Attention thakur ji + urdu naviso +urdu navazo

[Guest guest]

Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar hote hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA HUYI MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI MITTI KO SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI MATA KAHTE HAIN.

aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107 GUTKE WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI.

PLEASE callous approach mat apnayeiye.

moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message approve kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha. nirmal ji aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain.

itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi galat likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to understand lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate

sincerely

kulbirbance , "Iqbal Chand Thakur" <thakur.iqbalchand wrote:>> Bhai Kulbir,> Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal Bhusay mein> pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.> Bhai tai yaa teh ek hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein Zamin ki> satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.> "Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-Chander"> Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya hoga. yeh> Lalkitab kee hee linay hain.> Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee master hain> Urdu Kay> Aapka> Iqbal Chand Thakur> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance wrote:> >> > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely,> > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground "tah"> > thanks> > kulbir> > thanks> > kulbir <%40>,> > Yograj Prabhakar> > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:> > >> > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,> > >> > > The correct word in question is "Taiy" not "Na" I agree with all> > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather spoiled) the> > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For me> > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake.> > >> > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as "Garda (n)" is incorrect. The> > correct word is "Gar Vaan". "Gar" means "If" and "Vaan"> > means "There". Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet "Vayo"> > as "Daal" in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake and> > misjudged "Taiy" as "Na" as one "Nukta" was missing from "Taiy" in> > the Urdu page.> > >> > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book and> > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as soon as possible. I request> > every LK devotee to point out such errors.> > >> > >> > > Respectfully> > > Yograj Prabhakar> > >> > >> > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi> > Ji,> > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the book.> > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the lalkitab> > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the> > lalKitab.> > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The> > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl Urdu> > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there which> > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable> > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin during> > printing or photocopy process. But as researched by Varun Ji, I also> > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word> > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in hindi> > as well as English> > > दीवार कचॠची- मिटॠटी> > कचॠची, - तै ही कचॠची गर वाà¤> > हो> > > "deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan ho"> > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are> > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107 line> > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji> > recieved.> > > Regarding other words "Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda(n)' ho.> > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which means 'if> > it happens to be there'.> > > Please convey my gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed> > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji> > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far.> > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to same is> > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and correct> > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are now> > on the same platform.> > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original> > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or Desi> > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to> > learn to read urdu> > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.> > > Regards> > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj> > >> > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected> > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia Ji,> > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding> > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the correction> > if it is wrong as per the original.> > > Yours> > > Shiv Dev Kalsi> > >> > >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@> > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM> > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli> > ghee kiska dalda kiska> > > <%40>> > >> > >> > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;> > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA DRAD> > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK HISTORICAL> > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE BADHENGE.> > (page xi) appeal> > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME ISKI> > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI.> > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941> > edition reads :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho"> > > >> > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya nahin> > > >> > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho"> > > >> > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab tak> > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani. ab koi> > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai. maine to> > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi nahin> > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant batein> > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.> > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat wala> > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par bechare> > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki> > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE> > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE.> > > sincere to lalkitab> > > kulbirbance> > >> > > <%40>,> > Varun Trivedi> > <varun_trvd@> wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,> > > >> > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words> > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.> > > >> > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition reads :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho"> > > >> > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > has been written as `gar va(n)'> > > >> > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho"> > > >> > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as follows:> > > >> > > > "Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda ho"> > > >> > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm what> > has actually been said.> > > >> > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a part of> > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]> > > >> > > > Have a nice day,> > > >> > > > Varun> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them online.> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,> > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)> > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.> > >> >> > > >>

[Guest guest]

Respected Kulbir Ji,

Kulbir Ji & Thakur Ji From your mails , I gather that both are

correct. It is the word Pronouncation that caanot be depicted

correctly in English. Let me write in hindi also in Hindi also to

remove confusion

" & #2340; & #2376; & #2351; & #2366; & #2340; & #2361; (tai or teh)-means fold,coat,

layer , & #2340; & #2351; (taiya)-

difinite. In normal speaking in punjabi h in tai or teh is not

pronounce strongly. while in Taiya - more stress is given to word ya.

However in Hindi Belt of UP more stress is given to H while

pronouncing Teh. "

Any how there is no doubt that word is tai/tey/teh not Taiya.

Regarding Liguistic - Kulbir Ji, I learn urdu to read lalkitab.I

call it the Grace of God that he give me opprtunity to study the text

of Lalkitab in Original. It is my approach to the subject.

Your approach is more advanced than mine.

Regarding Errors in Gutka Published by Prabhakar Ji, I feel

privileged to be associated with this project. It is nice to have

reader such as you, who like to have scrutinized each and every page

and word of the book. I wish every reader have the similar approach

to read the book.

I congratulate Prabhakar Ji that out of first 107 pages of the book

he got published,only one major error in printing/proofing come to

fore. That too brought out by Kulbir Ji.

Regards

Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj

 

 

 

 

 

, " kulbirbance " <kulbirbance

wrote:

>

>

> Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar

hote

> hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA HUYI

> MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine

> check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI

MITTI KO

> SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI

MATA

> KAHTE HAIN.

>

> aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107

GUTKE

> WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI.

>

> PLEASE callous approach mat apnayeiye.

>

> moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message

approve

> kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere

> khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha. nirmal

ji

> aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain.

>

> itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi

galat

> likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to

understand

> lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to

> linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate

>

> sincerely

>

> kulbirbance

> , " Iqbal Chand Thakur "

> <thakur.iqbalchand@> wrote:

> >

> > Bhai Kulbir,

> > Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal

Bhusay

> mein

> > pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.

> > Bhai tai yaa teh ek hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein

> Zamin ki

> > satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.

> > " Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-

Chander "

> > Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya

hoga. yeh

> > Lalkitab kee hee linay hain.

> > Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee

master

> hain

> > Urdu Kay

> > Aapka

> > Iqbal Chand Thakur

> >

> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely,

> > > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground " tah "

> > > thanks

> > > kulbir

> > > thanks

> > > kulbir--- In

> <%40>,

> > > Yograj Prabhakar

> > > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,

> > > >

> > > > The correct word in question is " Taiy " not " Na " I agree with

all

> > > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather

spoiled) the

> > > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For

me

> > > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake.

> > > >

> > > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as " Garda (n) " is incorrect.

The

> > > correct word is " Gar Vaan " . " Gar " means " If " and " Vaan "

> > > means " There " . Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet " Vayo "

> > > as " Daal " in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake

and

> > > misjudged " Taiy " as " Na " as one " Nukta " was missing from " Taiy "

in

> > > the Urdu page.

> > > >

> > > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book and

> > > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as soon as possible. I

request

> > > every LK devotee to point out such errors.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Respectfully

> > > > Yograj Prabhakar

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi

> > > Ji,

> > > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the

book.

> > > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the lalkitab

> > > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the

> > > lalKitab.

> > > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The

> > > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl

Urdu

> > > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there

which

> > > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable

> > > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin

during

> > > printing or photocopy process. But as researched by Varun Ji, I

also

> > > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word

> > > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in

hindi

> > > as well as English

> > > > दीवार कचॠची-

> मिटॠटी

> > > कचॠची, - तै ही कचà¥

> ची गर वाà¤

> > > हो

> > > > " deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan ho "

> > > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are

> > > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107

line

> > > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji

> > > recieved.

> > > > Regarding other words " Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda(n)'

ho.

> > > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which

means 'if

> > > it happens to be there'.

> > > > Please convey my gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed

> > > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji

> > > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far.

> > > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to same

is

> > > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and

correct

> > > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are

now

> > > on the same platform.

> > > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original

> > > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or

Desi

> > > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to

> > > learn to read urdu

> > > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.

> > > > Regards

> > > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj

> > > >

> > > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected

> > > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia Ji,

> > > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding

> > > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the

correction

> > > if it is wrong as per the original.

> > > > Yours

> > > > Shiv Dev Kalsi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> > > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@

> > > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM

> > > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli

> > > ghee kiska dalda kiska

> > > > To:

>

<%40.co\

> m>

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;

> > > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA DRAD

> > > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK HISTORICAL

> > > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE

> BADHENGE.

> > > (page xi) appeal

> > > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME

ISKI

> > > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI.

> > > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941

> > > edition reads :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'

> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of

gard,mitti]

> > > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya

nahin

> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab

tak

> > > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani.

ab koi

> > > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai.

maine to

> > > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi nahin

> > > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant batein

> > > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.

> > > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat

wala

> > > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par

bechare

> > > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki

> > > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE

> > > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE.

> > > > sincere to lalkitab

> > > > kulbirbance

> > > >

> > > > --- In

>

<%40.co\

> m>,

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > > <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,

> > > > >

> > > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words

> > > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.

> > > > >

> > > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition

reads :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'

> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of

gard,mitti]

> > > has been written as `gar va(n)'

> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as follows:

> > > > >

> > > > > " Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda

ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm

what

> > > has actually been said.

> > > > >

> > > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a

part of

> > > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]

> > > > >

> > > > > Have a nice day,

> > > > >

> > > > > Varun

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them online.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > --

> > > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,

> > > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)

> > > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

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

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nirmal ji, u forgot to add OUR to kulbir ji in the last line.

respectfully

kulbirbains

On 3/13/08, Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj <nirbhar wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Respected Kulbir Ji,Kulbir Ji & Thakur Ji From your mails , I gather that both are correct. It is the word Pronouncation that caanot be depicted correctly in English. Let me write in hindi also in Hindi also to

remove confusion " & #2340; & #2376; & #2351; & #2366; & #2340; & #2361; (tai or teh)-means fold,coat, layer , & #2340; & #2351; (taiya)-difinite. In normal speaking in punjabi h in tai or teh is not

pronounce strongly. while in Taiya - more stress is given to word ya. However in Hindi Belt of UP more stress is given to H while pronouncing Teh. " Any how there is no doubt that word is tai/tey/teh not Taiya.

Regarding Liguistic - Kulbir Ji, I learn urdu to read lalkitab.I call it the Grace of God that he give me opprtunity to study the text of Lalkitab in Original. It is my approach to the subject. Your approach is more advanced than mine.

Regarding Errors in Gutka Published by Prabhakar Ji, I feel privileged to be associated with this project. It is nice to have reader such as you, who like to have scrutinized each and every page and word of the book. I wish every reader have the similar approach

to read the book. I congratulate Prabhakar Ji that out of first 107 pages of the book he got published,only one major error in printing/proofing come to fore. That too brought out by Kulbir Ji.RegardsNirmal Kumar Bhardwaj

, " kulbirbance " <kulbirbance wrote: >> > Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar hote> hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA HUYI

> MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine> check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI MITTI KO> SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI

MATA> KAHTE HAIN.> > aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107 GUTKE> WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI.> > PLEASE callous approach mat apnayeiye.>

> moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message approve> kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere> khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha. nirmal

ji> aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain.> > itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi galat> likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to

understand> lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to> linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate> > sincerely> > kulbirbance> , " Iqbal Chand Thakur "

> <thakur.iqbalchand@> wrote:> >> > Bhai Kulbir,> > Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal Bhusay> mein> > pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.

> > Bhai tai yaa teh ek hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein> Zamin ki> > satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.> > " Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-

Chander " > > Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya hoga. yeh> > Lalkitab kee hee linay hain.> > Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee

master> hain> > Urdu Kay> > Aapka> > Iqbal Chand Thakur> >> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance@ wrote:> > >> > > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely,

> > > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground " tah " > > > thanks> > > kulbir> > > thanks> > > kulbir--- In> <%40>,

> > > Yograj Prabhakar> > > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:> > > >> > > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,> > > >> > > > The correct word in question is " Taiy " not " Na " I agree with

all> > > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather spoiled) the> > > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For me> > > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake.

> > > >> > > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as " Garda (n) " is incorrect. The> > > correct word is " Gar Vaan " . " Gar " means " If " and " Vaan "

> > > means " There " . Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet " Vayo " > > > as " Daal " in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake and> > > misjudged " Taiy " as " Na " as one " Nukta " was missing from " Taiy "

in> > > the Urdu page.> > > >> > > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book and> > > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as soon as possible. I

request> > > every LK devotee to point out such errors.> > > >> > > >> > > > Respectfully> > > > Yograj Prabhakar> > > >> > > >

> > > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi> > > Ji,> > > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the book.> > > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the lalkitab

> > > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the> > > lalKitab.> > > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The> > > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl

Urdu> > > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there which> > > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable> > > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin

during> > > printing or photocopy process. But as researched by Varun Ji, I also> > > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word> > > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in

hindi> > > as well as English> > > > दीवार कचॠची-> मिटॠटी> > > कचॠची, - तै ही कचà¥> ची गर वाà¤

> > > हो> > > > " deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan ho " > > > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are> > > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107

line> > > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji> > > recieved.> > > > Regarding other words " Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda(n)' ho.

> > > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which means 'if> > > it happens to be there'.> > > > Please convey my gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed

> > > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji> > > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far.> > > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to same is> > > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and

correct> > > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are now> > > on the same platform.> > > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original

> > > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or Desi> > > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to> > > learn to read urdu> > > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.

> > > > Regards> > > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj> > > >> > > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected> > > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia Ji,

> > > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding> > > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the correction> > > if it is wrong as per the original.

> > > > Yours> > > > Shiv Dev Kalsi> > > >> > > >> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> > > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@

> > > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM> > > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli> > > ghee kiska dalda kiska> > > > To:>

<%40.co\

> m>> > > >> > > >> > > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;> > > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA DRAD> > > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK HISTORICAL

> > > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE> BADHENGE.> > > (page xi) appeal> > > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME ISKI

> > > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI.> > > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941> > > edition reads :> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > > >> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]

> > > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya nahin> > > > >> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >> > > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab tak

> > > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani. ab koi> > > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai. maine to> > > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi nahin

> > > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant batein> > > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.> > > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat wala

> > > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par bechare> > > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki> > > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE

> > > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE.> > > > sincere to lalkitab> > > > kulbirbance> > > >> > > > --- In>

<%40.co\ > m>,> > > Varun Trivedi> > > <varun_trvd@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,> > > > >

> > > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words> > > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.> > > > >> > > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition

reads :> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > > has been written as `gar va(n)'> > > > >> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :

> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >> > > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as follows:

> > > > >> > > > > " Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda ho " > > > > >> > > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm

what> > > has actually been said.> > > > >> > > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a part of> > > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]

> > > > >> > > > > Have a nice day,> > > > >> > > > > Varun> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >

> > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them online.> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >

> > > > --> > > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,> > > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)> > > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)> > > >> > > >> > > >

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

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

[Guest guest]

kulbir jee

mene kahin pada thaa ki budh se shukar bana, shukar se chander.

miti/ret ka kan budh hai, jab mil gaye to shukar bana, aur jab

sakhat huee to (dhartimata) yani ki chander

 

abb lijiye missal jab ladki paida hui to budh kehlayee, fir patni

bani to shukar, aur fir jab ma bani to chander

mahajan

-- In , " kulbirbance " <kulbirbance

wrote:

>

>

> Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar

hote

> hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA

HUYI

> MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine

> check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI

MITTI KO

> SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI

MATA

> KAHTE HAIN.

>

> aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107

GUTKE

> WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI.

>

> PLEASE callous approach mat apnayeiye.

>

> moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message

approve

> kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere

> khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha.

nirmal ji

> aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain.

>

> itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi

galat

> likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to

understand

> lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to

> linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate

>

> sincerely

>

> kulbirbance

> , " Iqbal Chand Thakur "

> <thakur.iqbalchand@> wrote:

> >

> > Bhai Kulbir,

> > Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal

Bhusay

> mein

> > pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.

> > Bhai tai yaa teh ek hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein

> Zamin ki

> > satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.

> > " Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-

Chander "

> > Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya

hoga. yeh

> > Lalkitab kee hee linay hain.

> > Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee

master

> hain

> > Urdu Kay

> > Aapka

> > Iqbal Chand Thakur

> >

> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely,

> > > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground " tah "

> > > thanks

> > > kulbir

> > > thanks

> > > kulbir--- In

> <%40>,

> > > Yograj Prabhakar

> > > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,

> > > >

> > > > The correct word in question is " Taiy " not " Na " I agree with

all

> > > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather

spoiled) the

> > > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For

me

> > > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake.

> > > >

> > > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as " Garda (n) " is incorrect.

The

> > > correct word is " Gar Vaan " . " Gar " means " If " and " Vaan "

> > > means " There " . Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet " Vayo "

> > > as " Daal " in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake

and

> > > misjudged " Taiy " as " Na " as one " Nukta " was missing

from " Taiy " in

> > > the Urdu page.

> > > >

> > > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book

and

> > > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as soon as possible. I

request

> > > every LK devotee to point out such errors.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Respectfully

> > > > Yograj Prabhakar

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi

> > > Ji,

> > > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the

book.

> > > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the

lalkitab

> > > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the

> > > lalKitab.

> > > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The

> > > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl

Urdu

> > > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there

which

> > > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable

> > > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin

during

> > > printing or photocopy process. But as researched by Varun Ji,

I also

> > > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word

> > > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in

hindi

> > > as well as English

> > > > दीवार कचॠची-

> मिटॠटी

> > > कचॠची, - तै ही कचà¥

> ची गर वाà¤

> > > हो

> > > > " deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan

ho "

> > > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are

> > > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107

line

> > > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji

> > > recieved.

> > > > Regarding other words " Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda

(n)' ho.

> > > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which

means 'if

> > > it happens to be there'.

> > > > Please convey my gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed

> > > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji

> > > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far.

> > > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to

same is

> > > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and

correct

> > > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are

now

> > > on the same platform.

> > > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original

> > > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or

Desi

> > > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to

> > > learn to read urdu

> > > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.

> > > > Regards

> > > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj

> > > >

> > > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected

> > > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia Ji,

> > > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding

> > > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the

correction

> > > if it is wrong as per the original.

> > > > Yours

> > > > Shiv Dev Kalsi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> > > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@

> > > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM

> > > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli

> > > ghee kiska dalda kiska

> > > > To:

> <%

40.co\

> m>

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;

> > > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA

DRAD

> > > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK

HISTORICAL

> > > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE

> BADHENGE.

> > > (page xi) appeal

> > > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME

ISKI

> > > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI.

> > > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941

> > > edition reads :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n)

ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'

> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of

gard,mitti]

> > > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya

nahin

> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n)

ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab

tak

> > > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani.

ab koi

> > > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai.

maine to

> > > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi

nahin

> > > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant

batein

> > > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.

> > > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat

wala

> > > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par

bechare

> > > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki

> > > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE

> > > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE.

> > > > sincere to lalkitab

> > > > kulbirbance

> > > >

> > > > --- In

> <%

40.co\

> m>,

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > > <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,

> > > > >

> > > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words

> > > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.

> > > > >

> > > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition

reads :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n)

ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'

> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of

gard,mitti]

> > > has been written as `gar va(n)'

> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :

> > > > >

> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n)

ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as

follows:

> > > > >

> > > > > " Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda

ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm

what

> > > has actually been said.

> > > > >

> > > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a

part of

> > > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]

> > > > >

> > > > > Have a nice day,

> > > > >

> > > > > Varun

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them online.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > --

> > > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,

> > > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)

> > > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

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

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Bhai Kulbir Ji,

Vaisay main aapko bata doon, ki is lalkitab kay puranay khiladi (yani ki Kulbir Bance) ko (Hanumaan ji(Mangal Nek) ko unki taaqat yaad karvanee padti hai) mainay uski taaqat yaad karvanee thee. Ye khiladi apni taaqat bhool kar budh ke chakkar mein pad gaya tha. Mujhay khushi hai ki main apni koshish mein kuchh kamyaab hua hoon .

Bhai, Jo main kehna Chahta thaa vo aap samajh Gaye ho.

Zarra Zarra huyi Mitti Aankhon mein Padti hai, Dhool aankhon mein dalna, Gardish yeh sabhi wo cheejein hai jo negative mayne mein hoti hai. Mere Khyaal se bhai Ye gardaan naam ka shabd/shai punjabi yaa haryanvi mein to nahin hoti. Naa heen mainay kisi ko baoltey sunaa hai kee gardaan padi huyi hai.

Rahi baat Disha Kee, Kya ye zaroori hai kee jahann vaahan likha jaaye vahaan disha bhee likhni zaroori hai

Yaad karo ki aapnay kucchh din pehlay makaan kundli kaa zikar kiya thaa. Har khana ik disha ko bhee pradarshit karta hai.To is liye ye zaroori nahin kee har jaga disha kaa zikar ho.

Aap puraney gyaata hain is ilam key Aagay Aapki marji.

Iqbal Chand Thakur

 

 

On 3/13/08, kulbirbance <kulbirbance wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar hote hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA HUYI MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI MITTI KO SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI MATA KAHTE HAIN.

aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107 GUTKE WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI.

PLEASE callous approach mat apnayeiye.

moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message approve kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha. nirmal ji aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain.

itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi galat likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to understand lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate

sincerely

kulbirbance , " Iqbal Chand Thakur " <thakur.iqbalchand wrote:

>> Bhai Kulbir,> Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal Bhusay mein> pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.> Bhai tai yaa teh ek hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein Zamin ki

> satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.> " Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-Chander " > Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya hoga. yeh> Lalkitab kee hee linay hain.

> Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee master hain> Urdu Kay> Aapka> Iqbal Chand Thakur> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance wrote:> >> > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely,

> > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground " tah " > > thanks> > kulbir> > thanks> > kulbir <%40>,

> > Yograj Prabhakar> > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:> > >> > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,> > >> > > The correct word in question is " Taiy " not " Na " I agree with all

> > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather spoiled) the> > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For me> > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake.

> > >> > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as " Garda (n) " is incorrect. The> > correct word is " Gar Vaan " . " Gar " means " If " and " Vaan " > > means " There " . Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet " Vayo "

> > as " Daal " in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake and> > misjudged " Taiy " as " Na " as one " Nukta " was missing from " Taiy " in> > the Urdu page.

> > >> > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book and> > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as soon as possible. I request> > every LK devotee to point out such errors.

> > >> > >> > > Respectfully> > > Yograj Prabhakar> > >> > >> > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi> > Ji,> > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the book.

> > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the lalkitab> > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the> > lalKitab.> > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The

> > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl Urdu> > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there which> > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable

> > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin during> > printing or photocopy process. But as researched by Varun Ji, I also> > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word

> > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in hindi> > as well as English> > > दीवार कचॠची- मिटॠटी> > कचॠची, - तै ही कचॠची गर वाà¤

> > हो> > > " deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan ho " > > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are> > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107 line

> > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji> > recieved.> > > Regarding other words " Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda(n)' ho.> > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which means 'if

> > it happens to be there'.> > > Please convey my gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed> > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji> > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far.

> > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to same is> > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and correct> > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are now

> > on the same platform.> > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original> > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or Desi> > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to

> > learn to read urdu> > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.> > > Regards> > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj> > >> > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected

> > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia Ji,> > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding> > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the correction> > if it is wrong as per the original.

> > > Yours> > > Shiv Dev Kalsi> > >> > >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@> > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM

> > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli> > ghee kiska dalda kiska> > > <%40>

> > >> > >> > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;> > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA DRAD> > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK HISTORICAL

> > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE BADHENGE.> > (page xi) appeal> > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME ISKI> > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI.

> > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941> > edition reads :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > >> > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya nahin

> > > >> > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > >> > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab tak> > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani. ab koi> > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai. maine to

> > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi nahin> > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant batein> > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.> > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat wala

> > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par bechare> > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki> > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE> > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE.

> > > sincere to lalkitab> > > kulbirbance> > >> > > <%40>,

> > Varun Trivedi> > <varun_trvd@> wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,> > > >> > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words

> > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.> > > >> > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition reads :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > >> > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > has been written as `gar va(n)'

> > > >> > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho "

> > > >> > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as follows:> > > >> > > > " Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda ho "

> > > >> > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm what> > has actually been said.> > > >> > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a part of

> > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]> > > >> > > > Have a nice day,> > > >> > > > Varun> > > >> > > >

> > > > > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them online.> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >

> > >> > > --> > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,> > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)> > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)> > >> > >> > >> > >

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

> > >> >> > > >>

[Guest guest]

Respected Thakur Sahib,Kulbir jee ko unkee taqat ka ehsaas kabhi-2 karwatey raha keejiye. Dar'asal yeh sab ka Ladlaa aur ajeez magar thoda sa Natkhat Balak hai, jis ki vajah sey gahey bagahey yeh apni taqat se gaafil hokar Raasta bhatak jaya karta hai aur iske Hosh par iska Josh havee ho jata hai. Vaisey Lal Kitab ke point of view se main iski tez tarrar nazar, observe karney ki be-intehaa taqat, zaheen soch aur Theth Punjabi lehzey ka hamesh se qayal raha hoon. Jab yeh burly Jatt dhadalley se kuchh bolta hai toh badey badon ko bhagney ka rastaa nahi dikhayee padtaa. Bass us waqt toh sirf ye hi hota hai ki "No IF no BUT - only JATT" Yeh sab khoobiyan ek sath mainey kisi aur shakhs mein aaj tak nahee dekhi. Bhagwan hamesha isko salaamat, aur nazar-e-badd se bachaye rakhey.Baki aap ney darust farmaya ki udtee huyi mitti ya dhool ko chandar beshaq kaha gaya hai, magar yahan yeh dekhna ki zaruri hoga ki aisa Chandar kis quality ka hoga? Aur wo bhi

Chandar Khana Number 10 ka? Vaisey Thakur sahib, kya aap ko nahi lagtaa ki aisi udtee huyi Gard mein Rahu ki quality numaya huya karti hai? RespectfullyYograj PrabhakarIqbal Chand Thakur <thakur.iqbalchand wrote: Bhai Kulbir Ji, Vaisay main aapko bata doon, ki is lalkitab kay puranay khiladi (yani ki Kulbir Bance) ko (Hanumaan ji(Mangal Nek) ko unki taaqat yaad karvanee padti hai) mainay uski taaqat yaad karvanee thee. Ye khiladi apni taaqat bhool kar budh ke

chakkar mein pad gaya tha. Mujhay khushi hai ki main apni koshish mein kuchh kamyaab hua hoon . Bhai, Jo main kehna Chahta thaa vo aap samajh Gaye ho. Zarra Zarra huyi Mitti Aankhon mein Padti hai, Dhool aankhon mein dalna, Gardish yeh sabhi wo cheejein hai jo negative mayne mein hoti hai. Mere Khyaal se bhai Ye gardaan naam ka shabd/shai punjabi yaa haryanvi mein to nahin hoti. Naa heen mainay kisi ko baoltey sunaa hai kee gardaan padi huyi hai. Rahi baat Disha Kee, Kya ye zaroori hai kee jahann vaahan likha jaaye vahaan disha bhee likhni zaroori hai Yaad karo ki aapnay kucchh din pehlay makaan kundli kaa zikar kiya thaa. Har khana ik disha ko bhee pradarshit karta hai.To is liye ye zaroori nahin kee har jaga disha kaa zikar ho. Aap puraney gyaata hain is ilam key Aagay Aapki marji. Iqbal Chand Thakur On 3/13/08, kulbirbance <kulbirbance > wrote: Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar hote hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA HUYI MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI MITTI KO SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI MATA KAHTE HAIN. aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107 GUTKE WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI. PLEASE callous

approach mat apnayeiye. moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message approve kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha. nirmal ji aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain. itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi galat likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to understand lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate sincerely kulbirbance , "Iqbal Chand Thakur" <thakur.iqbalchand wrote: >> Bhai Kulbir,> Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal Bhusay mein> pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.> Bhai tai yaa teh ek

hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein Zamin ki > satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.> "Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-Chander"> Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya hoga. yeh> Lalkitab kee hee linay hain. > Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee master hain> Urdu Kay> Aapka> Iqbal Chand Thakur> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance wrote:> >> > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely, > > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground "tah"> > thanks> > kulbir> > thanks> > kulbir <%40>, > > Yograj Prabhakar> > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:>

> >> > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,> > >> > > The correct word in question is "Taiy" not "Na" I agree with all > > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather spoiled) the> > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For me> > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake. > > >> > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as "Garda (n)" is incorrect. The> > correct word is "Gar Vaan". "Gar" means "If" and "Vaan"> > means "There". Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet "Vayo" > > as "Daal" in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake and> > misjudged "Taiy" as "Na" as one "Nukta" was missing from "Taiy" in> > the Urdu page. > > >> > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book and> > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as

soon as possible. I request> > every LK devotee to point out such errors. > > >> > >> > > Respectfully> > > Yograj Prabhakar> > >> > >> > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi> > Ji,> > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the book. > > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the lalkitab> > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the> > lalKitab.> > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The > > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl Urdu> > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there which> > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable > > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin during> > printing or photocopy process.

But as researched by Varun Ji, I also> > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word > > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in hindi> > as well as English> > > दीवार कचॠची- मिटॠटी> > कचॠची, - तै ही कचॠची गर वाठ> > हो> > > "deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan ho"> > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are> > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107 line > > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji> > recieved.> > > Regarding other words "Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda(n)' ho.> > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which means 'if > > it happens to be there'.> > > Please convey my

gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed> > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji> > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far. > > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to same is> > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and correct> > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are now > > on the same platform.> > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original> > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or Desi> > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to > > learn to read urdu> > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.> > > Regards> > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj> > >> > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected > > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia

Ji,> > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding> > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the correction> > if it is wrong as per the original. > > > Yours> > > Shiv Dev Kalsi> > >> > >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@> > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM > > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli> > ghee kiska dalda kiska> > > <%40> > > >> > >> > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;> > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA DRAD> > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL

KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK HISTORICAL > > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE BADHENGE.> > (page xi) appeal> > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME ISKI> > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI. > > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941> > edition reads :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho" > > > >> > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya nahin > > > >> > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi

garda(n) ho" > > > >> > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab tak> > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani. ab koi> > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai. maine to > > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi nahin> > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant batein> > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.> > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat wala > > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par bechare> > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki> > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE> > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE. > > > sincere to lalkitab> > > kulbirbance> > >> > > <%40>, > > Varun Trivedi> > <varun_trvd@> wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,> > > >> > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words > > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.> > > >> > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition reads :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho" > > > >> > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah hi'> > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > has been written as `gar va(n)' > > > >> > > > In the 1942 urdu edition

page 156 the line is as follows :> > > >> > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho" > > > >> > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as follows:> > > >> > > > "Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda ho" > > > >> > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm what> > has actually been said.> > > >> > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a part of > > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]> > > >> > > > Have a nice day,> > > >> > > > Varun> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them

online.> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >> > > --> > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,> > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)> > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > >> >> > > >>

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.

[Guest guest]

Sirji, aage yaad karawa doon; last me chander se budh; yani jab ma banane ki shakti khatm to phir se bhusdh ban jati hai. budh ka chakkr budh par hi khatam hota hai.

regards

kulbirbance

On 3/14/08, mts3434 <mts3434 wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

kulbir jeemene kahin pada thaa ki budh se shukar bana, shukar se chander.miti/ret ka kan budh hai, jab mil gaye to shukar bana, aur jab sakhat huee to (dhartimata) yani ki chanderabb lijiye missal jab ladki paida hui to budh kehlayee, fir patni

bani to shukar, aur fir jab ma bani to chandermahajan-- In , " kulbirbance " <kulbirbance

wrote:>>

> Thakur ji kam s kam quote to thik kar diya karo. urdu ke jankaar hote> hue bhi pata nahin kaun si kitab se likh rahe ho ki ZARRA ZARRA HUYI> MITTI K-SHUKKR, TAI DER TAI MITTI CHANDER. Aapke mashware par maine

> check kiya to page 826 line 9 1952 farmati hai ZARRA ZARRA HUI MITTI KO> SHUKAR AUR JAMKAR TAMAM EK HI TAH BANI MITTI KO CHANDER KI DHARTI MATA> KAHTE HAIN.> > aaP KHUD CHECK KAR LO WORD TAH HAI, TAI NAHIN AUR YEH TEH PAGE 107

GUTKE> WALI LINE SE HU B HU MILTA HAI.> > PLEASE callous approach mat apnayeiye.> > moderator sahib urdu ke mahir hote hue bhi aise adhpake message approve> kar dete hain aur likhne wale ko spashtikaran bhi nahin dete. mere

> khayal se Nirmal ji ne bhi apne message me Tai hi likha tha. nirmal ji> aap bhi check kar lijiye. dono teh yaksan hain.> > itni der urdu sikhne ki matha pachi karne ke baad bhi kitab me bhi

galat> likh ab bhi galat padh rahe ho to easy to learn urdu easy to understand> lalkitab. agar itna time lalkitab ko samajhne me lagaya hota to> linguistic bante na bante lalkitabi to poore ban jaate

> > sincerely> > kulbirbance> , " Iqbal Chand Thakur "

> <thakur.iqbalchand@> wrote:> >> > Bhai Kulbir,> > Bahut purane khiladi lagtay ho Lalkitab key. Fir ye kis Bhambal Bhusay> mein> > pad gaye ho. Tai may hee gardan fasa lee.

> > Bhai tai yaa teh ek hee cheej hoti hai urdu mein. Mere khyal mein> Zamin ki> > satah ko he tai ya teh kahtain hain.> > " Zarra Zarra huyi mitti- Shukkar, Tai der tai jami hui mitti-

Chander " > > Aapne Lalkitab to Padhi hai,ab yeh zumla zaroor yaad aa gaya hoga. yeh> > Lalkitab kee hee linay hain.> > Baaqi Prabhakar Bhai Theek kar dein agar koyi galti ho. Vo bhee

master> hain> > Urdu Kay> > Aapka> > Iqbal Chand Thakur> >> > On 3/12/08, kulbirbance kulbirbance@ wrote:> > >> > > Prabhakr ji, please confirm here tai hi meaning surely,

> > > absolutely,definitely; or does it denote, layer on ground " tah " > > > thanks> > > kulbir> > > thanks> > > kulbir--- In> <%40>,

> > > Yograj Prabhakar> > > yr_prabhakar@ wrote:> > > >> > > > Respected Nirmal ji/Kalsi Sahib/ Kulbir ji,> > > >> > > > The correct word in question is " Taiy " not " Na " I agree with

all> > > of you that this particular mistake has changed (rather spoiled) the> > > whole meanings. I will not give any silly excuse for this. For me> > > this is a criminal mistake, and mistake is a mistake.

> > > >> > > > The word mentioned by Mr. Varun as " Garda (n) " is incorrect. The> > > correct word is " Gar Vaan " . " Gar " means " If " and " Vaan "

> > > means " There " . Perhaps he mistook the Urdu alphabet " Vayo " > > > as " Daal " in this instance. I too committed a similar mistake and> > > misjudged " Taiy " as " Na " as one " Nukta " was missing

from " Taiy " in> > > the Urdu page.> > > >> > > > I will try to rectify evey possible mistakes from the book and> > > will upload a proper Darustee-namaa as soon as possible. I

request> > > every LK devotee to point out such errors.> > > >> > > >> > > > Respectfully> > > > Yograj Prabhakar> > > >> > > >

> > > > NKB nirbhar@ wrote: Dear Kalsi> > > Ji,> > > > Thanks for informing about the readers compliments about the book.> > > You are really a true lalkitab devotee and followed the

lalkitab> > > principles laid by Pandit Ji in the very first pages of the> > > lalKitab.> > > > I have checked up page 107 of 1941 in shukkar no 10. The> > > word 'Tai' is not clear in gutka in our copy of the Origianl

Urdu> > > version. For the word 'Tai' the two dots required to be there which> > > diffrentiate between word 'tai' or 'na'. Word still is readable> > > as 'Na'. It is very much possible that two dots may conjoin

during> > > printing or photocopy process. But as researched by Varun Ji, I also> > > verified it from 1942 page 156 line 14 of shukkar 10. The word> > > should be 'Tai' I am giving the right transliteration below in

hindi> > > as well as English> > > > दीवार कचॠची-> मिटॠटी> > > कचॠची, - तै ही कचà¥> ची गर वाà¤

> > > हो> > > > " deewaar kachchi mitti kachchi, - tai hee kachchi gar vaan ho " > > > > Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji , Please Verify the above. All are> > > requested to make necessary correction in Hindi Gutka Page 107

line> > > no. 2. after the confirmation from Prabhakar Ji and Bhatia Ji> > > recieved.> > > > Regarding other words " Garda(Na) ,There is no word 'Garda(n)' ho.

> > > or 'garda na' ho. The correct word is 'Gar Vaan hon' which means 'if> > > it happens to be there'.> > > > Please convey my gratefulness to Varun Ji for giving detailed

> > > inputs. Thanks to Kulbir Ji> > > > Kalsi Ji, We seems to be successfull in our mission so far.> > > Printing transliteration line as well as page wise same to same is> > > giving fruitfule results. the errors are easy to locate and

correct> > > in hindi tranliteration. All Hindi as well as Urdu readers are now> > > on the same platform.> > > > But I still reiterate that the text should read from original

> > > urdu Books. By reading original texts scope of mixing Dalda or Desi> > > ghee becoming Dalda remain almost nil. It is very much easy to> > > learn to read urdu> > > > Early to learn urdu ,Easy to understand lalkitab.

> > > > Regards> > > > Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj> > > >> > > > On 3/10/08, Shivdev Kalsi shivdev.kalsi@ wrote: Respected> > > Nirmal Ji, Yograj Ji & Bhatia Ji,

> > > > Here is the mail I recieved From a group discussion regarding> > > The gutka published by Prabhakar Ji. Please announce the correction> > > if it is wrong as per the original.

> > > > Yours> > > > Shiv Dev Kalsi> > > >> > > >> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> > > > kulbirbance kulbirbance@

> > > > Mar 10, 2008 7:47 PM> > > > LK discussion group Re: Shukra in the 10th / Asli> > > ghee kiska dalda kiska> > > > To:> <%

 

40.co\> m>> > > >> > > >> > > > Varun ji, ab aap hi bataien kya karein;> > > > Shri Nirmal bhardwaj ji ne introduction me likha hai MERA

DRAD> > > MAT HAI KI BHAVISHYA ME LAL KITAB KE SHODKARTA ISE IK HISTORICAL> > > DOCUMENT KI TARAH ISTEMAL KARKE LOK KALYAN KE MARG PAR AAGE> BADHENGE.> > > (page xi) appeal

> > > > further Bhatia ji page (xxiii) par farmate hain... BAAD ME ISKI> > > PROOF READING SHRI PRABHAKAR JI V SHRI BHARDWAJ JI NE KI.> > > > ab batao. The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941

> > > edition reads :> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > > has been written as `gar va(n)' ab poora arth badal diya ya nahin> > > > >

> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >

> > > > > Agar yeh transliteration ke maharathion ka haal hai to ab tak> > > hindi ke pehle sanskarno ko DALDA ghee kahne ki kya tuk bani. ab koi> > > Bhatia ji se pooche aapke KHALIS ghee me kitni milawat hai.

maine to> > > jo pehle mistakes nikali thi inhone to usko acknowledge hi nahin> > > kiya. documentary proof hai bhai mai koi apni manghadhant batein> > > thoda likh raha tha ya hun.

> > > > aage gutke ko detail me padhte hain. inhone to apna milawat wala> > > ghee shor macha kar asli aur doosron ka DALDA kahan hai par bechare> > > redares ko to asli material ka pata chale. kyonki

> > > > SAACHAI CHUP NAHIN SAKTI BANAWAT KE ASSUULON SE> > > > KI KHUSHBOO AA NAHIN SAKTI KAGAZ KE PHOOLON SE.> > > > sincere to lalkitab> > > > kulbirbance> > > >

> > > > --- In> <%

40.co\ > m>,> > > Varun Trivedi> > > <varun_trvd@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai,> > > > >

> > > > > There seems to have occurred an error of reading the words> > > correctly in Yograj ji's gutka of 1941.> > > > >> > > > > The line on page 107 of the original Urdu 1941 edition

reads :> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >> > > > > In the transliterated version of Yograj ji the words ` tah

hi'> > > have been written as ` na hi' and the word garda(n) [ of gard,mitti]> > > has been written as `gar va(n)'> > > > >> > > > > In the 1942 urdu edition page 156 the line is as follows :

> > > > >> > > > > " deewar kachchi, mitti kachchi, tah hi kachchi garda(n) ho " > > > > >> > > > > In the 1952 urdu edition the line on page 470 is as

follows:> > > > >> > > > > " Deewar maghrabi jab tak kachchi , parivar daulat zar umda ho " > > > > >> > > > > Therefore one should always go to the original to confirm

what> > > has actually been said.> > > > >> > > > > If one doesn't have the west wall kachchi, he can get a part of> > > it plastered with mitti [ mitti ka lep karva den]

> > > > >> > > > > Have a nice day,> > > > >> > > > > Varun> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >

> > > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them online.> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >

> > > > --> > > > Dr. Shiv Dev Kalsi,> > > > Jyotish Rishi (AIFAS)> > > > Consultant (Vedic Astrology)> > > >> > > >> > > >

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

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