Lal Kitab Confusions

[Guest guest]

Dear Experts, I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another is from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu language. But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to lalkitab group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of the conflicting lines are:

page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(LKV) " Khush data rabb bhai apne " The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is " Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney "

Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV ) " duniya kee keemat hai aakaash budh mein " same at page 12 first line(YRP)'Duniya kee kismat hai aakaash budh mein " LKV Page 7 last line

' hamdardi foofi budh kee hai " YRP page 18 line 11 " hamdardi foqi budh kee hai " LKV page 8 line 2'peshaani(Maaya) chehra hoti hai "

YRP page 18 line 13 " peshani chehra hoti hai " LKV page 11 line 14 " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee shakti hain " YRP page 27 line 3 " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee shakki hain "

LKV page 11 5th line from bottom " Khud rooh bura bul bhee hai " YRP page 28 line 8 " khud rau boota bel bhee hai " LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7 " Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakha "

YRP page 45 line 13 " Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi " LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2 " bachhiya se vo galta ho " YRP page 56 line 5

" Bhichhiya se vo galta ho " LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4Mama se taarey daya se taarey " YRP page 80 line 7 " Maya se taarey daya se taarey "

LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6 " Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki " YRP page 127 line 5' damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki "

LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13 " dono registaan aur samundar hongey " YRP page 223 line 14 " Dono kohsar aur samunder hongey " It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I listed only few.

Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is writer's moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the shape of translation or transliteration.or at least they can do is to publish the errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as correct.RegardsDr.Vinay

[Guest guest]

Dear Vinay Ji,These things also happened to me rather t every lalkitab reader face this problem initially. You can refer book by Prabhakar ji, without any fear. It is the best available transliteration of 1941 book. Our group have authenticated the correctness of this book. Prabahkar ji also opened a blog for publishing the errata in his transliterated book.

http://lalkitab1941.blogspot.comThere are minor printing errors.You can corrrect your book from this blog site.For other books you can refer the transliterations done by Pt. beni Madhav Goswami. These books are near to correct. But Pt beni madhav Goswami have yet not supplied errata in his book.You can point out any difficulty in understanding any word in group. Group members certainly help to correct these words.

Discard other available transliterations, they are of no use now.RegardsNirmalOn Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Vinay kumar <v4vedic wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Experts, I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another is from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu language. But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to lalkitab group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of the conflicting lines are:

page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(LKV) " Khush data rabb bhai apne " The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is " Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney "

Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV ) " duniya kee keemat hai aakaash budh mein " same at page 12 first line(YRP)'Duniya kee kismat hai aakaash budh mein " LKV Page 7 last line

' hamdardi foofi budh kee hai " YRP page 18 line 11 " hamdardi foqi budh kee hai " LKV page 8 line 2'peshaani(Maaya) chehra hoti hai "

YRP page 18 line 13 " peshani chehra hoti hai " LKV page 11 line 14 " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee shakti hain " YRP page 27 line 3 " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee shakki hain "

LKV page 11 5th line from bottom " Khud rooh bura bul bhee hai " YRP page 28 line 8 " khud rau boota bel bhee hai " LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7 " Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakha "

YRP page 45 line 13 " Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi " LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2 " bachhiya se vo galta ho " YRP page 56 line 5

" Bhichhiya se vo galta ho " LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4Mama se taarey daya se taarey " YRP page 80 line 7 " Maya se taarey daya se taarey "

LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6 " Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki " YRP page 127 line 5' damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki "

LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13 " dono registaan aur samundar hongey " YRP page 223 line 14 " Dono kohsar aur samunder hongey " It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I listed only few.

Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is writer's moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the shape of translation or transliteration.or at least they can do is to publish the errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as correct.RegardsDr.Vinay

[Guest guest]

Respected nirmal ji prabhakar ji,

DEAR all Lal Kitab members,

I have read 1939 ,1940 & 1941 by yograj Prabhakarji and beni madhav goswami they have transliterated the original lal kitab to 95 to 100% correct as some spelling mistakes are there that is an human error but that doesnt mean that book is not correct I humbly ReQuest all Lal kitab readers that they must read all these edtions by these writers they have done an excellent job .Today what i have gain some knowledge of lal kitab are from these books only.

 

THANX

 

lal kitab learner

JATINN KAPPILA

--- On Sat, 12/20/08, Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj <nirbhar wrote:

Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj <nirbharRe: Lal Kitab Confusions Date: Saturday, December 20, 2008, 4:38 PM

 

 

 

Dear Vinay Ji,

These things also happened to me rather t every lalkitab reader face this problem initially.

You can refer book by Prabhakar ji, without any fear. It is the best available transliteration of 1941 book. Our group have authenticated the correctness of this book. Prabahkar ji also opened a blog for publishing the errata in his transliterated book.

http://lalkitab1941 .blogspot. com

There are minor printing errors.You can corrrect your book from this blog site.

For other books you can refer the transliterations done by Pt. beni Madhav Goswami. These books are near to correct. But Pt beni madhav Goswami have yet not supplied errata in his book.You can point out any difficulty in understanding any word in group. Group members certainly help to correct these words.

Discard other available transliterations, they are of no use now.

Regards

Nirmal

On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Vinay kumar <v4vedic (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Experts,

I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another is from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu language. But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to lalkitab group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of the conflicting lines are:page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)"Khush data rabb bhai apne" The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is"Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney"Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )"duniya kee keemat hai aakaash budh mein"same at page 12 first line(YRP)'Duniya kee kismat hai aakaash budh mein"LKV Page 7 last line' hamdardi foofi budh kee hai"YRP page 18 line 11"hamdardi foqi budh kee hai"LKV page 8 line 2'peshaani(Maaya) chehra hoti hai"YRP page 18 line 13" peshani chehra hoti

hai"LKV page 11 line 14" rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee shakti hain"YRP page 27 line 3"rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee shakki hain"LKV page 11 5th line from bottom"Khud rooh bura bul bhee hai"YRP page 28 line 8"khud rau boota bel bhee hai"LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7"Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakha"YRP page 45 line 13"Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi"LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2"bachhiya se vo galta ho"YRP page 56 line 5" Bhichhiya se vo galta ho"LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4Mama se taarey daya se taarey"YRP page 80 line 7" Maya se taarey daya se taarey"LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6"Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki"YRP page 127 line 5' damdamey mein dam na hon khvah

khar hogi jaan ki"LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13" dono registaan aur samundar hongey"YRP page 223 line 14" Dono kohsar aur samunder hongey"It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I listed only few. Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is writer's moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the shape of translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to publish the errata separately for there readers to correct their books.Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as correct.

Regards

Dr.Vinay

[Guest guest]

Dear Respected Bhardwaj ji,

Namaskar !!

 

Where is our guruji Pandit Bhusan Priyaji,Has he close the laltkitab remedy forum ?

 

with regards

Manoj Kar

 

 

-- On Sat, 20/12/08, Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj <nirbhar wrote:

Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj <nirbharRe: Lal Kitab Confusions Date: Saturday, 20 December, 2008, 10:08 PM

 

 

 

Dear Vinay Ji,

These things also happened to me rather t every lalkitab reader face this problem initially.

You can refer book by Prabhakar ji, without any fear. It is the best available transliteration of 1941 book. Our group have authenticated the correctness of this book. Prabahkar ji also opened a blog for publishing the errata in his transliterated book.

http://lalkitab1941 .blogspot. com

There are minor printing errors.You can corrrect your book from this blog site.

For other books you can refer the transliterations done by Pt. beni Madhav Goswami. These books are near to correct. But Pt beni madhav Goswami have yet not supplied errata in his book.You can point out any difficulty in understanding any word in group. Group members certainly help to correct these words.

Discard other available transliterations, they are of no use now.

Regards

Nirmal

On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Vinay kumar <v4vedic (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Experts,

I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another is from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu language. But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to lalkitab group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of the conflicting lines are:page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)"Khush data rabb bhai apne" The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is"Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney"Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )"duniya kee keemat hai aakaash budh mein"same at page 12 first line(YRP)'Duniya kee kismat hai aakaash budh mein"LKV Page 7 last line' hamdardi foofi budh kee hai"YRP page 18 line 11"hamdardi foqi budh kee hai"LKV page 8 line 2'peshaani(Maaya) chehra hoti hai"YRP page 18 line 13" peshani chehra hoti

hai"LKV page 11 line 14" rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee shakti hain"YRP page 27 line 3"rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee shakki hain"LKV page 11 5th line from bottom"Khud rooh bura bul bhee hai"YRP page 28 line 8"khud rau boota bel bhee hai"LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7"Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakha"YRP page 45 line 13"Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi"LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2"bachhiya se vo galta ho"YRP page 56 line 5" Bhichhiya se vo galta ho"LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4Mama se taarey daya se taarey"YRP page 80 line 7" Maya se taarey daya se taarey"LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6"Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki"YRP page 127 line 5' damdamey mein dam na hon khvah

khar hogi jaan ki"LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13" dono registaan aur samundar hongey"YRP page 223 line 14" Dono kohsar aur samunder hongey"It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I listed only few. Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is writer's moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the shape of translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to publish the errata separately for there readers to correct their books.Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as correct.

Regards

Dr.Vinay

Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now.

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Vinay,

You have done wonderful work to keep the authors (actually the translators and the transliterators) honest. Thanks for the hard work you put into keeping the LalKitab lovers informed about proper choice of the version they should invest into.

Coincidentally, as of a last few days, there has been a discussion going on between Pt Umesh Sharma, Pt Lakshmi Kant Vashisth (LKV), who are defending their modus operndi (translated work) vis-a-vis Shri Yograj Prabhakar (YRP) (transliterated work.) Pt LKV is a professional Arabic/Urdu/English translator for the government of India.

 

I tried to verify your findings with my independent analysis by comparing the original Urdu version (Lal Kitab 1941), versus the version transliterated by Sh Yograj Prabhakar (YRP). I don't have the version by Pt LKV so I took your interpretation for comparison purposes. If you have interpreted something wrong from Pt LKV's translated version, then my profuse apologies to Pt LKV in advance.

 

My findings are indicated in in red color and enclosed in { }. It is very clear that there are some serious problems in Pt LKV's version. It is for our readers/forum members to decide what they want to to.

 

Let me state clearly that I have no commercial interest in either Shri Yog Raj's book or Shri Goswami's transliterated work on Lal Kitab. My atttachment and loyalty is only to LalKitab and to those who are honestly dedicated to the cause of Lal Kitab.

 

Thanks again for such painstaking work.

 

Respectfully,

Rajinder Bhatia

--- On Sat, 12/20/08, Vinay kumar <v4vedic wrote:

Vinay kumar <v4vedic Lal Kitab Confusions Date: Saturday, December 20, 2008, 10:56 AM

 

 

 

Dear Experts,

I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another is from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu language. But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to lalkitab group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of the conflicting lines are:page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)"Khush data rabb bhai apne" The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is"Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney"{ YRP version is 100% correct.

LKV couldn't even come close to reading this word and missed it by a mile. This can't be categorized as a typographical error or a spelling mistake.}

 

Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )"duniya kee keemat hai aakaash budh mein"same at page 12 first line(YRP)'Duniya kee kismat hai aakaash budh mein"

{The actual word is "qismat" - YRP is 100% correct.

LKV - Again inexcusable error. This is not a typographical error; the word seems toi have been read wrong by LKV.}

LKV Page 7 last line' hamdardi foofi budh kee hai"YRP page 18 line 11"hamdardi foqi budh kee hai"

{ YRP 100% correct.

LKV wrong again. Not a typographical error. An easy word, totally misinterpreted by LKV. Of course, foofi is an item of budh but this interpretation is out of context.}

LKV page 8 line 2'peshaani(Maaya) chehra hoti hai"YRP page 18 line 13" peshani chehra hoti hai"

{YRP: 100% correct.

LKV: There is no such word as (Maaya) in the original text, not even in the footnotes.}

LKV page 11 line 14" rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee shakti hain"YRP page 27 line 3"rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee shakki hain"

{The word is "shakki". YRP 100% correct.

LKV - could be a typographical error. The error is serious as it changes the meaning of the sentence. But I will give LKV the benefit of doubt.}

LKV page 11 5th line from bottom"Khud rooh bura bul bhee hai"YRP page 28 line 8"khud rau boota bel bhee hai"

{YRP: 100% correct. The word is clearly written as "booTaa bail" Also it is not "rooh" as in LKV version. Three errors in one line in the LKV "Translation?" Does it deserve any better rating than the old "Dalda" books?}

LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7"Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakha"YRP page 45 line 13"Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi"

{YRP 100% correct!

The LKV book takes the award for jumbling up the whole entire sentence to make it utter jibberish and nonsensical. Did he try to understand what he was reading before "translating" it ?}

LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2"bachhiya se vo galta ho"YRP page 56 line 5" Bhichhiya se vo galta ho"

{YRP: 100% correct. The word is clearly written and corrrectly interpreted by YRP.

LKV seems to have not even undertood the meaning of this word and thus arth kaa anarth ho gayaa! This is actually Punjabi version of the word "bhiksha" (begging; "Begging will rot him/her" is the meaning. Not the animal "bachhiya") This can't be classed as a typographical error but an error of interpretation.}

LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4Mama se taarey daya se taarey"YRP page 80 line 7" Maya se taarey daya se taarey"

{YRP - 100% correct. The word is clearly written in the original text.

 

We will give LKV the benefit of doubt, this is a typographical error.}

LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6"Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki"YRP page 127 line 5' damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki"

{ YRP 100% correct. The word is very clearly NOT "dhandhey" LKV: wrong again. This is not a typographical error.}

LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13" dono registaan aur samundar hongey"YRP page 223 line 14" Dono kohsar aur samunder hongey"

{ This is not on page 223. So I can't rate it. But there is a huge difference between the words "kohsaar (mountain) and registaan (desert). }

 

It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I listed only few. Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is writer's moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the shape of translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to publish the errata separately for there readers to correct their books.Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as correct.

Regards

Dr.Vinay

[Guest guest]

dear vinay ji,

 

i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with a

monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu

knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his morality

is not appropriate at all.

 

as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar ji's

version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet excellent

understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " . as you

mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budh

teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense to you?? should

it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

 

anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their advice

on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.

 

thanks

 

urs sincerely

 

jitin syal

 

 

 

, " Vinay kumar " <v4vedic wrote:

>

> Dear Experts,

>

> I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another

is

> from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu

language.

> But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

lalkitab

> group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of

the

> conflicting lines are:

>

> page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(LKV)

>

> " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

>

> Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> LKV Page 7 last line

> ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> YRP page 18 line 11

> " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> LKV page 8 line 2

> 'peshaan*i(Maaya)* chehra hoti hai "

> YRP page 18 line 13

> " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> LKV page 11 line 14

> " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> YRP page 27 line 3

> " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> YRP page 28 line 8

> " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakh*a "

> YRP page 45 line 13

> " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi* "

> LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> YRP page 56 line 5

> " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> YRP page 80 line 7

> " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> YRP page 127 line 5

> ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> YRP page 223 line 14

> " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with

> different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I

listed

> only few.

> Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is

writer's

> moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the

shape of

> translation or transliteration.or at least they can do is to publish

the

> errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

> Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as

> correct.

>

> Regards

>

> Dr.Vinay

>

[Guest guest]

Sir,

The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.

he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain punjabi terms etc.

Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just not worth to be compared with his book.

it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which publication.

the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

kulbir

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82 wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

dear vinay ji,i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with amonetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urduknowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his morality

is not appropriate at all.as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar ji'sversion with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet excellentunderstanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " . as you

mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budhteesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense to you?? shouldit not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their adviceon which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.thanksurs sincerelyjitin syal , " Vinay kumar " <v4vedic wrote:>> Dear Experts,>

> I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and anotheris> from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdulanguage.> But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

lalkitab> group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some ofthe> conflicting lines are:>> page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(LKV)>> " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* " >> Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> same at page 12 first line(YRP)> 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein " > LKV Page 7 last line> ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai " > YRP page 18 line 11> " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> LKV page 8 line 2> 'peshaan*i(Maaya)* chehra hoti hai " > YRP page 18 line 13> " peshani chehra hoti hai " > LKV page 11 line 14> " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " > YRP page 27 line 3

> " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain " > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai " > YRP page 28 line 8> " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakh*a "

 

> YRP page 45 line 13> " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi* " > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> YRP page 56 line 5> " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho " > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey " > YRP page 80 line 7> " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* " > YRP page 127 line 5> ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* " > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey " > YRP page 223 line 14> " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey " > It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with> different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I

listed> only few.> Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It iswriter's> moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in theshape of> translation or transliteration.or at least they can do is to publish

the> errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as> correct.>> Regards>> Dr.Vinay>

[Guest guest]

Dear all,

Shri Nirmal Kumar Bharadwajji and Shri Yograj Prabhakarji, I do not know how to thank them. thanks would be too less a word for them .

For me, they were unknown names to me a few months back. Suddenly Igot a call from Shri Bharadwaj ji who asked for my address and sent me a copy of the Gutka , without my asking him or requesting him for same. Before this I had never expressed my desire for hard copy to anyone. On my hesitation in receiving any object free from him or anyone , I was reluctant at his offer, and said that you please take tell me how much I must pay for same, I will send you the money,but he declined clearly and I did not wish to offend him by harping on the matter. I got the copy within 3 days, and just last month I got a call from Shri Prabhakarji who does not know me , but yet called me and was very affectionate in his approach and conversations.

Who are these people gifting books to unknown people and non-entities like me ? If not well wishers for this wonderful system of prognostication, then what else can they be ? Though I was acquainted with this system since about a decade or more , but was never seriously following it. Because of their sending this Gutka to me, I felt it my moral duty to go through same and study this system as one among the many chosen by the Originators of this system. Without " Prerna " nothing happens in this world.

If they can be called commercial then it would be a heninous crime on the part of the person who says so, and a sacrilege act. They have not asked me for any favour in return till date nor have I reimbursed them in any way, neither in kind or considerations.

They are the real exponents of the " LalKitab " and I wish them all the best in their efforts to publicise this system at their own cost , without any selfish ends, and may they receive full grace and blessings from the writer of this great Book .

kind regards,

Bhaskar.Bombay.

 

 

 

, "jitinsyal82" <jitinsyal82 wrote:>> > dear vinay ji,> > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with a> monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu> knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his morality> is not appropriate at all.> > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar ji's> version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet excellent> understanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as you> mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budh> teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to you?? should> it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?> > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their advice> on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.> > thanks> > urs sincerely> > jitin syal> > > > , "Vinay kumar" v4vedic@ wrote:> >> > Dear Experts,> >> > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and another> is> > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu> language.> > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to> lalkitab> > group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some of> the> > conflicting lines are:> >> > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(LKV)> >> > "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"> > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> > "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*"> >> > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> > "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > same at page 12 first line(YRP)> > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > LKV Page 7 last line> > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> > YRP page 18 line 11> > "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"> > LKV page 8 line 2> > 'peshaan*i(Maaya)* chehra hoti hai"> > YRP page 18 line 13> > " peshani chehra hoti hai"> > LKV page 11 line 14> > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> > YRP page 27 line 3> > "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> > "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> > YRP page 28 line 8> > "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"> > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> > "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakh*a"> > YRP page 45 line 13> > "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi*"> > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> > "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"> > YRP page 56 line 5> > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> > YRP page 80 line 7> > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"> > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> > "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> > YRP page 127 line 5> > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13> > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> > YRP page 223 line 14> > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> > It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with> > different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I> listed> > only few.> > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is> writer's> > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in the> shape of> > translation or transliteration.or at least they can do is to publish> the> > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as> > correct.> >> > Regards> >> > Dr.Vinay> >>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir;

 

I am interesting in obtaining one transcript in Urdu. Any good source for that, please?

 

thanks. Be Blessed!

 

M Syed

 

 

kulbir bance <kulbirbance Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 10:45:49 PMRe: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

 

 

Sir,

The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.

he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain punjabi terms etc.

Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just not worth to be compared with his book.

it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which publication.

the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

kulbir

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@ .co. uk> wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

dear vinay ji,i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with amonetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urduknowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his moralityis not appropriate at all.as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar ji'sversion with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet excellentunderstanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as youmentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budhteesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to you?? shouldit not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their adviceon which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.thanksurs sincerelyjitin syal , "Vinay kumar" <v4vedic wrote:>> Dear Experts,>> I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and anotheris> from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdulanguage.> But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail tolalkitab> group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some ofthe> conflicting lines are:>> page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)>> "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"> The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*">> Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh

mein"> same at page 12 first line(YRP)> 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> LKV Page 7 last line> ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> YRP page 18 line 11> "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"> LKV page 8 line 2> 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai" > YRP page 18 line 13> " peshani chehra hoti hai"> LKV page 11 line 14> " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> YRP page 27 line 3> "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> YRP page 28 line 8> "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"> LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakh*a"

 

> YRP page 45 line 13> "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi*"> LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"> YRP page 56 line 5> " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> YRP page 80 line 7> " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"> LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> YRP page 127 line 5> ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13> " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> YRP page 223 line 14> " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with> different meanings. there are several instance in both the books Ilisted> only few.>

Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It iswriter's> moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in theshape of> translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to publishthe> errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as> correct.>> Regards>> Dr.Vinay>

[Guest guest]

Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji, Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift me the copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused to accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad. The book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted gutka not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare Krishna trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books. Only the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero before his book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal kitab, becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice with such great work. SincerelyBaljeet Singh Pandher --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance

<kulbirbance wrote:kulbir bance <kulbirbanceRe: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

 

Sir,

The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.

he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain punjabi terms etc.

Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just not worth to be compared with his book.

it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which publication.

the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

kulbir

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@ .co. uk> wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

dear vinay ji,i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with amonetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urduknowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his morality

is not appropriate at all.as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar ji'sversion with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet excellentunderstanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as you

mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budhteesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to you?? shouldit not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their adviceon which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.thanksurs sincerelyjitin syal , "Vinay kumar" <v4vedic wrote:>> Dear Experts,>

> I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and anotheris> from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdulanguage.> But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

lalkitab> group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some ofthe> conflicting lines are:>> page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)>> "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"

> The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*">> Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein"

> same at page 12 first line(YRP)> 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> LKV Page 7 last line> ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> YRP page 18 line 11> "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"

> LKV page 8 line 2> 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai" > YRP page 18 line 13> " peshani chehra hoti hai"> LKV page 11 line 14> " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> YRP page 27 line 3

> "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> YRP page 28 line 8> "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"

> LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakh*a"

 

> YRP page 45 line 13> "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi*"> LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"

> YRP page 56 line 5> " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> YRP page 80 line 7> " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"

> LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> YRP page 127 line 5> ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> YRP page 223 line 14> " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> It is the same book these two writers published and referred but with> different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I

listed> only few.> Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It iswriter's> moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in theshape of> translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to publish

the> errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as> correct.>> Regards>> Dr.Vinay>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now!

[Guest guest]

Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,

If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that would be

a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have to

worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your plate

BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's future

(as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this

responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK hindi

versions without a second thought.

 

yours truly

jitin syal

 

, Baljeet Pandher

<bs_pandher54 wrote:

>

> Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji,

Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift me the

copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused to

accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad. The

book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than

ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted gutka

not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare Krishna

trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books. Only

the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero before his

book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal kitab,

becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice with

such great work.

>

> Sincerely

> Baljeet Singh Pandher

>

> --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance <kulbirbance wrote:

> kulbir bance <kulbirbance

> Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

>

> Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

>

>

>

>

>

Sir, 

>  The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by

hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even

correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be

published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar

ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.

>

> he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect

the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of

printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher

would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

>

> the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a

master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script

alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain

punjabi terms etc.

>

> Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just

not worth to be compared with his book.

> it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which

publication.

> the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for

any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by

giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add

insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of

repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book

in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

>

> kulbir

>

>

> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@

.co. uk> wrote:

>

dear vinay ji,

>

> i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with a

> monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu

> knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his

morality

>

> is not appropriate at all.

>

> as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar

ji's

> version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet

excellent

> understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " . as you

>

> mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budh

> teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense to you??

should

> it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

>

>

> anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their

advice

> on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.

>

> thanks

>

> urs sincerely

>

> jitin syal

>

>

> , " Vinay kumar " <v4vedic@>

wrote:

> >

> > Dear Experts,

> >

>

> > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and

another

> is

> > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu

> language.

> > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

>

> lalkitab

> > group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some

of

> the

> > conflicting lines are:

> >

> > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)

> >

> > " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

>

> > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> > " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

> >

> > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> > " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

>

> > same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > LKV Page 7 last line

> > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> > YRP page 18 line 11

> > " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

>

> > LKV page 8 line 2

> > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai "

>

> > YRP page 18 line 13

> > " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> > LKV page 11 line 14

> > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> > YRP page 27 line 3

>

> > " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> > " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> > YRP page 28 line 8

> > " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

>

> > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> > " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke

raakh*a "

>

>

>

> > YRP page 45 line 13

> > " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi* "

> > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> > " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

>

> > YRP page 56 line 5

> > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > YRP page 80 line 7

> > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

>

> > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> > " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> > YRP page 127 line 5

> > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

>

> > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> > YRP page 223 line 14

> > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> > It is the same book these two writers published and referred but

with

> > different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I

>

> listed

> > only few.

> > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is

> writer's

> > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in

the

> shape of

> > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to

publish

>

> the

> > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

> > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred

as

> > correct.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Dr.Vinay

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

________________

> Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

>

> http://www.flickr.com/gift/

>

[Guest guest]

Dear all,

Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.

But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone is occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with his own family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should he be expected to give his time in such activities which would take up the major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help him in his endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for the suggestion just made ?

This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a practical one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such activities with contributions from all interested members so that the time, energy, technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.

If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to contribute with Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time. Please let us have your views dear members

kind regards,

Bhaskar.

 

, "jitinsyal82" <jitinsyal82 wrote:>> Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,> If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that would be > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have to > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your plate > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's future> (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK hindi > versions without a second thought.> > yours truly> jitin syal> > , Baljeet Pandher > bs_pandher54@ wrote:> >> > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji, > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift me the > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused to > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad. The > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted gutka > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare Krishna > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books. Only > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero before his > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal kitab, > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice with > such great work. > > > > Sincerely> > Baljeet Singh Pandher > > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:> > kulbir bance kulbirbance@> > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions> > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.> > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.> > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain > punjabi terms etc.> > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just > not worth to be compared with his book.> > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which > publication. > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.> > > > kulbir> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@ > .co. uk> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dear vinay ji,> > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with a> > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu> > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his > morality> > > > is not appropriate at all.> > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar > ji's> > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet > excellent> > understanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as you> > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budh> > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to you?? > should> > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?> > > > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their > advice> > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.> > > > thanks> > > > urs sincerely> > > > jitin syal > > > > > > , "Vinay kumar" <v4vedic@> > wrote:> > >> > > Dear Experts,> > >> > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and > another> > is> > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu> > language.> > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to> > > > lalkitab> > > group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some > of> > the> > > conflicting lines are:> > >> > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)> > >> > > "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"> > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> > > "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*"> > >> > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> > > "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)> > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > > LKV Page 7 last line> > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> > > YRP page 18 line 11> > > "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"> > > > > LKV page 8 line 2> > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai" > > > > > YRP page 18 line 13> > > " peshani chehra hoti hai"> > > LKV page 11 line 14> > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> > > YRP page 27 line 3> > > > > "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> > > "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> > > YRP page 28 line 8> > > "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"> > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> > > "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke > raakh*a" > > > > > > > > > YRP page 45 line 13> > > "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi*"> > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> > > "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"> > > > > YRP page 56 line 5> > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> > > YRP page 80 line 7> > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"> > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> > > "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> > > YRP page 127 line 5> > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13> > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> > > YRP page 223 line 14> > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> > > It is the same book these two writers published and referred but > with> > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I> > > > listed> > > only few.> > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is> > writer's> > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in > the> > shape of> > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to > publish> > > > the> > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred > as> > > correct.> > >> > > Regards> > >> > > Dr.Vinay> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________> > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! > > > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/> >>

[Guest guest]

Dear M Syed,

Of course, you can download urdu transcript not only for one book but

for all the books. Thanks to Yograj Prabhakar Ji for providing the

same. You can download these books from group web site

http://.ueuo.com

Happy reading

Nirmal

, M Syed <syedinvestor wrote:

>

> Dear Sir;

>

> I am interesting in obtaining one transcript in Urdu. Any good

source for that, please?

>

> thanks.

>  Be Blessed!

>

> M Syed

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Thank You Nirmal Ji Be Blessed!

 

Mehmood Syed

 

 

Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj <nirbhar Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 7:51:50 AM Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

 

Dear M Syed,Of course, you can download urdu transcript not only for one book butfor all the books. Thanks to Yograj Prabhakar Ji for providing thesame. You can download these books from group web sitehttp://astrostudent s.ueuo.comHappy readingNirmal, M Syed <syedinvestor@ ...> wrote:>> Dear Sir;> > I am interesting in obtaining one transcript in Urdu. Any goodsource for that, please?> > thanks.> Be Blessed! > > M Syed> > >

[Guest guest]

I strongly agree with Mr. Rajinder Bhatia

I have both the books by YRP Ji and by LKV Ji and the copy of original

text too

The Gukta (Lal Kitab Teesra Hissa)transliterated by Shri Yograj

Prabhakar Ji is most accurate till today in the market

 

The Gutka by shri LKV has a lot of mistakes and almost on every single

page e.g

On first page first he missed the word " arjh "

and first line suppose to be " kya huya tha kya bhi hoga " (right)by YRP

it is written as " kya huya tha yaa kya abhi hoga " (wrong)by LKV

it is a big mistake on very first line.

on second line suppose to be " ilm jyotish hast rekha haal sab farmaa

gaya " (right)By YRP

written as " ilma-e-jyotish hast rekha haal sab pe farmaa

gaya " (wrong)by LKV

 

on third line it suppose to be " janam kundli yaa ki chandar hissae

doo batla gaya " (right)by YRP

written as " janam kundli yaa chander kundli hissae do batla

gaya " (wrong)by LKV

 

So I think the gutka transliterated by Shri YRP Ji is more accurate

 

Thanks

Gaurav Sharma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, Rajinder Bhatia

<rajinderbhatia2002 wrote:

>

>

> Dear Dr. Vinay,

> You have done wonderful work to keep the authors (actually the

translators and the transliterators) honest. Thanks for the hard work

you put into keeping the LalKitab lovers informed about proper choice

of the version they should invest into.

> Coincidentally, as of a last few days, there has been a discussion

going on between Pt Umesh Sharma, Pt Lakshmi Kant Vashisth (LKV), who

are defending their modus operndi (translated work) vis-a-vis Shri

Yograj Prabhakar (YRP) (transliterated work.) Pt LKV is a professional

Arabic/Urdu/English translator for the government of India. 

>  

> I tried to verify your findings with my independent analysis by

comparing the original Urdu version (Lal Kitab 1941), versus

the version transliterated by Sh Yograj Prabhakar (YRP). I don't have

the version by Pt LKV so I took your interpretation for comparison

purposes. If you have interpreted something wrong from Pt LKV's

translated version, then my profuse apologies to Pt LKV in advance.  

>  

> My findings are indicated in in red color and enclosed in { }. It is

very clear that there are some serious problems in Pt LKV's version.

It is for our readers/forum members to decide what they want to

to.

>  

> Let me state clearly that I have no commercial interest in either

Shri Yog Raj's book or Shri Goswami's transliterated work on Lal

Kitab. My atttachment and loyalty is only to LalKitab and to those who

are honestly dedicated to the cause of Lal Kitab.

>  

> Thanks again for such painstaking work.

>  

> Respectfully,

> Rajinder Bhatia

>

> --- On Sat, 12/20/08, Vinay kumar <v4vedic wrote:

>

> Vinay kumar <v4vedic

> Lal Kitab Confusions

>

> Saturday, December 20, 2008, 10:56 AM

>

Dear Experts,

>  I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and

another is from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in

Urdu language. But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail

to lalkitab group regarding this but they have not approved

my message. Some of the conflicting lines are:

>

> page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)

>

> " Khush data rabb bhai apne "  

> The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> " Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney "

> { YRP version is 100% correct.

> LKV couldn't even come close to reading this word and missed it by a

mile. This can't be categorized as a typographical error or a spelling

mistake.} 

>

>  

> Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> " duniya kee keemat hai aakaash budh mein "

> same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> 'Duniya kee kismat hai aakaash budh mein "

> {The actual word is " qismat " - YRP is 100% correct.

> LKV -  Again inexcusable error. This is not a typographical error;

the word seems toi have been read wrong by LKV.}

>

> LKV Page 7 last line

> ' hamdardi foofi budh kee hai "

> YRP page 18 line 11

> " hamdardi foqi budh kee hai "

> { YRP 100% correct.

> LKV wrong again. Not a typographical error. An easy word, totally

misinterpreted by LKV. Of course, foofi is an item of budh but this

interpretation is out of context.}

>  

> LKV page 8 line 2

> 'peshaani(Maaya) chehra hoti hai "

> YRP page 18 line 13

> " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> {YRP: 100% correct.

> LKV: There is no such word as (Maaya) in the original text, not even

in the footnotes.}

>

> LKV page 11 line 14

> " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee shakti hain "

> YRP page 27 line 3

> " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee shakki hain "

> {The word is " shakki " . YRP 100% correct.

> LKV - could be a typographical error. The error is serious as it

changes  the meaning of the sentence. But I will give LKV the benefit

of doubt.}

>

> LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> " Khud rooh bura bul bhee hai "

> YRP page 28 line 8

> " khud rau boota bel bhee hai "

> {YRP: 100% correct. The word is clearly written as " booTaa bail "

Also it is not " rooh " as in LKV version. Three errors in one line in

the LKV " Translation? " Does it deserve any better rating than the old

" Dalda " books?}

>

> LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> " Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke raakha "

> YRP page 45 line 13

> " Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi "

> {YRP 100% correct!

> The LKV book takes the award for jumbling up the whole entire

sentence to make it utter jibberish and nonsensical. Did he try to

understand what he was reading before " translating " it ?}

>

> LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> " bachhiya se vo galta ho "

> YRP page 56 line 5

> " Bhichhiya se vo galta ho "

> {YRP: 100% correct.  The word is clearly written and corrrectly

interpreted by YRP.

> LKV seems to have not even undertood the meaning of this word and

thus arth kaa anarth ho gayaa!  This is actually Punjabi version of

the word " bhiksha " (begging; " Begging will rot him/her "  is the

meaning. Not the animal " bachhiya " ) This can't be classed as a

typographical error but an error of interpretation.}

>

> LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> Mama se taarey daya se taarey "

> YRP page 80 line 7

> " Maya se taarey daya se taarey "

> {YRP - 100% correct. The word is clearly written in the original text.

>  

> We will give LKV the benefit of doubt, this is a typographical error.}

>

> LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> " Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki "

> YRP page 127 line 5

> ' damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki "

> { YRP 100% correct. The word is very clearly NOT " dhandhey " LKV:

wrong again. This is not a typographical error.}

>

> LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> " dono registaan aur samundar hongey "

> YRP page 223 line 14

> " Dono kohsar aur samunder hongey "

> { This is not on page 223. So I can't rate it.  But there is a huge

difference between the words " kohsaar (mountain) and registaan (desert). }

>  

> It is the same book these two writers published and referred but

with different meanings. there are several instance in both the books

I listed only few. 

> Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is

writer's moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether

in the shape of translation or transliteration. or at least they can

do is to publish the errata separately for there readers to correct

their books.

> Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred as

correct.

> Regards

> Dr.Vinay

>

[Guest guest]

Dear all,

 

Shri Yograj Ptabhakar translation of LK 1941 is simply best! no doubt

in it.

 

Best Wishes,

Vijay Goel

Jaipur

 

, " Nirmal Kumar Bhardwaj "

<nirbhar wrote:

>

> Dear M Syed,

> Of course, you can download urdu transcript not only for one book but

> for all the books. Thanks to Yograj Prabhakar Ji for providing the

> same. You can download these books from group web site

> http://.ueuo.com

> Happy reading

> Nirmal

> , M Syed <syedinvestor@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sir;

> >

> > I am interesting in obtaining one transcript in Urdu. Any good

> source for that, please?

> >

> > thanks.

> > Be Blessed!

> >

> > M Syed

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

No takers ?

Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?

regards,

Bhaskar.

 

, "Bhaskar" <rajiventerprises wrote:>> > Dear all,> > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.> > But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone is> occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and> monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with his own> family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should he be> expected to give his time in such activities which would take up the> major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help him in his> endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for the> suggestion just made ?> > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask> Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a practical> one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such activities> with contributions from all interested members so that the time, energy,> technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.> > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to contribute with> Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute> whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time. Please let us> have your views dear members> > kind regards,> > Bhaskar.> > > > > , "jitinsyal82" jitinsyal82@> wrote:> >> > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,> > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that would be> > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have to> > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your plate> > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's future> > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this> > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK hindi> > versions without a second thought.> >> > yours truly> > jitin syal> >> > , Baljeet Pandher> > bs_pandher54@ wrote:> > >> > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji,> > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift me the> > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused to> > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad. The> > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than> > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted gutka> > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare Krishna> > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books. Only> > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero before his> > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal kitab,> > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice with> > such great work.> > >> > > Sincerely> > > Baljeet Singh Pandher> > >> > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:> > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@> > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions> > > > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Sir,> > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by> > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even> > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be> > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar> > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.> > >> > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect> > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of> > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher> > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.> > >> > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a> > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script> > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain> > punjabi terms etc.> > >> > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just> > not worth to be compared with his book.> > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which> > publication.> > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for> > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by> > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add> > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of> > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book> > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.> > >> > > kulbir> > >> > >> > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@> > .co. uk> wrote:> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > dear vinay ji,> > >> > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with a> > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu> > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his> > morality> > >> > > is not appropriate at all.> > >> > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar> > ji's> > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet> > excellent> > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as you> > >> > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budh> > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to you??> > should> > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?> > >> > >> > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their> > advice> > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.> > >> > > thanks> > >> > > urs sincerely> > >> > > jitin syal> > >> > >> > > , "Vinay kumar" <v4vedic@>> > wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Experts,> > > >> > >> > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and> > another> > > is> > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu> > > language.> > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to> > >> > > lalkitab> > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some> > of> > > the> > > > conflicting lines are:> > > >> > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)> > > >> > > > "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"> > >> > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> > > > "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*"> > > >> > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> > > > "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > >> > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)> > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > > > LKV Page 7 last line> > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> > > > YRP page 18 line 11> > > > "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"> > >> > > > LKV page 8 line 2> > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai"> > >> > > > YRP page 18 line 13> > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai"> > > > LKV page 11 line 14> > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> > > > YRP page 27 line 3> > >> > > > "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> > > > "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> > > > YRP page 28 line 8> > > > "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"> > >> > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> > > > "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke> > raakh*a"> > >> > >> > >> > > > YRP page 45 line 13> > > > "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi*"> > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> > > > "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"> > >> > > > YRP page 56 line 5> > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> > > > YRP page 80 line 7> > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"> > >> > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> > > > "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> > > > YRP page 127 line 5> > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13> > >> > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> > > > YRP page 223 line 14> > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> > > > It is the same book these two writers published and referred but> > with> > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I> > >> > > listed> > > > only few.> > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is> > > writer's> > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in> > the> > > shape of> > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to> > publish> > >> > > the> > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred> > as> > > > correct.> > > >> > > > Regards> > > >> > > > Dr.Vinay> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ________________> > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!> > >> > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/> > >> >>

[Guest guest]

Most Respected Bhaskar jeeSa'adar NamaskaarI appreciate your great gesture and the devotion towards the cause of sacred Lal Kitab. Sir, money was never been a problem for me. The problem always was the lack of time due to my professional and domestic responsibilities. I know how time consuming the job of transliterating a book is because It took almost one year in transliterating the 1941 edition. Moreover, the first four versions of Lal Kitab are already been transliterated and available. I can assure you that these 4 editions are the most correct versions available so far. Pt.BM Goswami ji is in the process of transliterating the fifth edition (LK-1952) and the work is in its advance stages. The whole Lal Kitab student community will always be indebted to Pt. BM Goswami ji for his historical work. We will soon be having all the 5

editions of Lal Kitab in Devanagari script. Any financial assistance thus be provided to Pt. BM Goswami ji who is doing the noble work and deserves all the credits. RespectfullyYograj Prabhakar--- On Wed, 24/12/08, Bhaskar <rajiventerprises wrote:Bhaskar <rajiventerprises Re: Lal Kitab Confusions Date: Wednesday, 24 December, 2008, 12:32 AM

 

No takers ?

Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay .........?

regards,

Bhaskar.

 

, "Bhaskar" <rajiventerprises@ ...> wrote:>> > Dear all,> > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.> > But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone is> occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and> monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with his own> family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should he be> expected to give his time in such activities which would take up the> major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help him in his> endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for the> suggestion just made ?> > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask> Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a practical> one, in

todays times. We must form a pool of money for such activities> with contributions from all interested members so that the time, energy,> technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.> > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to contribute with> Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute> whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time. Please let us> have your views dear members> > kind regards,> > Bhaskar.> > > > > , "jitinsyal82" jitinsyal82@> wrote:> >> > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,> > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that would be> > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have to> > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much

on your plate> > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's future> > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this> > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK hindi> > versions without a second thought.> >> > yours truly> > jitin syal> >> > , Baljeet Pandher> > bs_pandher54@ wrote:> > >> > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji,> > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift me the> > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused to> > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad. The> > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than> > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted

gutka> > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare Krishna> > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books. Only> > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero before his> > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal kitab,> > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice with> > such great work.> > >> > > Sincerely> > > Baljeet Singh Pandher> > >> > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:> > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@> > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions> > > > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >

>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Sir,> > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by> > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even> > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be> > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in prabhakar> > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true spirit.> > >> > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to collect> > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of> > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any publisher> > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.> > >> > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a>

> master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu script> > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain> > punjabi terms etc.> > >> > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just> > not worth to be compared with his book.> > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which> > publication.> > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough for> > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage by> > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to add> > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of> > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his book> > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.> > >> > > kulbir>

> >> > >> > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@> > .co. uk> wrote:> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > dear vinay ji,> > >> > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books with a> > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu> > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his> > morality> > >> > > is not appropriate at all.> > >> > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to prabhakar> > ji's> > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet> > excellent> > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as

you> > >> > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu budh> > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to you??> > should> > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?> > >> > >> > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their> > advice> > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.> > >> > > thanks> > >> > > urs sincerely> > >> > > jitin syal> > >> > >> > > , "Vinay kumar" <v4vedic@>> > wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Experts,> > > >> > >> > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt

Vashishtha and> > another> > > is> > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in Urdu> > > language.> > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to> > >> > > lalkitab> > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my message. Some> > of> > > the> > > > conflicting lines are:> > > >> > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)> > > >> > > > "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"> > >> > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> > > > "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*"> > > >> > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> > > > "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh

mein"> > >> > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)> > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > > > LKV Page 7 last line> > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> > > > YRP page 18 line 11> > > > "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"> > >> > > > LKV page 8 line 2> > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai"> > >> > > > YRP page 18 line 13> > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai"> > > > LKV page 11 line 14> > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> > > > YRP page 27 line 3> > >> > > > "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> > > > "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> > > > YRP

page 28 line 8> > > > "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"> > >> > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> > > > "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke> > raakh*a"> > >> > >> > >> > > > YRP page 45 line 13> > > > "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee raakhi*"> > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> > > > "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"> > >> > > > YRP page 56 line 5> > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> > > > YRP page 80 line 7> > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"> > >> > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> >

> > "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> > > > YRP page 127 line 5> > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13> > >> > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> > > > YRP page 223 line 14> > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> > > > It is the same book these two writers published and referred but> > with> > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the books I> > >> > > listed> > > > only few.> > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It is> > > writer's> > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether in> > the> > > shape of> > > >

translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to> > publish> > >> > > the> > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or referred> > as> > > > correct.> > > >> > > > Regards> > > >> > > > Dr.Vinay> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >

>> > >> > >> > >> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________> > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!> > >> > > http://www.flickr. com/gift/> > >> >>

 

Be the first one to try the new Messenger 9 Beta!

[Guest guest]

respected bhaskar ji,

It's very nice to see a fellow member taking such pain, i am very

pleased to see this and i assure you that i am with you 100% on

this.I am definitely in, infact as i said this would be dream come

true for me hence i am ready to contribute physically and

financially. however there is one small problem, as far as i know

prabhakar ji, he wouldn't do this(publishing books) for monetary aim

and neither do i think he would accept any financial help.

 

Earlier this year i consulted shri prabhakar ji and i was so amazed

by his accurate knowledge of lal kitab and predictions(he told me

things that even i had forgotten) that i happily offered prabhakar ji

500 Australian dollars but he very politely declined the offer

saying " kakka rab da ditta sab kuch hai " .Even till date i literally

argue with him to accept the money but he never does.Not only that

from time to time i ask prabhakar ji lot of LK related stuff and you

know what, he never says that i don't have time for this or any other

excuse. instead he always explain things to me very politely.till

date he hasn't taken a single cent from me for all this and i only

have one word to describe him " legend " , he really is a true legend in

my eyes.

I think the problem for him would be to spare time. and once he does

have some free time on his hands,i am sure he would transliterate

rest of the LK editions too(fingers crossed).

bhaskar ji, my apologies if i offended you in any way but my

intentions are clean and as far as i know shri prabhakar ji, he is a

very selfless man.

 

yours respectfully

jitin syal

 

, " Bhaskar "

<rajiventerprises wrote:

>

>

> No takers ?

>

> Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?

>

> regards,

>

> Bhaskar.

>

>

>

>

> , " Bhaskar " <rajiventerprises@>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Dear all,

> >

> > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.

> >

> > But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone

is

> > occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and

> > monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with

his

> own

> > family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should he

be

> > expected to give his time in such activities which would take up

the

> > major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help him

in

> his

> > endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for the

> > suggestion just made ?

> >

> > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask

> > Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a

practical

> > one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such

activities

> > with contributions from all interested members so that the time,

> energy,

> > technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.

> >

> > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to

contribute

> with

> > Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute

> > whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time. Please

let

> us

> > have your views dear members

> >

> > kind regards,

> >

> > Bhaskar.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " jitinsyal82 " jitinsyal82@

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,

> > > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that

would be

> > > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have

to

> > > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your

plate

> > > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's

> future

> > > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this

> > > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK

hindi

> > > versions without a second thought.

> > >

> > > yours truly

> > > jitin syal

> > >

> > > , Baljeet Pandher

> > > bs_pandher54@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji,

> > > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift

me

> the

> > > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused

to

> > > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad.

The

> > > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than

> > > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted

gutka

> > > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare

Krishna

> > > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books.

Only

> > > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero

before

> his

> > > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal

kitab,

> > > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice

with

> > > such great work.

> > > >

> > > > Sincerely

> > > > Baljeet Singh Pandher

> > > >

> > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@

> > > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

> > > >

> > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Sir,

> > > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by

> > > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even

> > > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to

be

> > > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in

prabhakar

> > > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true

spirit.

> > > >

> > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to

collect

> > > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality

of

> > > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any

publisher

> > > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

> > > >

> > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes

it a

> > > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu

script

> > > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain

> > > punjabi terms etc.

> > > >

> > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are

just

> > > not worth to be compared with his book.

> > > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which

> > > publication.

> > > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are

enough for

> > > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed

sacrilage by

> > > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to

add

> > > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask

of

> > > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his

book

> > > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

> > > >

> > > > kulbir

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@

> > > .co. uk> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > dear vinay ji,

> > > >

> > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books

with

> a

> > > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without

urdu

> > > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his

> > > morality

> > > >

> > > > is not appropriate at all.

> > > >

> > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to

prabhakar

> > > ji's

> > > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet

> > > excellent

> > > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " . as

you

> > > >

> > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu

budh

> > > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense to

you??

> > > should

> > > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given

their

> > > advice

> > > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2

cents.

> > > >

> > > > thanks

> > > >

> > > > urs sincerely

> > > >

> > > > jitin syal

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " Vinay kumar "

<v4vedic@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Experts,

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and

> > > another

> > > > is

> > > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in

Urdu

> > > > language.

> > > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

> > > >

> > > > lalkitab

> > > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my message.

Some

> > > of

> > > > the

> > > > > conflicting lines are:

> > > > >

> > > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)

> > > > >

> > > > > " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> > > >

> > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> > > > > " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

> > > > >

> > > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> > > > > " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > >

> > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> > > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > > LKV Page 7 last line

> > > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> > > > > YRP page 18 line 11

> > > > > " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV page 8 line 2

> > > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai "

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 18 line 13

> > > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> > > > > LKV page 11 line 14

> > > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> > > > > YRP page 27 line 3

> > > >

> > > > > " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> > > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> > > > > " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> > > > > YRP page 28 line 8

> > > > > " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke

> > > raakh*a "

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 45 line 13

> > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee

raakhi* "

> > > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> > > > > " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 56 line 5

> > > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> > > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > > YRP page 80 line 7

> > > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> > > > > " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > YRP page 127 line 5

> > > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> > > >

> > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> > > > > YRP page 223 line 14

> > > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> > > > > It is the same book these two writers published and

referred but

> > > with

> > > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the

books

> I

> > > >

> > > > listed

> > > > > only few.

> > > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money.

It

> is

> > > > writer's

> > > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients,

whether in

> > > the

> > > > shape of

> > > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is

to

> > > publish

> > > >

> > > > the

> > > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

> > > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or

> referred

> > > as

> > > > > correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards

> > > > >

> > > > > Dr.Vinay

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

________________

> > > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

> > > >

> > > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Prabhakar ji,

 

Namaste.

 

I was expecting this reply from You. But at same time it was necessary

to put up this fact before you, that we are with you whenever needed,

and can be of help in our own little ways like the squirell who helped

with few drops of water during Shri Ramji's time.

 

I have just yesterday Ordered the books from Pt.Goswamijis son. Its good

to know your approval for same, in this mail, since I was actually not

sure whether I had made the right decesion, because I did not know him .

 

I appreciate your affections towards Panditji and towards all those who

are connected to Lal KItab in a genuine manner.

 

Kind regards,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

, Yograj Prabhakar

<yr_prabhakar wrote:

>

> Most Respected Bhaskar jee

> Sa'adar Namaskaar

>

> I appreciate your great gesture and the devotion towards theÂ

cause of sacred Lal Kitab. Sir, money was never been a problem for me.

The problem always was the lack of time due to my professional and

domestic responsibilities. I know how time consuming the job of

transliterating a book is because It took almost one year in

transliterating the 1941 edition. Moreover, the first four versions of

Lal Kitab are already been transliterated and available. I can assure

you that these 4 editions are the most correct versions available so

far.

>

> Pt.BM Goswami ji is in the process of transliterating the fifth

edition (LK-1952) and the work is in its advance stages. The whole Lal

Kitab student community will always be indebted to Pt. BM Goswami ji for

his historical work. We will soon be having all the 5 editions of Lal

Kitab in Devanagari script. Any financial assistance thus be provided to

Pt. BM Goswami ji who is doing the noble work and deserves all the

credits.

>

> Respectfully

> Yograj Prabhakar

>

> --- On Wed, 24/12/08, Bhaskar rajiventerprises wrote:

> Bhaskar rajiventerprises

> Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

>

> Wednesday, 24 December, 2008, 12:32 AM

>

>

>

>

>

No takers ?

> Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?

> regards,

> Bhaskar.

> Â

>

> , " Bhaskar " <rajiventerprises@

....> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Dear all,

> >

> > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.

> >

> > But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone is

> > occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and

> > monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with his

own

> > family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should he be

> > expected to give his time in such activities which would take up the

> > major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help him in

his

> > endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for the

> > suggestion just made ?

> >

> > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask

> > Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a

practical

> > one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such

activities

> > with contributions from all interested members so that the time,

energy,

> > technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.

> >

> > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to contribute

with

> > Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute

> > whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time. Please

let us

> > have your views dear members

> >

> > kind regards,

> >

> > Bhaskar.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " jitinsyal82 " jitinsyal82@

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,

> > > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that would

be

> > > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have to

> > > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your

plate

> > > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's

future

> > > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this

> > > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK

hindi

> > > versions without a second thought.

> > >

> > > yours truly

> > > jitin syal

> > >

> > > , Baljeet Pandher

> > > bs_pandher54@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj ji,

> > > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift me

the

> > > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He refused to

> > > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's Pashad.

The

> > > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than

> > > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted gutka

> > > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare Krishna

> > > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the books.

Only

> > > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero before

his

> > > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal

kitab,

> > > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full justice

with

> > > such great work.

> > > >

> > > > Sincerely

> > > > Baljeet Singh Pandher

> > > >

> > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@

> > > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

> > > >

> > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Sir,

> > > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published by

> > > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even

> > > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one to be

> > > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in

prabhakar

> > > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true

spirit.

> > > >

> > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to

collect

> > > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality of

> > > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any

publisher

> > > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

> > > >

> > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes it a

> > > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu

script

> > > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain

> > > punjabi terms etc.

> > > >

> > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are just

> > > not worth to be compared with his book.

> > > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on which

> > > publication.

> > > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are enough

for

> > > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed sacrilage

by

> > > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further to

add

> > > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask of

> > > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his

book

> > > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

> > > >

> > > > kulbir

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@

> > > .co. uk> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > dear vinay ji,

> > > >

> > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books

with a

> > > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without urdu

> > > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his

> > > morality

> > > >

> > > > is not appropriate at all.

> > > >

> > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to

prabhakar

> > > ji's

> > > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet

> > > excellent

> > > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " . as you

> > > >

> > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu

budh

> > > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense to

you??

> > > should

> > > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given their

> > > advice

> > > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 cents.

> > > >

> > > > thanks

> > > >

> > > > urs sincerely

> > > >

> > > > jitin syal

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " Vinay kumar " <v4vedic@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Experts,

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha and

> > > another

> > > > is

> > > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert in

Urdu

> > > > language.

> > > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

> > > >

> > > > lalkitab

> > > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my message.

Some

> > > of

> > > > the

> > > > > conflicting lines are:

> > > > >

> > > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( LKV)

> > > > >

> > > > > " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> > > >

> > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> > > > > " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

> > > > >

> > > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> > > > > " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > >

> > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> > > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > > LKV Page 7 last line

> > > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> > > > > YRP page 18 line 11

> > > > > " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV page 8 line 2

> > > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai "

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 18 line 13

> > > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> > > > > LKV page 11 line 14

> > > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> > > > > YRP page 27 line 3

> > > >

> > > > > " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> > > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> > > > > " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> > > > > YRP page 28 line 8

> > > > > " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke

> > > raakh*a "

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 45 line 13

> > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee

raakhi* "

> > > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> > > > > " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 56 line 5

> > > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> > > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > > YRP page 80 line 7

> > > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> > > > > " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > YRP page 127 line 5

> > > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> > > >

> > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> > > > > YRP page 223 line 14

> > > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> > > > > It is the same book these two writers published and referred

but

> > > with

> > > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the

books I

> > > >

> > > > listed

> > > > > only few.

> > > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned money. It

is

> > > > writer's

> > > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, whether

in

> > > the

> > > > shape of

> > > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is to

> > > publish

> > > >

> > > > the

> > > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

> > > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or

referred

> > > as

> > > > > correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards

> > > > >

> > > > > Dr.Vinay

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

_________

> > > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

> > > >

> > > > http://www.flickr. com/gift/

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

Check out the all-new face of India. Go to http://in./

>

[Guest guest]

dear Bhaskar ji,

I join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to

prabhakarji,that is the big question.

sincerely,

kiranjit

 

tudents , " Bhaskar " <rajiventerprises wrote:

>

>

> No takers ?

>

> Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?

>

> regards,

>

> Bhaskar.

>

>

>

>

> , " Bhaskar " <rajiventerprises@>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Dear all,

> >

> > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.

> >

> > But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone

is

> > occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and

> > monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with

his

> own

> > family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should

he be

> > expected to give his time in such activities which would take up

the

> > major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help

him in

> his

> > endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for

the

> > suggestion just made ?

> >

> > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask

> > Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a

practical

> > one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such

activities

> > with contributions from all interested members so that the time,

> energy,

> > technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.

> >

> > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to

contribute

> with

> > Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute

> > whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time.

Please let

> us

> > have your views dear members

> >

> > kind regards,

> >

> > Bhaskar.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " jitinsyal82 " jitinsyal82@

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,

> > > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that

would be

> > > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have

to

> > > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your

plate

> > > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's

> future

> > > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this

> > > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK

hindi

> > > versions without a second thought.

> > >

> > > yours truly

> > > jitin syal

> > >

> > > , Baljeet Pandher

> > > bs_pandher54@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj

ji,

> > > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift

me

> the

> > > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He

refused to

> > > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's

Pashad. The

> > > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than

> > > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted

gutka

> > > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare

Krishna

> > > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the

books. Only

> > > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero

before

> his

> > > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal

kitab,

> > > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full

justice with

> > > such great work.

> > > >

> > > > Sincerely

> > > > Baljeet Singh Pandher

> > > >

> > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@

> > > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

> > > >

> > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Sir,

> > > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published

by

> > > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even

> > > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one

to be

> > > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in

prabhakar

> > > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true

spirit.

> > > >

> > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to

collect

> > > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality

of

> > > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any

publisher

> > > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.

> > > >

> > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes

it a

> > > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu

script

> > > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain

> > > punjabi terms etc.

> > > >

> > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are

just

> > > not worth to be compared with his book.

> > > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on

which

> > > publication.

> > > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are

enough for

> > > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed

sacrilage by

> > > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further

to add

> > > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask

of

> > > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his

book

> > > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

> > > >

> > > > kulbir

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@

> > > .co. uk> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > dear vinay ji,

> > > >

> > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books

with

> a

> > > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without

urdu

> > > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his

> > > morality

> > > >

> > > > is not appropriate at all.

> > > >

> > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to

prabhakar

> > > ji's

> > > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet

> > > excellent

> > > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " . as

you

> > > >

> > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu

budh

> > > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense to

you??

> > > should

> > > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given

their

> > > advice

> > > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2

cents.

> > > >

> > > > thanks

> > > >

> > > > urs sincerely

> > > >

> > > > jitin syal

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " Vinay kumar "

<v4vedic@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Experts,

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha

and

> > > another

> > > > is

> > > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert

in Urdu

> > > > language.

> > > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

> > > >

> > > > lalkitab

> > > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my

message. Some

> > > of

> > > > the

> > > > > conflicting lines are:

> > > > >

> > > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(

LKV)

> > > > >

> > > > > " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> > > >

> > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> > > > > " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

> > > > >

> > > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> > > > > " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > >

> > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> > > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > > LKV Page 7 last line

> > > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> > > > > YRP page 18 line 11

> > > > > " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV page 8 line 2

> > > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai "

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 18 line 13

> > > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> > > > > LKV page 11 line 14

> > > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> > > > > YRP page 27 line 3

> > > >

> > > > > " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> > > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> > > > > " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> > > > > YRP page 28 line 8

> > > > > " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke

> > > raakh*a "

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 45 line 13

> > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee

raakhi* "

> > > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> > > > > " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > >

> > > > > YRP page 56 line 5

> > > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> > > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > > YRP page 80 line 7

> > > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > >

> > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> > > > > " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > YRP page 127 line 5

> > > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> > > >

> > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> > > > > YRP page 223 line 14

> > > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> > > > > It is the same book these two writers published and

referred but

> > > with

> > > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the

books

> I

> > > >

> > > > listed

> > > > > only few.

> > > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned

money. It

> is

> > > > writer's

> > > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients,

whether in

> > > the

> > > > shape of

> > > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is

to

> > > publish

> > > >

> > > > the

> > > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.

> > > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or

> referred

> > > as

> > > > > correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards

> > > > >

> > > > > Dr.Vinay

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

________________

> > > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

> > > >

> > > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhaskar ji,

I also join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to

prabhakarji. If yes, My contribution is Rs.3100/-

Thanks

Umesh Sharma

, " kapatjal " <kapatjal

wrote:

>

> dear Bhaskar ji,

> I join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to

> prabhakarji,that is the big question.

> sincerely,

> kiranjit

>

> tudents , " Bhaskar " <rajiventerprises@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > No takers ?

> >

> > Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?

> >

> > regards,

> >

> > Bhaskar.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " Bhaskar "

<rajiventerprises@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Dear all,

> > >

> > > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.

> > >

> > > But we too should be understanding in todays times when

everyone

> is

> > > occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day

and

> > > monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being

with

> his

> > own

> > > family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should

> he be

> > > expected to give his time in such activities which would take

up

> the

> > > major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help

> him in

> > his

> > > endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for

> the

> > > suggestion just made ?

> > >

> > > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask

> > > Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a

> practical

> > > one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such

> activities

> > > with contributions from all interested members so that the

time,

> > energy,

> > > technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.

> > >

> > > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to

> contribute

> > with

> > > Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically

contribute

> > > whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time.

> Please let

> > us

> > > have your views dear members

> > >

> > > kind regards,

> > >

> > > Bhaskar.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " jitinsyal82 "

jitinsyal82@

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,

> > > > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that

> would be

> > > > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't

have

> to

> > > > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on

your

> plate

> > > > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of

LK's

> > future

> > > > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this

> > > > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy

LK

> hindi

> > > > versions without a second thought.

> > > >

> > > > yours truly

> > > > jitin syal

> > > >

> > > > , Baljeet Pandher

> > > > bs_pandher54@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj

> ji,

> > > > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to

gift

> me

> > the

> > > > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He

> refused to

> > > > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's

> Pashad. The

> > > > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather

than

> > > > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted

> gutka

> > > > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare

> Krishna

> > > > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the

> books. Only

> > > > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero

> before

> > his

> > > > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of

lal

> kitab,

> > > > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full

> justice with

> > > > such great work.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sincerely

> > > > > Baljeet Singh Pandher

> > > > >

> > > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > > > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@

> > > > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

> > > > >

> > > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Sir,

> > > > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one

published

> by

> > > > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been

even

> > > > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one

> to be

> > > > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in

> prabhakar

> > > > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true

> spirit.

> > > > >

> > > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to

> collect

> > > > the original books, then translate and publish it. the

quality

> of

> > > > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any

> publisher

> > > > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be

made.

> > > > >

> > > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it

makes

> it a

> > > > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of

urdu

> script

> > > > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to

explain

> > > > punjabi terms etc.

> > > > >

> > > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust

are

> just

> > > > not worth to be compared with his book.

> > > > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on

> which

> > > > publication.

> > > > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are

> enough for

> > > > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed

> sacrilage by

> > > > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further

> to add

> > > > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to

ask

> of

> > > > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up

his

> book

> > > > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

> > > > >

> > > > > kulbir

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@

> > > > .co. uk> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > dear vinay ji,

> > > > >

> > > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate

books

> with

> > a

> > > > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners

(without

> urdu

> > > > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning

his

> > > > morality

> > > > >

> > > > > is not appropriate at all.

> > > > >

> > > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to

> prabhakar

> > > > ji's

> > > > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple

yet

> > > > excellent

> > > > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " .

as

> you

> > > > >

> > > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu

ketu

> budh

> > > > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense

to

> you??

> > > > should

> > > > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given

> their

> > > > advice

> > > > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2

> cents.

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks

> > > > >

> > > > > urs sincerely

> > > > >

> > > > > jitin syal

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Vinay kumar "

> <v4vedic@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Experts,

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha

> and

> > > > another

> > > > > is

> > > > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert

> in Urdu

> > > > > language.

> > > > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

> > > > >

> > > > > lalkitab

> > > > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my

> message. Some

> > > > of

> > > > > the

> > > > > > conflicting lines are:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(

> LKV)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> > > > >

> > > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> > > > > > " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> > > > > > " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > >

> > > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> > > > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > > > LKV Page 7 last line

> > > > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> > > > > > YRP page 18 line 11

> > > > > > " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> > > > >

> > > > > > LKV page 8 line 2

> > > > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai "

> > > > >

> > > > > > YRP page 18 line 13

> > > > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> > > > > > LKV page 11 line 14

> > > > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> > > > > > YRP page 27 line 3

> > > > >

> > > > > > " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> > > > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> > > > > > " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> > > > > > YRP page 28 line 8

> > > > > > " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> > > > >

> > > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> > > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke

> > > > raakh*a "

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > YRP page 45 line 13

> > > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee

> raakhi* "

> > > > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> > > > > > " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > >

> > > > > > YRP page 56 line 5

> > > > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> > > > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > > > YRP page 80 line 7

> > > > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > >

> > > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> > > > > > " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > > YRP page 127 line 5

> > > > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> > > > >

> > > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> > > > > > YRP page 223 line 14

> > > > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> > > > > > It is the same book these two writers published and

> referred but

> > > > with

> > > > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both

the

> books

> > I

> > > > >

> > > > > listed

> > > > > > only few.

> > > > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned

> money. It

> > is

> > > > > writer's

> > > > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients,

> whether in

> > > > the

> > > > > shape of

> > > > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do

is

> to

> > > > publish

> > > > >

> > > > > the

> > > > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their

books.

> > > > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or

> > referred

> > > > as

> > > > > > correct.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dr.Vinay

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> ________________

> > > > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

> > > > >

> > > > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Umesh ji and Bhaskar ji,

I also join both of you in this gesture. If acceptable to Prabhakar ji I would contribute US$ 500.

Best regards,

Dharmender

 

 

 

Umesh Sharma

Thursday, December 25, 2008 10:41 PM

Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

 

 

Dear Bhaskar ji,I also join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to prabhakarji. If yes, My contribution is Rs.3100/-ThanksUmesh Sharma , "kapatjal" <kapatjal wrote:>> dear Bhaskar ji,> I join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to > prabhakarji,that is the big question.> sincerely,> kiranjit> > tudents , "Bhaskar" <rajiventerprises@> wrote:> >> > > > No takers ?> > > > Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?> > > > regards,> > > > Bhaskar.> > > > > > > > > > , "Bhaskar" <rajiventerprises@>> > wrote:> > >> > >> > > Dear all,> > >> > > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.> > >> > > But we too should be understanding in todays times when everyone > is> > > occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day and> > > monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being with > his> > own> > > family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should > he be> > > expected to give his time in such activities which would take up > the> > > major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help > him in> > his> > > endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for > the> > > suggestion just made ?> > >> > > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask> > > Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a > practical> > > one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such > activities> > > with contributions from all interested members so that the time,> > energy,> > > technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.> > >> > > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to > contribute> > with> > > Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically contribute> > > whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time. > Please let> > us> > > have your views dear members> > >> > > kind regards,> > >> > > Bhaskar.> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > , "jitinsyal82" jitinsyal82@> > > wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,> > > > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that > would be> > > > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't have > to> > > > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on your > plate> > > > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of LK's> > future> > > > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this> > > > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy LK > hindi> > > > versions without a second thought.> > > >> > > > yours truly> > > > jitin syal> > > >> > > > , Baljeet Pandher> > > > bs_pandher54@ wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj > ji,> > > > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to gift > me> > the> > > > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He > refused to> > > > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's > Pashad. The> > > > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather than> > > > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted > gutka> > > > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare > Krishna> > > > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the > books. Only> > > > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero > before> > his> > > > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of lal > kitab,> > > > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full > justice with> > > > such great work.> > > > >> > > > > Sincerely> > > > > Baljeet Singh Pandher> > > > >> > > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:> > > > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@> > > > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions> > > > > > > > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Sir,> > > > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one published > by> > > > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been even> > > > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one > to be> > > > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in > prabhakar> > > > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true > spirit.> > > > >> > > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to > collect> > > > the original books, then translate and publish it. the quality > of> > > > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any > publisher> > > > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be made.> > > > >> > > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it makes > it a> > > > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of urdu > script> > > > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to explain> > > > punjabi terms etc.> > > > >> > > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust are > just> > > > not worth to be compared with his book.> > > > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on > which> > > > publication.> > > > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are > enough for> > > > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed > sacrilage by> > > > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further > to add> > > > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to ask > of> > > > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up his > book> > > > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.> > > > >> > > > > kulbir> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@> > > > .co. uk> wrote:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > dear vinay ji,> > > > >> > > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate books > with> > a> > > > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners(without > urdu> > > > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning his> > > > morality> > > > >> > > > > is not appropriate at all.> > > > >> > > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to > prabhakar> > > > ji's> > > > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple yet> > > > excellent> > > > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal "view". as > you> > > > >> > > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu ketu > budh> > > > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain". does that makes sense to > you??> > > > should> > > > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given > their> > > > advice> > > > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2 > cents.> > > > >> > > > > thanks> > > > >> > > > > urs sincerely> > > > >> > > > > jitin syal> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > , "Vinay kumar" > <v4vedic@>> > > > wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > Dear Experts,> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha > and> > > > another> > > > > is> > > > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert > in Urdu> > > > > language.> > > > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to> > > > >> > > > > lalkitab> > > > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my > message. Some> > > > of> > > > > the> > > > > > conflicting lines are:> > > > > >> > > > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta( > LKV)> > > > > >> > > > > > "*Khush data rabb *bhai apne"> > > > >> > > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is> > > > > > "*Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney*"> > > > > >> > > > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )> > > > > > "duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > > > >> > > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)> > > > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein"> > > > > > LKV Page 7 last line> > > > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai"> > > > > > YRP page 18 line 11> > > > > > "hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai"> > > > >> > > > > > LKV page 8 line 2> > > > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai"> > > > >> > > > > > YRP page 18 line 13> > > > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai"> > > > > > LKV page 11 line 14> > > > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain"> > > > > > YRP page 27 line 3> > > > >> > > > > > "rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain"> > > > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom> > > > > > "Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai"> > > > > > YRP page 28 line 8> > > > > > "khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai"> > > > >> > > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7> > > > > > "*Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke> > > > raakh*a"> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > YRP page 45 line 13> > > > > > "*Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee > raakhi*"> > > > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2> > > > > > "*bachhiya* se vo galta ho"> > > > >> > > > > > YRP page 56 line 5> > > > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho"> > > > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4> > > > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey"> > > > > > YRP page 80 line 7> > > > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey"> > > > >> > > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6> > > > > > "*Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki*"> > > > > > YRP page 127 line 5> > > > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki*"> > > > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13> > > > >> > > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey"> > > > > > YRP page 223 line 14> > > > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey"> > > > > > It is the same book these two writers published and > referred but> > > > with> > > > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both the > books> > I> > > > >> > > > > listed> > > > > > only few.> > > > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned > money. It> > is> > > > > writer's> > > > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients, > whether in> > > > the> > > > > shape of> > > > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do is > to> > > > publish> > > > >> > > > > the> > > > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their books.> > > > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or> > referred> > > > as> > > > > > correct.> > > > > >> > > > > > Regards> > > > > >> > > > > > Dr.Vinay> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > ________> > > > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!> > > > >> > > > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

[Guest guest]

Thank You dear friends,

 

Thank you for the support shown through your mails.

 

I am just leaving for Nathdwara from Bombay, for darshan, today, and

will be back by the 31st. Then will speak to Shri Yograj ji, though he

has declined the financial support as per his mail few days ago, but

maybe he could use the same to equip himself with more tools for the

expositions of the Lalkitab teachings and learnngs we are a part of.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, " Dharmender " <dksrenu wrote:

>

> Dear Umesh ji and Bhaskar ji,

> I also join both of you in this gesture. If acceptable to Prabhakar ji

I would contribute US$ 500.

> Best regards,

> Dharmender

>

>

> Umesh Sharma

> Thursday, December 25, 2008 10:41 PM

>

> Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

>

>

> Dear Bhaskar ji,

> I also join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to

> prabhakarji. If yes, My contribution is Rs.3100/-

> Thanks

> Umesh Sharma

> , " kapatjal " kapatjal@

> wrote:

> >

> > dear Bhaskar ji,

> > I join u in your gesture;whether it is acceptable to

> > prabhakarji,that is the big question.

> > sincerely,

> > kiranjit

> >

> > tudents , " Bhaskar " <rajiventerprises@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > No takers ?

> > >

> > > Hume chahiye sab kuch, parantu dene ke samay ........?

> > >

> > > regards,

> > >

> > > Bhaskar.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " Bhaskar "

> <rajiventerprises@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Dear all,

> > > >

> > > > Yes this is a good request which will be helpful to all of us.

> > > >

> > > > But we too should be understanding in todays times when

> everyone

> > is

> > > > occupied and busy in accumlating " artha " for his day to day

> and

> > > > monthly expenditures , and Prabhakarji too is a human being

> with

> > his

> > > own

> > > > family, home and expenditures to take care of, then why should

> > he be

> > > > expected to give his time in such activities which would take

> up

> > the

> > > > major part of the day ? Should we not compensate him and help

> > him in

> > > his

> > > > endevaours and encourage him in this, while requesting him for

> > the

> > > > suggestion just made ?

> > > >

> > > > This my seem to be a cheap suggestion from my side, and I ask

> > > > Prabhakarji to forgive me if he finds it so, but I believe a

> > practical

> > > > one, in todays times. We must form a pool of money for such

> > activities

> > > > with contributions from all interested members so that the

> time,

> > > energy,

> > > > technical infrastructure etc. is all compensated for.

> > > >

> > > > If you find this in order, the I can be the first one to

> > contribute

> > > with

> > > > Rs.2100- for this noble cause. I can also periodically

> contribute

> > > > whenever needed with more , if required, if not at a time.

> > Please let

> > > us

> > > > have your views dear members

> > > >

> > > > kind regards,

> > > >

> > > > Bhaskar.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " jitinsyal82 "

> jitinsyal82@

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear members and respected prabhakar ji,

> > > > > If Shri Prabhakar ji can transliterate all the 5 books that

> > would be

> > > > > a dream come true for the students. At least then i won't

> have

> > to

> > > > > worry about learning urdu. sir i know u have too much on

> your

> > plate

> > > > > BUT i would humbly request you to do this for the sake of

> LK's

> > > future

> > > > > (as our generation can't read urdu).please take up this

> > > > > responsibility, at least that way students like me can buy

> LK

> > hindi

> > > > > versions without a second thought.

> > > > >

> > > > > yours truly

> > > > > jitin syal

> > > > >

> > > > > , Baljeet Pandher

> > > > > bs_pandher54@ wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respectable Kubir jee, I am having all the books of Yograj

> > ji,

> > > > > Vaishishta ji and Dr .Arun ji. Yograj ji was very kind to

> gift

> > me

> > > the

> > > > > copy of his book through one of his Canadian friend. He

> > refused to

> > > > > accept any money and said that this book is Pundit ji's

> > Pashad. The

> > > > > book is a real GEM. It look like a pavittar rranth rather

> than

> > > > > ordinary astrology book. I think that Vashishta ji converted

> > gutka

> > > > > not from original urdu book rather from the gutka of Hare

> > Krishna

> > > > > trust, because there are lot of similarities in both the

> > books. Only

> > > > > the gutka of Yograj ji is the best, the other two are zero

> > before

> > > his

> > > > > book. I request ograj ji to translate all the editions of

> lal

> > kitab,

> > > > > becuse a honest and devoted person like him can do full

> > justice with

> > > > > such great work.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sincerely

> > > > > > Baljeet Singh Pandher

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/22/08, kulbir bance kulbirbance@ wrote:

> > > > > > kulbir bance kulbirbance@

> > > > > > Re: Re: Lal Kitab Confusions

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Received: Monday, December 22, 2008, 6:45 AM

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sir,

> > > > > > The gutka by vashishta ji is no good than the one

> published

> > by

> > > > > hare krishna trust many years ago. had any of these 2 been

> even

> > > > > correct by 70 % only, there was no need to get the third one

> > to be

> > > > > published by prabhakar ji, there are only 1-2 mistakes in

> > prabhakar

> > > > > ji's gutka and he has accepted and rectified it in the true

> > spirit.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > he single handedly toiled for a considerable time first to

> > collect

> > > > > the original books, then translate and publish it. the

> quality

> > of

> > > > > printing, paper and binding of his book were such that any

> > publisher

> > > > > would know that there was no scope for much profit to be

> made.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > the transliteration and the dictionary appended to it

> makes

> > it a

> > > > > master piece for non urdu knowing learners. knowledge of

> urdu

> > script

> > > > > alone is not sufficient. prabhakar ji has taken care to

> explain

> > > > > punjabi terms etc.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Vashishta ji's gutka and also one by hare krishna trust

> are

> > just

> > > > > not worth to be compared with his book.

> > > > > > it is a matter of luck that a beginner lays his hands on

> > which

> > > > > publication.

> > > > > > the degrees diplomas in arabic etc. by vashishta ji are

> > enough for

> > > > > any layman to fall in the trap. i feel he has committed

> > sacrilage by

> > > > > giving such a shabby treatment to lalkitab gutka and further

> > to add

> > > > > insult to injury he doesn't even owns his mistakes what to

> ask

> > of

> > > > > repentance. it is no surprise that a beginner who picks up

> his

> > book

> > > > > in good faith ends up loosing interest in lalkitab.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > kulbir

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:52 AM, jitinsyal82 <jitinsyal82@

> > > > > .co. uk> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > dear vinay ji,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > i don't think a person like prabhakar ji transliterate

> books

> > with

> > > a

> > > > > > monetary aim, infact he does it to help us learners

> (without

> > urdu

> > > > > > knowledge) to learn lal kitab.hence my friend questioning

> his

> > > > > morality

> > > > > >

> > > > > > is not appropriate at all.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > as far as the correct version goes then i would refer to

> > prabhakar

> > > > > ji's

> > > > > > version with my eyes closed and that's because his simple

> yet

> > > > > excellent

> > > > > > understanding of the originals, sans any personal " view " .

> as

> > you

> > > > > >

> > > > > > mentioned that in vashishta ji's version it says " rahu

> ketu

> > budh

> > > > > > teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain " . does that makes sense

> to

> > you??

> > > > > should

> > > > > > it not be shakki(as written in prabhakar ji's version)?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > anyhow the senior members of the group have already given

> > their

> > > > > advice

> > > > > > on which book to follow, but i just felt like giving my 2

> > cents.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > thanks

> > > > > >

> > > > > > urs sincerely

> > > > > >

> > > > > > jitin syal

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , " Vinay kumar "

> > <v4vedic@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Experts,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > I have two roopantars of 1941 books one by Pt Vashishtha

> > and

> > > > > another

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > from Yograj Prabhakar. Both are called themselves Expert

> > in Urdu

> > > > > > language.

> > > > > > > But the books tells different stories. I sent the mail to

> > > > > >

> > > > > > lalkitab

> > > > > > > group regarding this but they have not approved my

> > message. Some

> > > > > of

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > conflicting lines are:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > page 5 second line of pakka ghar no. 3 of Pt.Vashishta(

> > LKV)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > " *Khush data rabb *bhai apne "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > The same line at p13 of Pt yograj prabhakar(YRP) book is

> > > > > > > " *Khavesh o- aqarab bhai apney* "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Page 5 line 14 from top (LKV )

> > > > > > > " duniya kee *keemat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > same at page 12 first line(YRP)

> > > > > > > 'Duniya kee *kismat* hai aakaash budh mein "

> > > > > > > LKV Page 7 last line

> > > > > > > ' hamdardi *foofi* budh kee hai "

> > > > > > > YRP page 18 line 11

> > > > > > > " hamdardi *foqi* budh kee hai "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > LKV page 8 line 2

> > > > > > > 'peshaan*i(Maaya) * chehra hoti hai "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > YRP page 18 line 13

> > > > > > > " peshani chehra hoti hai "

> > > > > > > LKV page 11 line 14

> > > > > > > " rahu ketu budh teesra, teenon hee *shakti* hain "

> > > > > > > YRP page 27 line 3

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > " rahu ketu aur budh teesra, teenon hee *shakki* hain "

> > > > > > > LKV page 11 5th line from bottom

> > > > > > > " Khud rooh *bura bul *bhee hai "

> > > > > > > YRP page 28 line 8

> > > > > > > " khud rau *boota bel* bhee hai "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > LKV Page 19 last line Brihaspati No 7

> > > > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela bela kabhi lala ji jhagde mein ghar ke

> > > > > raakh*a "

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > YRP page 45 line 13

> > > > > > > " *Log gaye jo mela baisakhi lala ji jakde hai ghar kee

> > raakhi* "

> > > > > > > LKV page 25 line 4 from bottom sooraj no 2

> > > > > > > " *bachhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > YRP page 56 line 5

> > > > > > > " *Bhichhiya* se vo galta ho "

> > > > > > > LKV page 35 line 3 chander 4

> > > > > > > *Mama* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > > > > YRP page 80 line 7

> > > > > > > " *Maya* se taarey daya se taarey "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > LKV Page 56 line 5 from bottom mangal 6

> > > > > > > " *Dhandey mein dam na ho chaahey khair hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > > > YRP page 127 line 5

> > > > > > > ' *damdamey mein dam na hon khvah khar hogi jaan ki* "

> > > > > > > LKV page 111 Para 3 line 13

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > " dono* registaan* aur samundar hongey "

> > > > > > > YRP page 223 line 14

> > > > > > > " Dono *kohsar* aur samunder hongey "

> > > > > > > It is the same book these two writers published and

> > referred but

> > > > > with

> > > > > > > different meanings. there are several instance in both

> the

> > books

> > > I

> > > > > >

> > > > > > listed

> > > > > > > only few.

> > > > > > > Readers purchased these books from their hard earned

> > money. It

> > > is

> > > > > > writer's

> > > > > > > moral duty to give correct version to their clients,

> > whether in

> > > > > the

> > > > > > shape of

> > > > > > > translation or transliteration. or at least they can do

> is

> > to

> > > > > publish

> > > > > >

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > errata separately for there readers to correct their

> books.

> > > > > > > Can any one guide which book from above is to be read or

> > > referred

> > > > > as

> > > > > > > correct.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dr.Vinay

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > ________

> > > > > > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>