL

> > HONE LAGAIN TO KHANA NO. 12 SE 12, 11 10 KE GHARON KE GRAH --

DAAYEN

> > (right) TARAF MAKAAN KE --SABOOT DENGEY.

> 1. In first term the person go out side from house.

> 2. In 2nd term the persaon come in side from out side.

> Both are opposite directins.

>

 

> Regards

>

>

 

> Umesh Sharma

>

>

>

>

, " lalkitabee "

> <lalkitabee@> wrote:

> >

> > Bhai Yograj ji

> >

> > aapka lalkitab ke original 5 version bina kisi swarth ke logo

main

> > baantnaa samaaj ke liye ek aisa yogdaan hai jise ki aane wale

samay

> > main kabhi bhi nahi bhulaayaa ja saktaa. Aapne ise is roop main

jis

> > tarah se surakshit kiyaa hai, vah appki udaartaa ka parichayak

hai.It

> > is a great work of great soul like u.

> >

> > Lekin Yograj ji, in 5 books ke baad aglaa daur jo ab shuru hua

hai

> > iski kalpana kuchh logon ke man main aaj se 3 varsh pehley hee

thi aur

> > uske liye kuchh prayaas kiye gaye, jinhain kuchh logon ne Urdu vs

> > Hindi/Dalda ka khitaab dekar darkinaar kar diyaa aur khud ko is

tarah

> se

> > expose kiyaa ki shayad pujyaa pandit ji ki Rooh unhain lalkitab

> samjhaa

> > kar jaa rahi hai aur unki baat ko hooob-hoo maan liyaa jaye.

Lalkitab

> > ki lines main ooper neechey ,aage peechey ghumaakar ve log kyaa

sabit

> > karnaa chahtey they samajh nahi aayaa, aaj aap khud ko hee dekho

aap

> to

> > urdu bahut badhia jaantey hain fir bhi galati to ho hi jaati

hai, arre

> > bhai insaan galatiyon ka putlaa hai,Jaise aap galati kar saktey

hain

> aur

> > bhi kar saktey hain, aaj groups main hum sabhi isliye ikatthey

hotey

> > hain taaki hum log galatiyon aur bhrantoyon se alag hatkar gyaan

ek

> > doosrey ke jariye prapt kar sakain.

> >

> > Chalo chhodo in baaton ko aur jaraa Original Lalkitab 1952 ke

> > page no. 206 par " GRAH KUNDALI KI MAKAAN KE HISAB SE DURUSTI par

nazar

> > daalo,likhaa hai ki ---KUNDALI KE KHANA NO. 1 SE CHALKAR AGAR

NAUVAIN

> KO

> > JAYAIN YA MAKAAN SE BAAHAR KO NIKALAIN TO JIS TARAF -DAYAAN

(right)

> > HAATH HOGAA- US TARAF MAKAAN KE TAMAAM GRAH JO KHANA NO. 1 SE 8

TAK HO

> > APNA SABOOT DENGEY, ISI TARAH AGAR 12 NO. KHAANE SE APNE AAPKO

KHANA

> > NO. 9 KI TARAF AATEY HUVE GINE YA MAKAAN MAIN BAAHAR SE AAKAR

DAAKHIL

> > HONE LAGAIN TO KHANA NO. 12 SE 12, 11 10 KE GHARON KE GRAH --

DAAYEN

> > (right) TARAF MAKAAN KE --SABOOT DENGEY.

> >

> > Kyaa aisa nahi lag rahaa hai ki yahaan par bhi kuchh

contradiction

> > hai. Dono hee tarah makan ke daayeen taraf saboot. Mujhe lagtaa

hai ki

> > yahaan par bhi lalkitab main shayd misprint hai ya galati ki

gunjaish

> > hai. Aapkaa kyaa vichaar hai? Kyon na hum aur baaton par jor

dene ki

> > bajaay is muddey par discussion ko continue karain. Agar meraa

shak

> > jayaj hai to is par gaur kiyaa jaaaye, agar najayaz hai to uskaa

> > khulaasa karne ki taqleef karain. Rahee baat shikve shikayat ki--

to

> > yograaj ji vo to chaltey hee rahengey, Koyee gyaan lene ke liye

group

> > main aayaa ,koyee dene ke liye, koyee paise batorne to koyee

chele

> > ikatthey karney main bhi interested ho saktaaa hai. In sab

baaton ka

> > koyee tharmameter to hai nahi . Who is queen & who is maid , it

shudnt

> > be motive all of us.Kyon group main shikvey shikayat par jor de

rahey

> > ho.Aur apni taraf se main ek baat saaf karnaa chahtaa hoon ki

maine

> > Aaina dikhane ki baat un logo ke liye likhi thi jo ,lalkitab ke

babat

> > poochhey gaye sawaal ke jawab main bola kartey they ki

> ---PROFESSIONALS

> > LE UDENGEY -isliye bolnaa thik nahi. aaj is group main ek ek

baat kee

> > tafseel dene ki koshish ki ja rahee hai, aur to aur lalkitab ki

mool

> > pustak ki bhi galatiyaan pakdi jaa rahee hain aur professionals

bhi

> > khulkar bol rahey hain jahaan tak unhain pataa hai. To ve log

aaj kis

> > gufaa main jaakar baith gaye hain. Sahee maayno main to shayad

aaj is

> > group ke yogdaan se ve bhi seekh rahey hongey ki lalkitab ko

kaise

> > padhaa jaye. QAIYDEY KI TARAH YA EK RESEARCH ORIENTED GRANTH KI

TARAH.

> > agar meri baat theek nahi to un logon ko yahaan par shirkat

jaroor

> karni

> > chahiye.

> >

> > Mere red words ki baabat discussion ko roop dene ka kash karain.

> >

> > Pt.lalkitabee

> >

> > V.Shukla

> >

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Maharaj;

> > >

> > >

> > > i didn't take anyone's name; how did u reach the conclusion

that it

> > > is aimed at you. to be very frank i had bhatia ji in mind.

nowhere

> did

> > u cut

> > > my viewpoint; it was all started by bhatia ji when i asked him

about

> > his

> > > foot note and it's authenticity. i am sorry i have to go

personal on

> > record

> > > but just check; he comes in various forums; tries to be a

bhisham

> > pitama but

> > > gets lost whenever any logical thing is to be discussed. you

know i

> > have

> > > proof of many other things about participation but don't want

to

> > derail the

> > > process of ongoing discussions by starting a new controversy;

> > > would you please be kind enough to let me know as to where did

my

> mail

> > point

> > > towards you or in which manner did u interpret it.

> > > baundale hoe bande nu jhunda te paya kapda wi bhoot pret hi

lagda so

> > just

> > > have a deep breath and reanalyse.

> > >

> > > kulbirbains.

> > >

> > >

> > > On 3/31/08, Yograj Prabhakar yr_prabhakar@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Varun jee

> > > >

> > > > The tragedy is not only what you have mentioned. Another

great

> > tragedy is

> > > > that whoever found a " Sonth Kee Ganth " starts thinking

himself a

> > > > " Pansaaree " , unfortunately we all are suffering from this

fatal

> > disease.

> > > >

> > > > There are two kinds of people in Lal Kitab, " Dil Waley " and

> " Deemagh

> > Wale "

> > > > Dil waley has more Josh than Hosh whereas Deemagh Waley has

more

> > Hosh but

> > > > less Josh. Both are actually complimentary to each other. A

> perfect

> > blend of

> > > > Josh and Hosh is a must to achieve anything. Dil Walon ne toh

> Pundit

> > jee ke

> > > > 5 Anmol Rattan bataur Prashad dunia bhar ko baant kar apne

sir se

> > Kitab ka

> > > > Rinn Utaar diya hai. Ab iski Roshni ko duniya bhar mein

phailaney

> ki

> > > > zimmewaree " Deemagh Walon " ki bhi hai. Agar aaj Ek Ek lafz

aur Ek

> Ek

> > logic

> > > > par agar debate

> > > > ho rahi hai to yaqeen karna, is baat kee khushi mujh se zyada

> shayad

> > hi

> > > > kisi aur ko hogi. It is not necessary that we agree with each

> other

> > on every

> > > > point. Every individual has his own way of seeing the

things, we

> > must not

> > > > raise question mark on that. Fot some Lal Kitab is

just " another

> > book " of

> > > > astrology, for many it is sacrosanct or divine scripture,

whats

> > wrong with

> > > > that? How a person looks at a filled bottle is depends upon

his

> own

> > > > judgment and capacity, why one should try to impose his

thoughts

> > over

> > > > anyone? We cannot even force our thoughts on our own kids,

so how

> we

> > can

> > > > expect others to follow our dictates?

> > > >

> > > > I do not know about the others but, for me knowing about how

> Pundit

> > jee

> > > > use to talk, walk, sit, wear, behave, looks and even abuse

is of

> no

> > less

> > > > significance, if someone has any objection - I do not care.

And

> what

> > is

> > > > wrong in it if someone produce some point (like in the case

of

> Bejod

> > > > Chhalla) in reference to the words of veterans? A few days

back a

> > remedy of

> > > > keeping Sponge was discussed in the forum, it is nowhere

written

> in

> > the book

> > > > as for how many days this sponge is supposed to be kept in

case of

> > Varshphal

> > > > and what to do with this afterwards. I prefer not to speak

about

> > that as I

> > > > knew that a demand of " Forensic analysis " will arise if I

forward

> my

> > views

> > > > since the same was conveyed by a non-

professional " VayoVridh " Lal

> > kitab

> > > > premi.

> > > >

> > > > As far as running from the participation is concerned, I

would

> like

> > to

> > > > assure you that Peeth Dikha Kar Bhag jaana meri fitrat nahi

hai.

> > Browse the

> > > > achieve, and see how many mails with Colorful Headings were

> directed

> > to me.

> > > > But I always took it as a compliment. Even the gauche way to

> degrade

> > never

> > > > bothered me. I continued to participate in the debates with

my

> > little or no

> > > > knowledge. But I hate to poke my nose in controversial

issues and

> > the issues

> > > > I am not sure

> > > > about. If that is called a weakness - I accept it gleefully.

> > > >

> > > > I also read starements about " showing the mirror "

and " Nishkasit

> kar

> > diya

> > > > tha " etc. I always treat you as the shadow of Prof.

Upadhyaye jee

> > who taught

> > > > me the great lesson of " Forgive and Forget " , so I was a

little

> > surprised

> > > > (but not at all shocked) with this retaliatory attitude. Now

you

> > will agree

> > > > with me that all chickens look gray in the dark.

> > > >

> > > > Kulbir jee, whos Lal Kitab business will suffer? Who is

afraid of

> > > > Shudhi-Karan? Whos Chele Chapte will ran away? To whom you

are

> > refering? I

> > > > am like a " Nanga Putt Choran Vich Khedey " , " Na aqal naa

maut " - so

> > have

> > > > nothing to loose. Neither astrology is my bread & butter nor

I

> have

> > any

> > > > Chela-Chapta. But yes, like you, I too have great faith in

this

> > divine

> > > > scripture and no one can ever deprived me of that.

> > > >

> > > > Respectfully

> > > > Yograj Prabhakar

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > *kulbir bance kulbirbance@* wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Gurudev; remember the last line of this book is MADAD MALIK

APNI

> > DEGA,

> > > > NEKI KHUD KARTE RAHO.

> > > > baki KUCH TO MAJBURIYAN RAHIN HONGI; YOUNH HI KOI BEWAFA

NAHIN

> HOTA,

> > > > pehli majboori; logon ko yeh shaq paida na ho jai ki mujhe

> lalkitab

> > ki

> > > > samajh nahin.

> > > > second; why to comment i.e. accept, deny or improve upon a

point

> > which we

> > > > ourselves couldn't point out. bhai hamse badhkar kaun;

> > > > please try to understand their difficulty they have

apprehensions

> > > > 1. their lalkitab commerce will suffer.

> > > > 2. it is difficult to acept that one has been associated

with this

> > book

> > > > for years; but all gone waste; all of sudden comes a bolt

that his

> > approach

> > > > was wrong; how to undo that. its hard to accept unless

antarman ka

> > > > shudikaran ho gaya jai.

> > > > 3. thier goodwill and chele chapte/ following will run away.

> > > > so it is convenient to turn a blind eye.

> > > > jab pt ji ne shuru me hi likh diya DUNIYAVI HISAB KITAB

HAI , KOI

> > > > DAWA-E-KHUDAI NAHIN. then what's wrong in reviewing and

> discussing.

> > rome was

> > > > not built in a day, we all can become masters but patience

and

> > integrity is

> > > > a vital ingredient.

> > > > sincerely

> > > > kulbirbance

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > On 3/29/08, varun_trvd varun_trvd@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Respected members,

> > > > >

> > > > > This is the tragedy; raise a fundamental astrological

issue and

> > all

> > > > > those who claim to have studied the Lal Kitab for decades

go

> > silent.

> > > > > If I had raised a peripheral question there would have

been at

> > least

> > > > > half a dozen people participating in an agitated debate.

> > > > >

> > > > > Go to the archives and you will find long debates on

issues like

> > > > > whether the steel ring should be open at the ends or

closed, or

> > > > > whether keeping a square piece of silver for Saturn is

just to

> > find

> > > > > out the nature of the Saturn or it is also a part of the

upaya

> and

> > > > > so on.

> > > > >

> > > > > Or talk about any myth or a legend about the book, and you

find

> > > > > every body ready with a myth of their own. Every body

claiming

> to

> > be

> > > > > very close to Pandit ji; they would go at great lengths to

> > describe

> > > > > what he wore, how he walked, how the spirits dictated the

book

> to

> > > > > him and so on. But when it comes to breaking some

astrological

> > > > > misconceptions surrounding this book, none of them is to be

> seen.

> > > > >

> > > > > On this current issue under discussion except for Kulbir

ji and

> > > > > Raheja ji, no body has come out with any comments either

way.

> > > > >

> > > > > It is this apathy to discuss the Lal Kitab and its contents

> purely

> > > > > with an astrological perspective, which has lead other

> astrologers

> > > > > to be vary of it. No wonder that they consider this book

as a

> book

> > > > > of Tona-Totkas and the Lal Kitab astrologers as semi-

literate

> > small

> > > > > time village pundits. I do not blame others for this

> > misconception.

> > > > > We are at fault. It is our own apathy responsible for it

because

> > we

> > > > > lack confidence to argue out issues on their astrological

> merits.

> > > > >

> > > > > Well, doesn't matter; our effort is to get the rightful

place

> this

> > > > > book deserves in the world of Indian Astrology.

Participation or

> > no

> > > > > participation we will continue with our effort.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > >

> > > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ------------------------------

> > > > Never miss a thing. Make your

> >

homepage.<http://us.rd./evt=51438/*http://www./r/hs

>

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Varun ji, in sabki taraf se main hi reply de deta hun;

kya varshphal ka basais;

rashi no ke bolne wale grah;

etc kain portion hain jo aapne unsolved kah kar chod diye;is liye jabtak is baat ka pata na chal jaye ki pt ji ki makkan kundali ka basis kya tha is par koi comment karna betuki baat hai.

han ek exercise zaroor ho sakti hai ki apne apne gharon me dekhon kis grah ki cheez kahan baithi hai.

sincerely

kulbirbains

On 4/1/08, varun_trvd <varun_trvd wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Aadarneeya Sharma ji, Thakur saheb, Yograj jijo kamare makan mein dakhil hote waqt dahine hath ki taraf honge vah bahar nikalte waqt bayeen taraf ho jayege.Ya to Lal Kitab ke is ansh mein kuchha galat chhapa hai ya fir ham

log samajh nahi pa rahe.hoobahoo yahi bat 1942 urdu ed page 347 lines # 14 onwards bhi likhi hai. 1952 urd ed page 206 aur 1942 ki text bikul hi samajh mein nahi aa rahi.kripaya is par prakash dalen, aap log to is kitab ko bahut arse se

parh rahe hai.Adar sahit,Varun Trivedi , " Umesh Sharma "

<mudit982001 wrote:>> > Respected Lalkitabee Ji,> In my view this statement has Two different terms.> 1. KUNDALI KE KHANA NO. 1 SE CHALKAR AGAR NAUVAIN KO> JAYAIN YA MAKAAN SE BAAHAR KO NIKALAIN TO JIS TARAF -DAYAAN (right)

> HAATH HOGAA- US TARAF MAKAAN KE TAMAAM GRAH JO KHANA NO. 1 SE 8 TAK HO> APNA SABOOT DENGEY.> 2. ISI TARAH AGAR 12 NO. KHAANE SE APNE AAPKO KHANA> > NO. 9 KI TARAF AATEY HUVE GINE YA MAKAAN MAIN BAAHAR SE AAKAR

DAAKHIL> > HONE LAGAIN TO KHANA NO. 12 SE 12, 11 10 KE GHARON KE GRAH --DAAYEN> > (right) TARAF MAKAAN KE --SABOOT DENGEY.> 1. In first term the person go out side from house.> 2. In 2nd term the persaon come in side from out side.

> Both are opposite directins.> > Regards> > > Umesh Sharma> > > > > > > > > > > , " lalkitabee "

> <lalkitabee@> wrote:> >> > Bhai Yograj ji> >> > aapka lalkitab ke original 5 version bina kisi swarth ke logo main> > baantnaa samaaj ke liye ek aisa yogdaan hai jise ki aane wale

samay> > main kabhi bhi nahi bhulaayaa ja saktaa. Aapne ise is roop main jis> > tarah se surakshit kiyaa hai, vah appki udaartaa ka parichayak hai.It> > is a great work of great soul like u.

> >> > Lekin Yograj ji, in 5 books ke baad aglaa daur jo ab shuru hua hai> > iski kalpana kuchh logon ke man main aaj se 3 varsh pehley hee thi aur> > uske liye kuchh prayaas kiye gaye, jinhain kuchh logon ne Urdu vs

> > Hindi/Dalda ka khitaab dekar darkinaar kar diyaa aur khud ko is tarah> se> > expose kiyaa ki shayad pujyaa pandit ji ki Rooh unhain lalkitab> samjhaa> > kar jaa rahi hai aur unki baat ko hooob-hoo maan liyaa jaye.

Lalkitab> > ki lines main ooper neechey ,aage peechey ghumaakar ve log kyaa sabit> > karnaa chahtey they samajh nahi aayaa, aaj aap khud ko hee dekho aap> to> > urdu bahut badhia jaantey hain fir bhi galati to ho hi jaati

hai, arre> > bhai insaan galatiyon ka putlaa hai,Jaise aap galati kar saktey hain> aur> > bhi kar saktey hain, aaj groups main hum sabhi isliye ikatthey hotey> > hain taaki hum log galatiyon aur bhrantoyon se alag hatkar gyaan

ek> > doosrey ke jariye prapt kar sakain.> >> > Chalo chhodo in baaton ko aur jaraa Original Lalkitab 1952 ke> > page no. 206 par " GRAH KUNDALI KI MAKAAN KE HISAB SE DURUSTI par

nazar> > daalo,likhaa hai ki ---KUNDALI KE KHANA NO. 1 SE CHALKAR AGAR NAUVAIN> KO> > JAYAIN YA MAKAAN SE BAAHAR KO NIKALAIN TO JIS TARAF -DAYAAN (right)> > HAATH HOGAA- US TARAF MAKAAN KE TAMAAM GRAH JO KHANA NO. 1 SE 8

TAK HO> > APNA SABOOT DENGEY, ISI TARAH AGAR 12 NO. KHAANE SE APNE AAPKO KHANA> > NO. 9 KI TARAF AATEY HUVE GINE YA MAKAAN MAIN BAAHAR SE AAKAR DAAKHIL> > HONE LAGAIN TO KHANA NO. 12 SE 12, 11 10 KE GHARON KE GRAH --

DAAYEN> > (right) TARAF MAKAAN KE --SABOOT DENGEY.> >> > Kyaa aisa nahi lag rahaa hai ki yahaan par bhi kuchh contradiction> > hai. Dono hee tarah makan ke daayeen taraf saboot. Mujhe lagtaa

hai ki> > yahaan par bhi lalkitab main shayd misprint hai ya galati ki gunjaish> > hai. Aapkaa kyaa vichaar hai? Kyon na hum aur baaton par jor dene ki> > bajaay is muddey par discussion ko continue karain. Agar meraa

shak> > jayaj hai to is par gaur kiyaa jaaaye, agar najayaz hai to uskaa> > khulaasa karne ki taqleef karain. Rahee baat shikve shikayat ki--to> > yograaj ji vo to chaltey hee rahengey, Koyee gyaan lene ke liye

group> > main aayaa ,koyee dene ke liye, koyee paise batorne to koyee chele> > ikatthey karney main bhi interested ho saktaaa hai. In sab baaton ka> > koyee tharmameter to hai nahi . Who is queen & who is maid , it

shudnt> > be motive all of us.Kyon group main shikvey shikayat par jor de rahey> > ho.Aur apni taraf se main ek baat saaf karnaa chahtaa hoon ki maine> > Aaina dikhane ki baat un logo ke liye likhi thi jo ,lalkitab ke

babat> > poochhey gaye sawaal ke jawab main bola kartey they ki> ---PROFESSIONALS> > LE UDENGEY -isliye bolnaa thik nahi. aaj is group main ek ek baat kee> > tafseel dene ki koshish ki ja rahee hai, aur to aur lalkitab ki

mool> > pustak ki bhi galatiyaan pakdi jaa rahee hain aur professionals bhi> > khulkar bol rahey hain jahaan tak unhain pataa hai. To ve log aaj kis> > gufaa main jaakar baith gaye hain. Sahee maayno main to shayad

aaj is> > group ke yogdaan se ve bhi seekh rahey hongey ki lalkitab ko kaise> > padhaa jaye. QAIYDEY KI TARAH YA EK RESEARCH ORIENTED GRANTH KI TARAH.> > agar meri baat theek nahi to un logon ko yahaan par shirkat

jaroor> karni> > chahiye.> >> > Mere red words ki baabat discussion ko roop dene ka kash karain.> >> > Pt.lalkitabee> >> > V.Shukla> >

> > wrote:> > >> > > Maharaj;> > >> > >> > > i didn't take anyone's name; how did u reach the conclusion that it> > > is aimed at you. to be very frank i had bhatia ji in mind.

nowhere> did> > u cut> > > my viewpoint; it was all started by bhatia ji when i asked him about> > his> > > foot note and it's authenticity. i am sorry i have to go

personal on> > record> > > but just check; he comes in various forums; tries to be a bhisham> > pitama but> > > gets lost whenever any logical thing is to be discussed. you

know i> > have> > > proof of many other things about participation but don't want to> > derail the> > > process of ongoing discussions by starting a new controversy;

> > > would you please be kind enough to let me know as to where did my> mail> > point> > > towards you or in which manner did u interpret it.> > > baundale hoe bande nu jhunda te paya kapda wi bhoot pret hi

lagda so> > just> > > have a deep breath and reanalyse.> > >> > > kulbirbains.> > >> > >> > > On 3/31/08, Yograj Prabhakar yr_prabhakar@ wrote:

> > > >> > > > Dear Varun jee> > > >> > > > The tragedy is not only what you have mentioned. Another great> > tragedy is> > > > that whoever found a " Sonth Kee Ganth " starts thinking

himself a> > > > " Pansaaree " , unfortunately we all are suffering from this fatal> > disease.> > > >> > > > There are two kinds of people in Lal Kitab, " Dil Waley " and

> " Deemagh> > Wale " > > > > Dil waley has more Josh than Hosh whereas Deemagh Waley has more> > Hosh but> > > > less Josh. Both are actually complimentary to each other. A

> perfect> > blend of> > > > Josh and Hosh is a must to achieve anything. Dil Walon ne toh> Pundit> > jee ke> > > > 5 Anmol Rattan bataur Prashad dunia bhar ko baant kar apne

sir se> > Kitab ka> > > > Rinn Utaar diya hai. Ab iski Roshni ko duniya bhar mein phailaney> ki> > > > zimmewaree " Deemagh Walon " ki bhi hai. Agar aaj Ek Ek lafz

aur Ek> Ek> > logic> > > > par agar debate> > > > ho rahi hai to yaqeen karna, is baat kee khushi mujh se zyada> shayad> > hi> > > > kisi aur ko hogi. It is not necessary that we agree with each

> other> > on every> > > > point. Every individual has his own way of seeing the things, we> > must not> > > > raise question mark on that. Fot some Lal Kitab is

just " another> > book " of> > > > astrology, for many it is sacrosanct or divine scripture, whats> > wrong with> > > > that? How a person looks at a filled bottle is depends upon

his> own> > > > judgment and capacity, why one should try to impose his thoughts> > over> > > > anyone? We cannot even force our thoughts on our own kids, so how

> we> > can> > > > expect others to follow our dictates?> > > >> > > > I do not know about the others but, for me knowing about how> Pundit> > jee

> > > > use to talk, walk, sit, wear, behave, looks and even abuse is of> no> > less> > > > significance, if someone has any objection - I do not care. And> what

> > is> > > > wrong in it if someone produce some point (like in the case of> Bejod> > > > Chhalla) in reference to the words of veterans? A few days back a> > remedy of

> > > > keeping Sponge was discussed in the forum, it is nowhere written> in> > the book> > > > as for how many days this sponge is supposed to be kept in case of> > Varshphal

> > > > and what to do with this afterwards. I prefer not to speak about> > that as I> > > > knew that a demand of " Forensic analysis " will arise if I forward> my

> > views> > > > since the same was conveyed by a non-professional " VayoVridh " Lal> > kitab> > > > premi.> > > >> > > > As far as running from the participation is concerned, I

would> like> > to> > > > assure you that Peeth Dikha Kar Bhag jaana meri fitrat nahi hai.> > Browse the> > > > achieve, and see how many mails with Colorful Headings were

> directed> > to me.> > > > But I always took it as a compliment. Even the gauche way to> degrade> > never> > > > bothered me. I continued to participate in the debates with

my> > little or no> > > > knowledge. But I hate to poke my nose in controversial issues and> > the issues> > > > I am not sure> > > > about. If that is called a weakness - I accept it gleefully.

> > > >> > > > I also read starements about " showing the mirror " and " Nishkasit> kar> > diya> > > > tha " etc. I always treat you as the shadow of Prof.

Upadhyaye jee> > who taught> > > > me the great lesson of " Forgive and Forget " , so I was a little> > surprised> > > > (but not at all shocked) with this retaliatory attitude. Now

you> > will agree> > > > with me that all chickens look gray in the dark.> > > >> > > > Kulbir jee, whos Lal Kitab business will suffer? Who is afraid of> > > > Shudhi-Karan? Whos Chele Chapte will ran away? To whom you

are> > refering? I> > > > am like a " Nanga Putt Choran Vich Khedey " , " Na aqal naa maut " - so> > have> > > > nothing to loose. Neither astrology is my bread & butter nor

I> have> > any> > > > Chela-Chapta. But yes, like you, I too have great faith in this> > divine> > > > scripture and no one can ever deprived me of that.> > > >

> > > > Respectfully> > > > Yograj Prabhakar> > > >> > > >> > > > *kulbir bance kulbirbance@* wrote:> > > >> > > > Gurudev; remember the last line of this book is MADAD MALIK

APNI> > DEGA,> > > > NEKI KHUD KARTE RAHO.> > > > baki KUCH TO MAJBURIYAN RAHIN HONGI; YOUNH HI KOI BEWAFA NAHIN> HOTA,> > > > pehli majboori; logon ko yeh shaq paida na ho jai ki mujhe

> lalkitab> > ki> > > > samajh nahin.> > > > second; why to comment i.e. accept, deny or improve upon a point> > which we> > > > ourselves couldn't point out. bhai hamse badhkar kaun;

> > > > please try to understand their difficulty they have apprehensions> > > > 1. their lalkitab commerce will suffer.> > > > 2. it is difficult to acept that one has been associated

with this> > book> > > > for years; but all gone waste; all of sudden comes a bolt that his> > approach> > > > was wrong; how to undo that. its hard to accept unless

antarman ka> > > > shudikaran ho gaya jai.> > > > 3. thier goodwill and chele chapte/ following will run away.> > > > so it is convenient to turn a blind eye.> > > > jab pt ji ne shuru me hi likh diya DUNIYAVI HISAB KITAB

HAI , KOI> > > > DAWA-E-KHUDAI NAHIN. then what's wrong in reviewing and> discussing.> > rome was> > > > not built in a day, we all can become masters but patience

and> > integrity is> > > > a vital ingredient.> > > > sincerely> > > > kulbirbance> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > On 3/29/08, varun_trvd varun_trvd@ wrote:

> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Respected members,> > > > >> > > > > This is the tragedy; raise a fundamental astrological issue and

> > all> > > > > those who claim to have studied the Lal Kitab for decades go> > silent.> > > > > If I had raised a peripheral question there would have been at

> > least> > > > > half a dozen people participating in an agitated debate.> > > > >> > > > > Go to the archives and you will find long debates on issues like

> > > > > whether the steel ring should be open at the ends or closed, or> > > > > whether keeping a square piece of silver for Saturn is just to> > find> > > > > out the nature of the Saturn or it is also a part of the

upaya> and> > > > > so on.> > > > >> > > > > Or talk about any myth or a legend about the book, and you find> > > > > every body ready with a myth of their own. Every body

claiming> to> > be> > > > > very close to Pandit ji; they would go at great lengths to> > describe> > > > > what he wore, how he walked, how the spirits dictated the

book> to> > > > > him and so on. But when it comes to breaking some astrological> > > > > misconceptions surrounding this book, none of them is to be> seen.> > > > >

> > > > > On this current issue under discussion except for Kulbir ji and> > > > > Raheja ji, no body has come out with any comments either way.> > > > >> > > > > It is this apathy to discuss the Lal Kitab and its contents

> purely> > > > > with an astrological perspective, which has lead other> astrologers> > > > > to be vary of it. No wonder that they consider this book as a> book

> > > > > of Tona-Totkas and the Lal Kitab astrologers as semi-literate> > small> > > > > time village pundits. I do not blame others for this> > misconception.

> > > > > We are at fault. It is our own apathy responsible for it because> > we> > > > > lack confidence to argue out issues on their astrological> merits.> > > > >

> > > > > Well, doesn't matter; our effort is to get the rightful place> this> > > > > book deserves in the world of Indian Astrology. Participation or> > no

> > > > > participation we will continue with our effort.> > > > >> > > > > Regards,> > > > >> > > > > Varun Trivedi> > > > >

> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > ------------------------------> > > > Never miss a thing. Make your> >

homepage.<http://us.rd./evt=51438/*http://www./r/hs

>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> >>

[Guest guest]

Dear Kulbir bhai,

 

I am not questioning the makan kundali, nor questioning the basis on

which it is drawn.

 

All I want is to understand the explanation given on page 347 of

1942 book and on 206 of the 1952 book. As I have said already that

I am not able to understand those lines. Therefore I have sought

help from some seniors who I think might know the answers.

 

In case even they do not know the answers, then nothing can be done.

 

Regards,

 

Varun

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " kulbir bance "

<kulbirbance wrote:

>

> Varun ji,

>

> in sabki taraf se main hi reply de deta hun;

> kya varshphal ka basis hai;

> rashi no ke bolne wale grah;

> etc kain portion hain jo aapne unsolved kah kar chod diye;is liye

jabtak is

> baat ka pata na chal jaye ki pt ji ki makkan kundali ka basis kya

tha is par

> koi comment karna betuki baat hai.

> han ek exercise zaroor ho sakti hai ki apne apne gharon me dekhon

kis grah

> ki cheez kahan baithi hai.

>

> sincerely

>

> kulbirbains

>

>

>

>

On 4/1/08, varun_trvd <varun_trvd wrote:

> >

> > Aadarneeya Sharma ji, Thakur saheb, Yograj ji

> >

> > jo kamare makan mein dakhil hote waqt dahine hath ki taraf honge

vah

> > bahar nikalte waqt bayeen taraf ho jayege.

> > Ya to Lal Kitab ke is ansh mein kuchha galat chhapa hai ya fir

ham

> > log samajh nahi pa rahe.

> >

> > hoobahoo yahi bat 1942 urdu ed page 347 lines # 14 onwards bhi

likhi

> > hai. 1952 urd ed page 206 aur 1942 ki text bikul hi samajh mein

nahi

> > aa rahi.

> >

> > kripaya is par prakash dalen, aap log to is kitab ko bahut arse

se

> > parh rahe hai.

> >

> > Adar sahit,

> >

> > Varun Trivedi

> >

> > <%

40>,

> > " Umesh Sharma "

> > <mudit982001@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Respected Lalkitabee Ji,

> > > In my view this statement has Two different terms.

> > > 1. KUNDALI KE KHANA NO. 1 SE CHALKAR AGAR NAUVAIN KO

> > > JAYAIN YA MAKAAN SE BAAHAR KO NIKALAIN TO JIS TARAF -DAYAAN

(right)

> > > HAATH HOGAA- US TARAF MAKAAN KE TAMAAM GRAH JO KHANA NO. 1 SE 8

> > TAK HO

> > > APNA SABOOT DENGEY.

> > > 2. ISI TARAH AGAR 12 NO. KHAANE SE APNE AAPKO KHANA

> > > > NO. 9 KI TARAF AATEY HUVE GINE YA MAKAAN MAIN BAAHAR SE AAKAR

> > DAAKHIL

> > > > HONE LAGAIN TO KHANA NO. 12 SE 12, 11 10 KE GHARON KE GRAH --

> > DAAYEN

> > > > (right) TARAF MAKAAN KE --SABOOT DENGEY.

> > > 1. In first term the person go out side from house.

> > > 2. In 2nd term the persaon come in side from out side.

> > > Both are opposite directins.

> > >

> >

> > > Regards

> > >

> > >

> >

> > > Umesh Sharma

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > <%

40>,

> > " lalkitabee "

> > > <lalkitabee@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Bhai Yograj ji

> > > >

> > > > aapka lalkitab ke original 5 version bina kisi swarth ke logo

> > main

> > > > baantnaa samaaj ke liye ek aisa yogdaan hai jise ki aane wale

> > samay

> > > > main kabhi bhi nahi bhulaayaa ja saktaa. Aapne ise is roop

main

> > jis

> > > > tarah se surakshit kiyaa hai, vah appki udaartaa ka

parichayak

> > hai.It

> > > > is a great work of great soul like u.

> > > >

> > > > Lekin Yograj ji, in 5 books ke baad aglaa daur jo ab shuru

hua

> > hai

> > > > iski kalpana kuchh logon ke man main aaj se 3 varsh pehley

hee

> > thi aur

> > > > uske liye kuchh prayaas kiye gaye, jinhain kuchh logon ne

Urdu vs

> > > > Hindi/Dalda ka khitaab dekar darkinaar kar diyaa aur khud ko

is

> > tarah

> > > se

> > > > expose kiyaa ki shayad pujyaa pandit ji ki Rooh unhain

lalkitab

> > > samjhaa

> > > > kar jaa rahi hai aur unki baat ko hooob-hoo maan liyaa jaye.

> > Lalkitab

> > > > ki lines main ooper neechey ,aage peechey ghumaakar ve log

kyaa

> > sabit

> > > > karnaa chahtey they samajh nahi aayaa, aaj aap khud ko hee

dekho

> > aap

> > > to

> > > > urdu bahut badhia jaantey hain fir bhi galati to ho hi jaati

> > hai, arre

> > > > bhai insaan galatiyon ka putlaa hai,Jaise aap galati kar

saktey

> > hain

> > > aur

> > > > bhi kar saktey hain, aaj groups main hum sabhi isliye

ikatthey

> > hotey

> > > > hain taaki hum log galatiyon aur bhrantoyon se alag hatkar

gyaan

> > ek

> > > > doosrey ke jariye prapt kar sakain.

> > > >

> > > > Chalo chhodo in baaton ko aur jaraa Original Lalkitab 1952 ke

> > > > page no. 206 par " GRAH KUNDALI KI MAKAAN KE HISAB SE DURUSTI

par

> > nazar

> > > > daalo,likhaa hai ki ---KUNDALI KE KHANA NO. 1 SE CHALKAR AGAR

> > NAUVAIN

> > > KO

> > > > JAYAIN YA MAKAAN SE BAAHAR KO NIKALAIN TO JIS TARAF -DAYAAN

> > (right)

> > > > HAATH HOGAA- US TARAF MAKAAN KE TAMAAM GRAH JO KHANA NO. 1

SE 8

> > TAK HO

> > > > APNA SABOOT DENGEY, ISI TARAH AGAR 12 NO. KHAANE SE APNE

AAPKO

> > KHANA

> > > > NO. 9 KI TARAF AATEY HUVE GINE YA MAKAAN MAIN BAAHAR SE AAKAR

> > DAAKHIL

> > > > HONE LAGAIN TO KHANA NO. 12 SE 12, 11 10 KE GHARON KE GRAH --

> > DAAYEN

> > > > (right) TARAF MAKAAN KE --SABOOT DENGEY.

> > > >

> > > > Kyaa aisa nahi lag rahaa hai ki yahaan par bhi kuchh

> > contradiction

> > > > hai. Dono hee tarah makan ke daayeen taraf saboot. Mujhe

lagtaa

> > hai ki

> > > > yahaan par bhi lalkitab main shayd misprint hai ya galati ki

> > gunjaish

> > > > hai. Aapkaa kyaa vichaar hai? Kyon na hum aur baaton par jor

> > dene ki

> > > > bajaay is muddey par discussion ko continue karain. Agar

meraa

> > shak

> > > > jayaj hai to is par gaur kiyaa jaaaye, agar najayaz hai to

uskaa

> > > > khulaasa karne ki taqleef karain. Rahee baat shikve shikayat

ki--

> > to

> > > > yograaj ji vo to chaltey hee rahengey, Koyee gyaan lene ke

liye

> > group

> > > > main aayaa ,koyee dene ke liye, koyee paise batorne to koyee

> > chele

> > > > ikatthey karney main bhi interested ho saktaaa hai. In sab

> > baaton ka

> > > > koyee tharmameter to hai nahi . Who is queen & who is maid ,

it

> > shudnt

> > > > be motive all of us.Kyon group main shikvey shikayat par jor

de

> > rahey

> > > > ho.Aur apni taraf se main ek baat saaf karnaa chahtaa hoon ki

> > maine

> > > > Aaina dikhane ki baat un logo ke liye likhi thi jo ,lalkitab

ke

> > babat

> > > > poochhey gaye sawaal ke jawab main bola kartey they ki

> > > ---PROFESSIONALS

> > > > LE UDENGEY -isliye bolnaa thik nahi. aaj is group main ek ek

> > baat kee

> > > > tafseel dene ki koshish ki ja rahee hai, aur to aur lalkitab

ki

> > mool

> > > > pustak ki bhi galatiyaan pakdi jaa rahee hain aur

professionals

> > bhi

> > > > khulkar bol rahey hain jahaan tak unhain pataa hai. To ve log

> > aaj kis

> > > > gufaa main jaakar baith gaye hain. Sahee maayno main to

shayad

> > aaj is

> > > > group ke yogdaan se ve bhi seekh rahey hongey ki lalkitab ko

> > kaise

> > > > padhaa jaye. QAIYDEY KI TARAH YA EK RESEARCH ORIENTED GRANTH

KI

> > TARAH.

> > > > agar meri baat theek nahi to un logon ko yahaan par shirkat

> > jaroor

> > > karni

> > > > chahiye.

> > > >

> > > > Mere red words ki baabat discussion ko roop dene ka kash

karain.

> > > >

> > > > Pt.lalkitabee

> > > >

> > > > V.Shukla

> > > >

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Maharaj;

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > i didn't take anyone's name; how did u reach the conclusion

> > that it

> > > > > is aimed at you. to be very frank i had bhatia ji in mind.

> > nowhere

> > > did

> > > > u cut

> > > > > my viewpoint; it was all started by bhatia ji when i asked

him

> > about

> > > > his

> > > > > foot note and it's authenticity. i am sorry i have to go

> > personal on

> > > > record

> > > > > but just check; he comes in various forums; tries to be a

> > bhisham

> > > > pitama but

> > > > > gets lost whenever any logical thing is to be discussed.

you

> > know i

> > > > have

> > > > > proof of many other things about participation but don't

want

> > to

> > > > derail the

> > > > > process of ongoing discussions by starting a new

controversy;

> > > > > would you please be kind enough to let me know as to where

did

> > my

> > > mail

> > > > point

> > > > > towards you or in which manner did u interpret it.

> > > > > baundale hoe bande nu jhunda te paya kapda wi bhoot pret hi

> > lagda so

> > > > just

> > > > > have a deep breath and reanalyse.

> > > > >

> > > > > kulbirbains.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > On 3/31/08, Yograj Prabhakar yr_prabhakar@ wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Varun jee

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The tragedy is not only what you have mentioned. Another

> > great

> > > > tragedy is

> > > > > > that whoever found a " Sonth Kee Ganth " starts thinking

> > himself a

> > > > > > " Pansaaree " , unfortunately we all are suffering from this

> > fatal

> > > > disease.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There are two kinds of people in Lal Kitab, " Dil Waley "

and

> > > " Deemagh

> > > > Wale "

> > > > > > Dil waley has more Josh than Hosh whereas Deemagh Waley

has

> > more

> > > > Hosh but

> > > > > > less Josh. Both are actually complimentary to each

other. A

> > > perfect

> > > > blend of

> > > > > > Josh and Hosh is a must to achieve anything. Dil Walon

ne toh

> > > Pundit

> > > > jee ke

> > > > > > 5 Anmol Rattan bataur Prashad dunia bhar ko baant kar

apne

> > sir se

> > > > Kitab ka

> > > > > > Rinn Utaar diya hai. Ab iski Roshni ko duniya bhar mein

> > phailaney

> > > ki

> > > > > > zimmewaree " Deemagh Walon " ki bhi hai. Agar aaj Ek Ek

lafz

> > aur Ek

> > > Ek

> > > > logic

> > > > > > par agar debate

> > > > > > ho rahi hai to yaqeen karna, is baat kee khushi mujh se

zyada

> > > shayad

> > > > hi

> > > > > > kisi aur ko hogi. It is not necessary that we agree with

each

> > > other

> > > > on every

> > > > > > point. Every individual has his own way of seeing the

> > things, we

> > > > must not

> > > > > > raise question mark on that. Fot some Lal Kitab is

> > just " another

> > > > book " of

> > > > > > astrology, for many it is sacrosanct or divine scripture,

> > whats

> > > > wrong with

> > > > > > that? How a person looks at a filled bottle is depends

upon

> > his

> > > own

> > > > > > judgment and capacity, why one should try to impose his

> > thoughts

> > > > over

> > > > > > anyone? We cannot even force our thoughts on our own

kids,

> > so how

> > > we

> > > > can

> > > > > > expect others to follow our dictates?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I do not know about the others but, for me knowing about

how

> > > Pundit

> > > > jee

> > > > > > use to talk, walk, sit, wear, behave, looks and even

abuse

> > is of

> > > no

> > > > less

> > > > > > significance, if someone has any objection - I do not

care.

> > And

> > > what

> > > > is

> > > > > > wrong in it if someone produce some point (like in the

case

> > of

> > > Bejod

> > > > > > Chhalla) in reference to the words of veterans? A few

days

> > back a

> > > > remedy of

> > > > > > keeping Sponge was discussed in the forum, it is nowhere

> > written

> > > in

> > > > the book

> > > > > > as for how many days this sponge is supposed to be kept

in

> > case of

> > > > Varshphal

> > > > > > and what to do with this afterwards. I prefer not to

speak

> > about

> > > > that as I

> > > > > > knew that a demand of " Forensic analysis " will arise if I

> > forward

> > > my

> > > > views

> > > > > > since the same was conveyed by a non-

> > professional " VayoVridh " Lal

> > > > kitab

> > > > > > premi.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > As far as running from the participation is concerned, I

> > would

> > > like

> > > > to

> > > > > > assure you that Peeth Dikha Kar Bhag jaana meri fitrat

nahi

> > hai.

> > > > Browse the

> > > > > > achieve, and see how many mails with Colorful Headings

were

> > > directed

> > > > to me.

> > > > > > But I always took it as a compliment. Even the gauche

way to

> > > degrade

> > > > never

> > > > > > bothered me. I continued to participate in the debates

with

> > my

> > > > little or no

> > > > > > knowledge. But I hate to poke my nose in controversial

> > issues and

> > > > the issues

> > > > > > I am not sure

> > > > > > about. If that is called a weakness - I accept it

gleefully.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I also read starements about " showing the mirror "

> > and " Nishkasit

> > > kar

> > > > diya

> > > > > > tha " etc. I always treat you as the shadow of Prof.

> > Upadhyaye jee

> > > > who taught

> > > > > > me the great lesson of " Forgive and Forget " , so I was a

> > little

> > > > surprised

> > > > > > (but not at all shocked) with this retaliatory attitude.

Now

> > you

> > > > will agree

> > > > > > with me that all chickens look gray in the dark.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Kulbir jee, whos Lal Kitab business will suffer? Who is

> > afraid of

> > > > > > Shudhi-Karan? Whos Chele Chapte will ran away? To whom

you

> > are

> > > > refering? I

> > > > > > am like a " Nanga Putt Choran Vich Khedey " , " Na aqal naa

> > maut " - so

> > > > have

> > > > > > nothing to loose. Neither astrology is my bread & butter

nor

> > I

> > > have

> > > > any

> > > > > > Chela-Chapta. But yes, like you, I too have great faith

in

> > this

> > > > divine

> > > > > > scripture and no one can ever deprived me of that.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respectfully

> > > > > > Yograj Prabhakar

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > *kulbir bance kulbirbance@* wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gurudev; remember the last line of this book is MADAD

MALIK

> > APNI

> > > > DEGA,

> > > > > > NEKI KHUD KARTE RAHO.

> > > > > > baki KUCH TO MAJBURIYAN RAHIN HONGI; YOUNH HI KOI BEWAFA

> > NAHIN

> > > HOTA,

> > > > > > pehli majboori; logon ko yeh shaq paida na ho jai ki

mujhe

> > > lalkitab

> > > > ki

> > > > > > samajh nahin.

> > > > > > second; why to comment i.e. accept, deny or improve upon

a

> > point

> > > > which we

> > > > > > ourselves couldn't point out. bhai hamse badhkar kaun;

> > > > > > please try to understand their difficulty they have

> > apprehensions

> > > > > > 1. their lalkitab commerce will suffer.

> > > > > > 2. it is difficult to acept that one has been associated

> > with this

> > > > book

> > > > > > for years; but all gone waste; all of sudden comes a bolt

> > that his

> > > > approach

> > > > > > was wrong; how to undo that. its hard to accept unless

> > antarman ka

> > > > > > shudikaran ho gaya jai.

> > > > > > 3. thier goodwill and chele chapte/ following will run

away.

> > > > > > so it is convenient to turn a blind eye.

> > > > > > jab pt ji ne shuru me hi likh diya DUNIYAVI HISAB KITAB

> > HAI , KOI

> > > > > > DAWA-E-KHUDAI NAHIN. then what's wrong in reviewing and

> > > discussing.

> > > > rome was

> > > > > > not built in a day, we all can become masters but

patience

> > and

> > > > integrity is

> > > > > > a vital ingredient.

> > > > > > sincerely

> > > > > > kulbirbance

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > On 3/29/08, varun_trvd varun_trvd@ wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Respected members,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This is the tragedy; raise a fundamental astrological

> > issue and

> > > > all

> > > > > > > those who claim to have studied the Lal Kitab for

decades

> > go

> > > > silent.

> > > > > > > If I had raised a peripheral question there would have

> > been at

> > > > least

> > > > > > > half a dozen people participating in an agitated

debate.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Go to the archives and you will find long debates on

> > issues like

> > > > > > > whether the steel ring should be open at the ends or

> > closed, or

> > > > > > > whether keeping a square piece of silver for Saturn is

> > just to

> > > > find

> > > > > > > out the nature of the Saturn or it is also a part of

the

> > upaya

> > > and

> > > > > > > so on.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Or talk about any myth or a legend about the book, and

you

> > find

> > > > > > > every body ready with a myth of their own. Every body

> > claiming

> > > to

> > > > be

> > > > > > > very close to Pandit ji; they would go at great

lengths to

> > > > describe

> > > > > > > what he wore, how he walked, how the spirits dictated

the

> > book

> > > to

> > > > > > > him and so on. But when it comes to breaking some

> > astrological

> > > > > > > misconceptions surrounding this book, none of them is

to be

> > > seen.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > On this current issue under discussion except for

Kulbir

> > ji and

> > > > > > > Raheja ji, no body has come out with any comments

either

> > way.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > It is this apathy to discuss the Lal Kitab and its

contents

> > > purely

> > > > > > > with an astrological perspective, which has lead other

> > > astrologers

> > > > > > > to be vary of it. No wonder that they consider this

book

> > as a

> > > book

> > > > > > > of Tona-Totkas and the Lal Kitab astrologers as semi-

> > literate

> > > > small

> > > > > > > time village pundits. I do not blame others for this

> > > > misconception.

> > > > > > > We are at fault. It is our own apathy responsible for

it

> > because

> > > > we

> > > > > > > lack confidence to argue out issues on their

astrological

> > > merits.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Well, doesn't matter; our effort is to get the rightful

> > place

> > > this

> > > > > > > book deserves in the world of Indian Astrology.

> > Participation or

> > > > no

> > > > > > > participation we will continue with our effort.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ------------------------------

> > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your

> > > >

> >

homepage.<http://us.rd./evt=51438/*http://www./r/hs

> > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>