Guest guest Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 Dear Chandrashekhar ji I have used an incorrect word -instead of wrong you said ''not right''.As the meanings convey the same ,i hope you have no problem. Please see your mail. ''I also see some very low level remarks like " trying to fool others " and so on with regards to well respected and knowledgeable astrologers, in off shoots of this thread...... I too DO NOT think GRAHA DRISHTIS in navamsha or other D-charts to be RIGHT, but I never use such language (of course, I may not be the role model for modern day astrologers). There are umpteen number of astrological texts that talk of aspects on Dreshkana lagna, navamsha lagna and lagna, by the same graha, or any two of them etc.indicating that some authorities did consider drishtis in those charts as they could not refer to one rasi as had that been the case then Vargottam lagna could have been mentioned there.'' You can see that to understand planets aspecting dreshakana lagna we do not need any drekkana chart as we have seen in the example. Now my question is once sage has a common yardstick for drishti -why should he mention aspects which does not fall within that yardstick.Thus my personal view is -as in the above case,what you think as aspects is the reason for your assumption. Everyone would be interested in knowing the reason - Why you think it is not right.Why you do not use it as a general practise. As aspect is a powerful influence,there should be some logic behind your opinion -Kindly share. Respect Pradeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 Dear Pradeep, It might be better if you do not put the words that never use as being said by me. There is a difference between what in my personal opinion, is thought to be not right and a blunt statement that something is wrong. If you read the mail fully you will understand that I have given my personal opinion as distinct from what is said in the texts. I have also expressed anguish over use of certain phrases in some mails that were being posted at that time. I do not see anything about that being referred to in the mail where you misquoted me. Any specific reason for avoiding that? Anyway I do not find me saying that the sages were wrong anywhere, do you? Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > I have used an incorrect word -instead of wrong you said ''not > right''.As the meanings convey the same ,i hope you have no problem. > > Please see your mail. > > ''I also see some very low level remarks like " trying to fool > others " and so on with regards to well respected and knowledgeable > astrologers, in off shoots of this thread...... > > I too DO NOT think GRAHA DRISHTIS in navamsha or other D-charts to > be RIGHT, but I never use such language (of course, I may not be the > role model for modern day astrologers). There are umpteen number of > astrological texts that talk of aspects on Dreshkana lagna, navamsha > lagna and lagna, by the same graha, or any two of them > etc.indicating that some authorities did consider drishtis in those > charts as they could not refer to one rasi as had that been the case > then Vargottam lagna could have been mentioned there.'' > > You can see that to understand planets aspecting dreshakana lagna we > do not need any drekkana chart as we have seen in the example. > > Now my question is once sage has a common yardstick for drishti -why > should he mention aspects which does not fall within that > yardstick.Thus my personal view is -as in the above case,what you > think as aspects is the reason for your assumption. > > Everyone would be interested in knowing the reason - Why you think > it is not right.Why you do not use it as a general practise. > As aspect is a powerful influence,there should be some logic behind > your opinion -Kindly share. > Respect > Pradeep > > > ------ > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release 7/24/2007 1:50 PM > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 Dear Chandrashekhar ji If i make a mistake i correct immediately.You may find that,before your mail i have corected mylsef. It was an inadvertent error. I said wrong instaed of ''not right''.Full mail was quoted ,even before your intervention.You may scroll don and see. Anyway inspite of all these,accept my apology. Respect Pradeep , Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > Dear Pradeep, > > It might be better if you do not put the words that never use as being > said by me. There is a difference between what in my personal opinion, > is thought to be not right and a blunt statement that something is wrong. > > If you read the mail fully you will understand that I have given my > personal opinion as distinct from what is said in the texts. I have also > expressed anguish over use of certain phrases in some mails that were > being posted at that time. I do not see anything about that being > referred to in the mail where you misquoted me. Any specific reason for > avoiding that? > > Anyway I do not find me saying that the sages were wrong anywhere, do you? > > Chandrashekhar. > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > I have used an incorrect word -instead of wrong you said ''not > > right''.As the meanings convey the same ,i hope you have no problem. > > > > Please see your mail. > > > > ''I also see some very low level remarks like " trying to fool > > others " and so on with regards to well respected and knowledgeable > > astrologers, in off shoots of this thread...... > > > > I too DO NOT think GRAHA DRISHTIS in navamsha or other D-charts to > > be RIGHT, but I never use such language (of course, I may not be the > > role model for modern day astrologers). There are umpteen number of > > astrological texts that talk of aspects on Dreshkana lagna, navamsha > > lagna and lagna, by the same graha, or any two of them > > etc.indicating that some authorities did consider drishtis in those > > charts as they could not refer to one rasi as had that been the case > > then Vargottam lagna could have been mentioned there.'' > > > > You can see that to understand planets aspecting dreshakana lagna we > > do not need any drekkana chart as we have seen in the example. > > > > Now my question is once sage has a common yardstick for drishti - why > > should he mention aspects which does not fall within that > > yardstick.Thus my personal view is -as in the above case,what you > > think as aspects is the reason for your assumption. > > > > Everyone would be interested in knowing the reason - Why you think > > it is not right.Why you do not use it as a general practise. > > As aspect is a powerful influence,there should be some logic behind > > your opinion -Kindly share. > > Respect > > Pradeep > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release Date: 7/24/2007 1:50 PM > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 Dear Pradeep, No need to apologize. This happens in enthusiasm to score over someone in an argument. But no more of jumping from one set of quotes to other. At my age, I do not have energy to respond to longish mails that seem to change direction midway. Take care, Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > If i make a mistake i correct immediately.You may find that,before > your mail i have corected mylsef. > > It was an inadvertent error. > > I said wrong instaed of ''not right''.Full mail was quoted ,even > before your intervention.You may scroll don and see. > > Anyway inspite of all these,accept my apology. > > Respect > Pradeep > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > It might be better if you do not put the words that never use as > being > > said by me. There is a difference between what in my personal > opinion, > > is thought to be not right and a blunt statement that something is > wrong. > > > > If you read the mail fully you will understand that I have given my > > personal opinion as distinct from what is said in the texts. I have > also > > expressed anguish over use of certain phrases in some mails that > were > > being posted at that time. I do not see anything about that being > > referred to in the mail where you misquoted me. Any specific reason > for > > avoiding that? > > > > Anyway I do not find me saying that the sages were wrong anywhere, > do you? > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > I have used an incorrect word -instead of wrong you said ''not > > > right''.As the meanings convey the same ,i hope you have no > problem. > > > > > > Please see your mail. > > > > > > ''I also see some very low level remarks like " trying to fool > > > others " and so on with regards to well respected and knowledgeable > > > astrologers, in off shoots of this thread...... > > > > > > I too DO NOT think GRAHA DRISHTIS in navamsha or other D-charts to > > > be RIGHT, but I never use such language (of course, I may not be > the > > > role model for modern day astrologers). There are umpteen number > of > > > astrological texts that talk of aspects on Dreshkana lagna, > navamsha > > > lagna and lagna, by the same graha, or any two of them > > > etc.indicating that some authorities did consider drishtis in > those > > > charts as they could not refer to one rasi as had that been the > case > > > then Vargottam lagna could have been mentioned there.'' > > > > > > You can see that to understand planets aspecting dreshakana lagna > we > > > do not need any drekkana chart as we have seen in the example. > > > > > > Now my question is once sage has a common yardstick for drishti - > why > > > should he mention aspects which does not fall within that > > > yardstick.Thus my personal view is -as in the above case,what you > > > think as aspects is the reason for your assumption. > > > > > > Everyone would be interested in knowing the reason - Why you think > > > it is not right.Why you do not use it as a general practise. > > > As aspect is a powerful influence,there should be some logic > behind > > > your opinion -Kindly share. > > > Respect > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release Date: > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM > > > > > > > > > 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.