Guest guest Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 Dear Pradeepji, You have been brought in a tight corner, with no recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth an example to support your theory, and also put forth the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which others are propogating. Both cases above are not possible by you, so better accept that I do not wish to argue further and want to end the thread. This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, otherwise if you do not do as suggested, then it would be a forceful and painful leaving away. Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. There would be no sense in continuing this thread., I hope you have realised this. so we better move away.............with dignity...... kind regards, And your well wisher, Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Dear bhaskar ji I don't understand what you are talking here. I have started giving case studies.Late PM Chandrahekhar was posted today.More charts are going to come. On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses were present in chandrakala nadi.We have all seen that,they were just amshas.So you may have to show me the examples,if any. Regds Pradeep , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear Pradeepji, > > You have been brought in a tight corner, with no > recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth > an example to support your theory, and also put forth > the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which > others are propogating. > > Both cases above are not possible by you, > so better accept that I do not wish to argue further > and want to end the thread. > > This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, > otherwise if you do not do as suggested, > then it would be a forceful and painful leaving > away. > > Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including > Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and > remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. > > There would be no sense in continuing this thread., > I hope you have realised this. > so we better move away.............with dignity...... > > kind regards, > And your well wisher, > Bhaskar. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Dear Pradeepji, I am not proposing anything, but spent 3 days in fruitless giving of references etc. I neither am interested in giving examples and neither interested in reading examples. neither interested in proposing any principle and neither interested in disposing any. //On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses were present in chandrakala nadi. // I have never mentioned this. That is the whole story of contention. IF You are going to misinterpret even the English words, then what to say of the Sanskrit shlokas. regards, Bhaskar. , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear bhaskar ji > > I don't understand what you are talking here. > I have started giving case studies.Late PM Chandrahekhar was posted > today.More charts are going to come. > > On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses were > present in chandrakala nadi.We have all seen that,they were just > amshas.So you may have to show me the examples,if any. > > Regds > Pradeep > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > You have been brought in a tight corner, with no > > recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth > > an example to support your theory, and also put forth > > the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which > > others are propogating. > > > > Both cases above are not possible by you, > > so better accept that I do not wish to argue further > > and want to end the thread. > > > > This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, > > otherwise if you do not do as suggested, > > then it would be a forceful and painful leaving > > away. > > > > Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including > > Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and > > remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. > > > > There would be no sense in continuing this thread., > > I hope you have realised this. > > so we better move away.............with dignity...... > > > > kind regards, > > And your well wisher, > > Bhaskar. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Dear Bhaskar ji The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started giving references.I thought your refernces too were for the same purpose. Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just for learning purpose and not connected to the thread under discussion. Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend on commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can accept they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. I am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi varga chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus etc reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students including us. Regds Pradeep , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear Pradeepji, > > I am not proposing anything, but spent 3 days in fruitless > giving of references etc. I neither am interested in giving > examples and neither interested in reading examples. > neither interested in proposing any principle > and neither interested in disposing any. > > > //On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with > houses were present in chandrakala nadi. // > I have never mentioned this. That is the whole > story of contention. IF You are going to misinterpret > even the English words, then what to say of the Sanskrit > shlokas. > > regards, > Bhaskar. > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > Dear bhaskar ji > > > > I don't understand what you are talking here. > > I have started giving case studies.Late PM Chandrahekhar was posted > > today.More charts are going to come. > > > > On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses were > > present in chandrakala nadi.We have all seen that,they were just > > amshas.So you may have to show me the examples,if any. > > > > Regds > > Pradeep > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > You have been brought in a tight corner, with no > > > recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth > > > an example to support your theory, and also put forth > > > the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which > > > others are propogating. > > > > > > Both cases above are not possible by you, > > > so better accept that I do not wish to argue further > > > and want to end the thread. > > > > > > This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, > > > otherwise if you do not do as suggested, > > > then it would be a forceful and painful leaving > > > away. > > > > > > Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including > > > Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and > > > remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. > > > > > > There would be no sense in continuing this thread., > > > I hope you have realised this. > > > so we better move away.............with dignity...... > > > > > > kind regards, > > > And your well wisher, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Drar Pradeepji, //The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as > charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started giving > references.I thought your refernces too were for the same purpose.// Of Course. //Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just for > learning purpose and not connected to the thread under discussion.// This is not true. They were of course connected to the thread only. //Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend on > commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can accept > they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. // Sir, we know you are rich in these, that is why ,your goodself is being asked to prove, and not the vice-versa. // am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi varga > chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus etc > reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students including > us.// My reference to vargas, was given wrt the shloka of Bhrama (Please re-read my previous mails)and not to Chandrakali Nadi. Chandrakala Ndi shloka was given by me wrt the Navamsha importance and the aspects point. I think we are deviating now. The posts are only written now, with a purpose of picking up few lines in my reply, and then discussion starts on same., for having to defnd or prove the statements. The real cause of astrology would not be served that way. I have nothing against you personally or othewise in astrology too, please bear that in mind. MY way of approach is entirely different while reading charts, and never waste time more than 10 minutes to solve a simple query, if asked verbally. In the same way I am not interested in others way of approach, but always open to learning new techniques of prediction. Also tarka or kutarka on Shastras and shlokas is again not my cup of tea. I would rather do this tarka-kutarka on commentaries or on predective modules. I am a poor man, both financially and otherwise. So tim,e is precious for me, to waste on unnecessary discussions. I had already left this discussion. But on instance of the other members I have stayed and still replying on this thread. I would enjoy this same thread converted into a chart, and principles applied, and then tarka and ku-tarka, done on same. regards, Bhaskar. , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar ji > > The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as > charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started giving > references.I thought your refernces too were for the same purpose. > > Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just for > learning purpose and not connected to the thread under discussion. > > Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend on > commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can accept > they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. > > I am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi varga > chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus etc > reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students including > us. > > Regds > Pradeep > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > I am not proposing anything, but spent 3 days in fruitless > > giving of references etc. I neither am interested in giving > > examples and neither interested in reading examples. > > neither interested in proposing any principle > > and neither interested in disposing any. > > > > > > //On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with > > houses were present in chandrakala nadi. // > > I have never mentioned this. That is the whole > > story of contention. IF You are going to misinterpret > > even the English words, then what to say of the Sanskrit > > shlokas. > > > > regards, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear bhaskar ji > > > > > > I don't understand what you are talking here. > > > I have started giving case studies.Late PM Chandrahekhar was > posted > > > today.More charts are going to come. > > > > > > On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses were > > > present in chandrakala nadi.We have all seen that,they were just > > > amshas.So you may have to show me the examples,if any. > > > > > > Regds > > > Pradeep > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > You have been brought in a tight corner, with no > > > > recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth > > > > an example to support your theory, and also put forth > > > > the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which > > > > others are propogating. > > > > > > > > Both cases above are not possible by you, > > > > so better accept that I do not wish to argue further > > > > and want to end the thread. > > > > > > > > This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, > > > > otherwise if you do not do as suggested, > > > > then it would be a forceful and painful leaving > > > > away. > > > > > > > > Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including > > > > Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and > > > > remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. > > > > > > > > There would be no sense in continuing this thread., > > > > I hope you have realised this. > > > > so we better move away.............with dignity...... > > > > > > > > kind regards, > > > > And your well wisher, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Dear Bhaskar ji Let God bless you with all good.Let you forgive mistakes of others including shri Sreenadh.Let your approach and style help you in achieving whatever you want. Regds Pradeep , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Drar Pradeepji, > > //The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as > > charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started giving > > references.I thought your refernces too were for the same purpose.// > > Of Course. > > //Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just for > > learning purpose and not connected to the thread under discussion.// > > This is not true. They were of course connected to the thread only. > > //Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend on > > commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can accept > > they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. // > > Sir, we know you are rich in these, that is why ,your goodself > is being asked to prove, and not the vice-versa. > > > // am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi varga > > chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus etc > > reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students including > > us.// > > My reference to vargas, was given wrt the shloka of Bhrama (Please > re-read my previous mails)and not to Chandrakali Nadi. > Chandrakala Ndi shloka was given by me wrt the Navamsha importance > and the aspects point. > > I think we are deviating now. The posts are only written now, > with a purpose of picking up few lines in my reply, and > then discussion starts on same., for having to defnd or prove > the statements. The real cause of astrology > would not be served that way. I have nothing against you personally > or othewise in astrology too, please bear that in mind. MY way of > approach is entirely different while reading charts, and never waste > time more than 10 minutes to solve a simple query, if asked verbally. > > In the same way I am not interested in others way of approach, but > always open to learning new techniques of prediction. Also > tarka or kutarka on Shastras and shlokas is again not my cup of tea. I > would rather do this tarka-kutarka on commentaries or on predective > modules. > > I am a poor man, both financially and otherwise. So tim,e is precious > for me, to waste on unnecessary discussions. I had already left this > discussion. But on instance of the other members I have stayed and > still replying on this thread. I would enjoy this same thread > converted into a chart, and principles applied, and then tarka and > ku-tarka, done on same. > > regards, > Bhaskar. > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji > > > > The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as > > charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started giving > > references.I thought your refernces too were for the same purpose. > > > > Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just for > > learning purpose and not connected to the thread under discussion. > > > > Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend on > > commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can accept > > they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. > > > > I am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi varga > > chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus etc > > reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students including > > us. > > > > Regds > > Pradeep > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > I am not proposing anything, but spent 3 days in fruitless > > > giving of references etc. I neither am interested in giving > > > examples and neither interested in reading examples. > > > neither interested in proposing any principle > > > and neither interested in disposing any. > > > > > > > > > //On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with > > > houses were present in chandrakala nadi. // > > > I have never mentioned this. That is the whole > > > story of contention. IF You are going to misinterpret > > > even the English words, then what to say of the Sanskrit > > > shlokas. > > > > > > regards, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear bhaskar ji > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you are talking here. > > > > I have started giving case studies.Late PM Chandrahekhar was > > posted > > > > today.More charts are going to come. > > > > > > > > On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses were > > > > present in chandrakala nadi.We have all seen that,they were just > > > > amshas.So you may have to show me the examples,if any. > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > You have been brought in a tight corner, with no > > > > > recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth > > > > > an example to support your theory, and also put forth > > > > > the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which > > > > > others are propogating. > > > > > > > > > > Both cases above are not possible by you, > > > > > so better accept that I do not wish to argue further > > > > > and want to end the thread. > > > > > > > > > > This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, > > > > > otherwise if you do not do as suggested, > > > > > then it would be a forceful and painful leaving > > > > > away. > > > > > > > > > > Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including > > > > > Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and > > > > > remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. > > > > > > > > > > There would be no sense in continuing this thread., > > > > > I hope you have realised this. > > > > > so we better move away.............with dignity...... > > > > > > > > > > kind regards, > > > > > And your well wisher, > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Dear Pradeepji, Yes Sir. I always forgive and forget, but yeh duniyawale baar baar chedte hain. I always have believed that ultimately The Lords amsha is there in all, these are all temporary physical bodies fighting with each other, which would all be consigned to the flames one day, all of us within 50 years maximum. These bodies who fought will be no more remain with their inflated Egos, self esteem etc. But we forget all this on provocation. That is why my request to all, that at least on astrological Forums there should be no provocation. Thank you for your kind words and blessings. regards, Bhaskar. , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar ji > > Let God bless you with all good.Let you forgive mistakes of others > including shri Sreenadh.Let your approach and style help you in > achieving whatever you want. > > Regds > Pradeep > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Drar Pradeepji, > > > > //The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as > > > charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started > giving > > > references.I thought your refernces too were for the same > purpose.// > > > > Of Course. > > > > //Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just > for > > > learning purpose and not connected to the thread under > discussion.// > > > > This is not true. They were of course connected to the thread only. > > > > //Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend > on > > > commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can > accept > > > they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. // > > > > Sir, we know you are rich in these, that is why ,your goodself > > is being asked to prove, and not the vice-versa. > > > > > > // am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi > varga > > > chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus > etc > > > reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students > including > > > us.// > > > > My reference to vargas, was given wrt the shloka of Bhrama (Please > > re-read my previous mails)and not to Chandrakali Nadi. > > Chandrakala Ndi shloka was given by me wrt the Navamsha importance > > and the aspects point. > > > > I think we are deviating now. The posts are only written now, > > with a purpose of picking up few lines in my reply, and > > then discussion starts on same., for having to defnd or prove > > the statements. The real cause of astrology > > would not be served that way. I have nothing against you personally > > or othewise in astrology too, please bear that in mind. MY way of > > approach is entirely different while reading charts, and never > waste > > time more than 10 minutes to solve a simple query, if asked > verbally. > > > > In the same way I am not interested in others way of approach, but > > always open to learning new techniques of prediction. Also > > tarka or kutarka on Shastras and shlokas is again not my cup of > tea. I > > would rather do this tarka-kutarka on commentaries or on predective > > modules. > > > > I am a poor man, both financially and otherwise. So tim,e is > precious > > for me, to waste on unnecessary discussions. I had already left > this > > discussion. But on instance of the other members I have stayed and > > still replying on this thread. I would enjoy this same thread > > converted into a chart, and principles applied, and then tarka and > > ku-tarka, done on same. > > > > regards, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji > > > > > > The whole discussion was about navamshas being treated as > > > charts,identical to rashi chakra.When debated,members started > giving > > > references.I thought your refernces too were for the same > purpose. > > > > > > Now i am glad to know that you had provided those examples just > for > > > learning purpose and not connected to the thread under > discussion. > > > > > > Both my english as well as sanskrit are poor.Thats why i depend > on > > > commentators who had lived 1000's of years back.I feel we can > accept > > > they knew a ''bit'' of sanskrit and astrology. > > > > > > I am also glad that our assumptions like in chandrakala nadi > varga > > > chakra is present,saravali it is present(sun cannot aspect venus > etc > > > reasons) etc.I feel it is great for thousands of students > including > > > us. > > > > > > Regds > > > Pradeep > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > I am not proposing anything, but spent 3 days in fruitless > > > > giving of references etc. I neither am interested in giving > > > > examples and neither interested in reading examples. > > > > neither interested in proposing any principle > > > > and neither interested in disposing any. > > > > > > > > > > > > //On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with > > > > houses were present in chandrakala nadi. // > > > > I have never mentioned this. That is the whole > > > > story of contention. IF You are going to misinterpret > > > > even the English words, then what to say of the Sanskrit > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear bhaskar ji > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you are talking here. > > > > > I have started giving case studies.Late PM Chandrahekhar was > > > posted > > > > > today.More charts are going to come. > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand,you were proposing that,vargas with houses > were > > > > > present in chandrakala nadi.We have all seen that,they were > just > > > > > amshas.So you may have to show me the examples,if any. > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > > > You have been brought in a tight corner, with no > > > > > > recourse to prove yourself. I wish that You put forth > > > > > > an example to support your theory, and also put forth > > > > > > the necessary shlokas which refute the theory which > > > > > > others are propogating. > > > > > > > > > > > > Both cases above are not possible by you, > > > > > > so better accept that I do not wish to argue further > > > > > > and want to end the thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > This would be a graceful leaving from the thread, > > > > > > otherwise if you do not do as suggested, > > > > > > then it would be a forceful and painful leaving > > > > > > away. > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I am a well wisher of all good men, including > > > > > > Your goodself, I wish that you leave, unstained and > > > > > > remain in the Forum, with your self-respect mantained. > > > > > > > > > > > > There would be no sense in continuing this thread., > > > > > > I hope you have realised this. > > > > > > so we better move away.............with dignity...... > > > > > > > > > > > > kind regards, > > > > > > And your well wisher, > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.