Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Respected moderator, Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the least. He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same way. Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop such occurings over and over again. Respectfully, RP Singh , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear Pradeepji, > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > to sit on the Kings throne. > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > front, is amusing. > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > first when it is about to sink. > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > to create artificial hype in public , about his > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > women with transparent clothing. > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > would support you and defend your interpretations or > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > Why are you left alone ? > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > they may be right. > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > research, prove your principles through theseis and > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > you, would start touching Your feet . > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > to defend yourself, so just dont > make a fool of yourself. > > Accept silence and pardon. > Period, > > best wishes, > Bhaskar. > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in doubt.This > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has understood > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having his own > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now i will > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can respond. > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were given.Chandrashekhar > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past too.Supporting > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam has > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in discussing > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as personal > > view. > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you love to > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri etc.Thus it > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this tactic again > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift will > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is upto you. > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been an > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > Regds > > Pradeep > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the attempts made > > by a > > > > some. > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It is ''high > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum can not > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for members > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, but it was > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with respect to D > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that sages said > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " mentioned. So > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected to those > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those people, > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have been > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the people who > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > Pramana,one > > > > may counter them through Tarka and Pramana.Unfortunately it is > > used > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his students as > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good rapport > > with > > > > him. > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist your > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to say that - > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka and > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to him. and > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - so he > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any rift? If > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your call dear. > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " including of > > yours. > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail on " basics " , > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the Truth,but to > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan Varma), case > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned people. But > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking for truth > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you all the > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, which you > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri translations? > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is selective. > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges on the > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You ignored so > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted to > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not have > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and select the > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of mails to be > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take Jyotish > > debates in > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular understanding > > of a > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that scholar as a > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift between > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect towards > > learned > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the basics of > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, what is > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single negative > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji explained > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those sages. At > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read Dashadhayayi. So sir > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > debates.Every > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as in > > politics > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed minded > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your argument - > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if astrologer is > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only it is > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright ideas - not > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are choosing > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - and > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the predictive > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any astrological > > principle. > > > > > > > Regds > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who don't. " > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > __________ > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free Radio & MP3 > > Player & Recorder > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 RP Singh, Yes You were one of the friends that time who supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . You feel guilty. Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You are smart. At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. At least I am trying to stop the unnecessary arguments from continuing. If you have some sense then note that I am not taking any sides, but talking the truth and want all to mantain their self respect. I wish no fights should continue here. What has been your contribution ? This is your 4th or 5th mail where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what cause ? Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing to contribute. Dont try to take sides of injustice. Dont try to look good when you have nothing to show that you are good. Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from the Forum 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time or Your Bhraminness ? Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants that you kept quiet that time? Why suddenly awakened now ? Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? Are you their leader ? Who made you their leader ? What proof ? Just be away and keep quiet. Bhaskar. , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710 wrote: > > Respected moderator, > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the least. > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same way. > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop such > occurings over and over again. > > Respectfully, > > RP Singh > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > front, is amusing. > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > they may be right. > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > Period, > > > > best wishes, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > doubt.This > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has understood > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having his > own > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now i > will > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can > respond. > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > given.Chandrashekhar > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > too.Supporting > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam has > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > discussing > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > personal > > > view. > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you love > to > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > etc.Thus it > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this tactic > again > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift will > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is upto > you. > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been an > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > Regds > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the attempts > made > > > by a > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It > is ''high > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum can not > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for > members > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, but it > was > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with respect to > D > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that sages > said > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " mentioned. > So > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected to > those > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those people, > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have been > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the people > who > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > > Pramana,one > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and Pramana.Unfortunately it > is > > > used > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his > students as > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good > rapport > > > with > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist your > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to say > that - > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka and > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to him. > and > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - so he > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any rift? > If > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your call > dear. > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " including of > > > yours. > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > on " basics " , > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the Truth,but to > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan Varma), > case > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned people. > But > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking for > truth > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you all > the > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, which > you > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is selective. > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges on the > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You ignored > so > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted to > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not have > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and select the > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of mails to > be > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take Jyotish > > > debates in > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > understanding > > > of a > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that scholar > as a > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift > between > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect towards > > > learned > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the basics > of > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, what > is > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single > negative > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji > explained > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those > sages. At > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read Dashadhayayi. So > sir > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > > debates.Every > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as in > > > politics > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed > minded > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your > argument - > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if astrologer is > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only it > is > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright ideas - > not > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are > choosing > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - and > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > predictive > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any astrological > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who don't. " > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free Radio & > MP3 > > > Player & Recorder > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear Mr. Bhaskar, You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble from Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. Regards, RP Singh , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > RP Singh, > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > You feel guilty. > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > are smart. > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > At least I am trying to stop the > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > taking any sides, but talking the truth > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > What has been your contribution ? > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > cause ? > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > to contribute. > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > show that you are good. > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > the Forum > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > or Your Bhraminness ? > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > that you kept quiet that time? > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > Are you their leader ? > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > wrote: > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the least. > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same way. > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop such > > occurings over and over again. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > they may be right. > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > Period, > > > > > > best wishes, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > doubt.This > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has understood > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having his > > own > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now i > > will > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can > > respond. > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > too.Supporting > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam has > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > discussing > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > personal > > > > view. > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you love > > to > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > etc.Thus it > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this tactic > > again > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift will > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is upto > > you. > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been an > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the attempts > > made > > > > by a > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It > > is ''high > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum can not > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for > > members > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, but it > > was > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with respect to > > D > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that sages > > said > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " mentioned. > > So > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected to > > those > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those people, > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have been > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the people > > who > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and Pramana.Unfortunately it > > is > > > > used > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his > > students as > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good > > rapport > > > > with > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist your > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to say > > that - > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka and > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to him. > > and > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - so he > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any rift? > > If > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your call > > dear. > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " including of > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > on " basics " , > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the Truth,but to > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan Varma), > > case > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned people. > > But > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking for > > truth > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you all > > the > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, which > > you > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is selective. > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges on the > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You ignored > > so > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted to > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not have > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and select the > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of mails to > > be > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take Jyotish > > > > debates in > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > understanding > > > > of a > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that scholar > > as a > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift > > between > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect towards > > > > learned > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the basics > > of > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, what > > is > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single > > negative > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji > > explained > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those > > sages. At > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read Dashadhayayi. So > > sir > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as in > > > > politics > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed > > minded > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your > > argument - > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if astrologer is > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only it > > is > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright ideas - > > not > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are > > choosing > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - and > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > predictive > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any astrological > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who don't. " > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free Radio & > > MP3 > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear RP Singh ji, I do not wish to comment on Pradeepji. He is as much dear to me as others are.And about you, too I do not wish to comment unnecessarily. For me its a simple rule, if one comments on me, then I comment on him, otherwise I do not. Another thing, one cannot turn humble by slapping some one and then suddenly saying that I am humble. So lets not tow that line. I hope you would not comment on me again, and give me the opportunity to retaliate. best wishes, Bhaskar. , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710 wrote: > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble from > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > Regards, > > RP Singh > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > RP Singh, > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > You feel guilty. > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > are smart. > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > cause ? > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > to contribute. > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > show that you are good. > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > the Forum > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > that you kept quiet that time? > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > Are you their leader ? > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the > least. > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same > way. > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop such > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > > doubt.This > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has > understood > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having > his > > > own > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now i > > > will > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > too.Supporting > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam > has > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > > discussing > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > > personal > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you > love > > > to > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this > tactic > > > again > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift > will > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is > upto > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been an > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > <jyotish@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the > attempts > > > made > > > > > by a > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It > > > is ''high > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum can > not > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for > > > members > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, but > it > > > was > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with > respect to > > > D > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that > sages > > > said > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > mentioned. > > > So > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected to > > > those > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those > people, > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have > been > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the > people > > > who > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and Pramana.Unfortunately > it > > > is > > > > > used > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his > > > students as > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good > > > rapport > > > > > with > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist > your > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to > say > > > that - > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka > and > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to > him. > > > and > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - so > he > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any > rift? > > > If > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your > call > > > dear. > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " including > of > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > > on " basics " , > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > Truth,but to > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan > Varma), > > > case > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned > people. > > > But > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking > for > > > truth > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you > all > > > the > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, > which > > > you > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges on > the > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You > ignored > > > so > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted > to > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not > have > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and select > the > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of > mails to > > > be > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take > Jyotish > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > > understanding > > > > > of a > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that > scholar > > > as a > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift > > > between > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect > towards > > > > > learned > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the > basics > > > of > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, > what > > > is > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single > > > negative > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji > > > explained > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those > > > sages. At > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read Dashadhayayi. > So > > > sir > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as > in > > > > > politics > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed > > > minded > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your > > > argument - > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > astrologer is > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only > it > > > is > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright ideas - > > > > not > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are > > > choosing > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - > and > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > > predictive > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any astrological > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who > believe > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who > don't. " > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free Radio > & > > > MP3 > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear RP Singh ji Thank you for your kind words.I am not a scholar -it is not out of humility -but a Truth. When a senior astrologer of the age of Chandrashekhar ji considers himself as student,what about me. Others are trying to take mileage out of difference in opinion on a jyotish topic. Regds Pradeep , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710 wrote: > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble from > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > Regards, > > RP Singh > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > RP Singh, > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > You feel guilty. > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > are smart. > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > cause ? > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > to contribute. > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > show that you are good. > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > the Forum > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > that you kept quiet that time? > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > Are you their leader ? > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the > least. > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same > way. > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop such > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > > doubt.This > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has > understood > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having > his > > > own > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now i > > > will > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > too.Supporting > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam > has > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > > discussing > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > > personal > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you > love > > > to > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this > tactic > > > again > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift > will > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is > upto > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been an > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > <jyotish@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the > attempts > > > made > > > > > by a > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It > > > is ''high > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum can > not > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for > > > members > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, but > it > > > was > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with > respect to > > > D > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that > sages > > > said > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > mentioned. > > > So > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected to > > > those > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those > people, > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have > been > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the > people > > > who > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and Pramana.Unfortunately > it > > > is > > > > > used > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his > > > students as > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good > > > rapport > > > > > with > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist > your > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to > say > > > that - > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka > and > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to > him. > > > and > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - so > he > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any > rift? > > > If > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your > call > > > dear. > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " including > of > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > > on " basics " , > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > Truth,but to > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan > Varma), > > > case > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned > people. > > > But > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking > for > > > truth > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you > all > > > the > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, > which > > > you > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges on > the > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You > ignored > > > so > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted > to > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not > have > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and select > the > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of > mails to > > > be > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take > Jyotish > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > > understanding > > > > > of a > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that > scholar > > > as a > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift > > > between > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect > towards > > > > > learned > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the > basics > > > of > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, > what > > > is > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single > > > negative > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji > > > explained > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those > > > sages. At > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read Dashadhayayi. > So > > > sir > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as > in > > > > > politics > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed > > > minded > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your > > > argument - > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > astrologer is > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only > it > > > is > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright ideas - > > > > not > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are > > > choosing > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - > and > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > > predictive > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any astrological > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who > believe > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who > don't. " > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free Radio > & > > > MP3 > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear Bhaskar ji, I will comment if you will use uncivilised language for any one. I don't care about your comments. No one takes you seriously any way. Best wishes, RP Singh , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear RP Singh ji, > > I do not wish to comment on Pradeepji. He is as much > dear to me as others are.And about you, too I do not > wish to comment unnecessarily. For me its a simple > rule, if one comments on me, then I comment on him, > otherwise I do not. > > Another thing, one cannot turn humble by slapping > some one and then suddenly saying that I am humble. > > So lets not tow that line. > > I hope you would not comment on me again, and give me the > opportunity to retaliate. > > best wishes, > Bhaskar. > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble from > > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > > > Regards, > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > RP Singh, > > > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > > You feel guilty. > > > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > > are smart. > > > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > > cause ? > > > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > > to contribute. > > > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > > show that you are good. > > > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > > the Forum > > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > > that you kept quiet that time? > > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > > Are you their leader ? > > > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the > > least. > > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same > > way. > > > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop such > > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > > > doubt.This > > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has > > understood > > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having > > his > > > > own > > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now i > > > > will > > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > > too.Supporting > > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam > > has > > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > > > discussing > > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > > > personal > > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you > > love > > > > to > > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this > > tactic > > > > again > > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift > > will > > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is > > upto > > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been an > > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > > <jyotish@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the > > attempts > > > > made > > > > > > by a > > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It > > > > is ''high > > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum can > > not > > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for > > > > members > > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, but > > it > > > > was > > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with > > respect to > > > > D > > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that > > sages > > > > said > > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > > mentioned. > > > > So > > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected to > > > > those > > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those > > people, > > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have > > been > > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the > > people > > > > who > > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and Pramana.Unfortunately > > it > > > > is > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his > > > > students as > > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good > > > > rapport > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist > > your > > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to > > say > > > > that - > > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka > > and > > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to > > him. > > > > and > > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - so > > he > > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any > > rift? > > > > If > > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your > > call > > > > dear. > > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " including > > of > > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > > > on " basics " , > > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > > Truth,but to > > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan > > Varma), > > > > case > > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned > > people. > > > > But > > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking > > for > > > > truth > > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you > > all > > > > the > > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, > > which > > > > you > > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is > > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges on > > the > > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You > > ignored > > > > so > > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted > > to > > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not > > have > > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and select > > the > > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of > > mails to > > > > be > > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take > > Jyotish > > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > > > understanding > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that > > scholar > > > > as a > > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift > > > > between > > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect > > towards > > > > > > learned > > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the > > basics > > > > of > > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, > > what > > > > is > > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single > > > > negative > > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji > > > > explained > > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those > > > > sages. At > > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read Dashadhayayi. > > So > > > > sir > > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as > > in > > > > > > politics > > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed > > > > minded > > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your > > > > argument - > > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > > astrologer is > > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only > > it > > > > is > > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright ideas - > > > > > > not > > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are > > > > choosing > > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - > > and > > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > > > predictive > > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any astrological > > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who > > believe > > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who > > don't. " > > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free Radio > > & > > > > MP3 > > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear pradeepji, This thinking has to be changed. Nobody except maybe 1-2 maybe trying to take mileage of this difference of opinion.And even if they are, then who is to blame ? Why did You and Chandrasekharji not nip this differnce in the bud itself instead of allowing this to turn into a Big EGO War ? Only fools would like to take temporary mileage from here. For people like me,I feel sad when good scholars take a difference to such a long and lengthy inconclusive discussion. anyway, whatever you feel right you do. regards, Bhaskar. , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear RP Singh ji > > Thank you for your kind words.I am not a scholar -it is not out of > humility -but a Truth. > > When a senior astrologer of the age of Chandrashekhar ji considers > himself as student,what about me. > > Others are trying to take mileage out of difference in opinion on a > jyotish topic. > > Regds > Pradeep > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble from > > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > > > Regards, > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > RP Singh, > > > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > > You feel guilty. > > > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > > are smart. > > > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > > cause ? > > > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > > to contribute. > > > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > > show that you are good. > > > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > > the Forum > > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > > that you kept quiet that time? > > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > > Are you their leader ? > > > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the > > least. > > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the same > > way. > > > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop > such > > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a vulnerable > > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > > > doubt.This > > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has > > understood > > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be having > > his > > > > own > > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and Pramana.Now > i > > > > will > > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish can > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > > too.Supporting > > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste Santhanam > > has > > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > > > discussing > > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > > > personal > > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you > > love > > > > to > > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this > > tactic > > > > again > > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift > > will > > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is > > upto > > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have been > an > > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > > <jyotish@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the > > attempts > > > > made > > > > > > by a > > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - It > > > > is ''high > > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum > can > > not > > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one for > > > > members > > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, > but > > it > > > > was > > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with > > respect to > > > > D > > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that > > sages > > > > said > > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > > mentioned. > > > > So > > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be subjected > to > > > > those > > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those > > people, > > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should have > > been > > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the > > people > > > > who > > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka and > > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and > Pramana.Unfortunately > > it > > > > is > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and his > > > > students as > > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having good > > > > rapport > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see your > > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not twist > > your > > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean to > > say > > > > that - > > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this tarka > > and > > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known to > > him. > > > > and > > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - > so > > he > > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of any > > rift? > > > > If > > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your > > call > > > > dear. > > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " > including > > of > > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > > > on " basics " , > > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > > Truth,but to > > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan > > Varma), > > > > case > > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned > > people. > > > > But > > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now asking > > for > > > > truth > > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by you > > all > > > > the > > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those things, > > which > > > > you > > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is > > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve challenges > on > > the > > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You > > ignored > > > > so > > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always opted > > to > > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited your > > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would not > > have > > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and > select > > the > > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of > > mails to > > > > be > > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take > > Jyotish > > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > > > understanding > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that > > scholar > > > > as a > > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create rift > > > > between > > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect > > towards > > > > > > learned > > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned the > > basics > > > > of > > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion then, > > what > > > > is > > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a single > > > > negative > > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar ji > > > > explained > > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed those > > > > sages. At > > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read > Dashadhayayi. > > So > > > > sir > > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups or > > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc as > > in > > > > > > politics > > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to closed > > > > minded > > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting your > > > > argument - > > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > > astrologer is > > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then only > > it > > > > is > > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright > ideas - > > > > > > not > > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who are > > > > choosing > > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar says - > > > and > > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > > > predictive > > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any > astrological > > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who > > believe > > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who > > don't. " > > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free > Radio > > & > > > > MP3 > > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 I have not left. I am never going to be silent when it comes to the abuse of Bhaskar. that man is so abominable. I will never leave this group. I have much to learn and must to appease ever since the return of Bhaskar. may this man fix the malefic nature of his rising and may he realize the spiritual truths of astrology. this man has done nothing but to act humble one moment and then blast his horn the next. I am with you about moderating this group. this is the only way to provide a working space for all members. despite of my lack of qualifications in the realms of slokas etc, I still feel that my voice is warranted as I do feel a mutual association with all members. sincerely, __________ Raja G. Gursahani *: 314.761.3134 (Clovis, CA) *: rajagursahani(atgmail.com) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear RP Singh ji, Buy why me only ? Why would you not comment when Sreenadh or Raja Gursahani or venkat yasmin uses uncivilised language ? Why this bias? What wrong have i done you ? What harm have I caused You ? If you dont care about me, then why did you comment in the first place. And again you are talking on behalf of others, that no one takes me seriously. Why ? Are you their leader ? regards, Bhaskar. , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710 wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > > I will comment if you will use uncivilised language for any one. I > don't care about your comments. No one takes you seriously any way. > > Best wishes, > > RP Singh > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear RP Singh ji, > > > > I do not wish to comment on Pradeepji. He is as much > > dear to me as others are.And about you, too I do not > > wish to comment unnecessarily. For me its a simple > > rule, if one comments on me, then I comment on him, > > otherwise I do not. > > > > Another thing, one cannot turn humble by slapping > > some one and then suddenly saying that I am humble. > > > > So lets not tow that line. > > > > I hope you would not comment on me again, and give me the > > opportunity to retaliate. > > > > best wishes, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > > > > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble > from > > > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > RP Singh, > > > > > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > > > You feel guilty. > > > > > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > > > are smart. > > > > > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > > > cause ? > > > > > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > > > to contribute. > > > > > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > > > show that you are good. > > > > > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > > > the Forum > > > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > > > that you kept quiet that time? > > > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > > > Are you their leader ? > > > > > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " > <rpsingh2710@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the > > > least. > > > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the > same > > > way. > > > > > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop > such > > > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a > vulnerable > > > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > > > > doubt.This > > > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has > > > understood > > > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be > having > > > his > > > > > own > > > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and > Pramana.Now i > > > > > will > > > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish > can > > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > > > too.Supporting > > > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste > Santhanam > > > has > > > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > > > > discussing > > > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > > > > personal > > > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if > you > > > love > > > > > to > > > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this > > > tactic > > > > > again > > > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create > rift > > > will > > > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not > is > > > upto > > > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have > been an > > > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > > > <jyotish@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the > > > attempts > > > > > made > > > > > > > by a > > > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - > It > > > > > is ''high > > > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know > basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum > can > > > not > > > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one > for > > > > > members > > > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, > but > > > it > > > > > was > > > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with > > > respect to > > > > > D > > > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that > > > sages > > > > > said > > > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > > > mentioned. > > > > > So > > > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be > subjected to > > > > > those > > > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those > > > people, > > > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should > have > > > been > > > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the > > > people > > > > > who > > > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka > and > > > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and > Pramana.Unfortunately > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and > his > > > > > students as > > > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having > good > > > > > rapport > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see > your > > > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not > twist > > > your > > > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean > to > > > say > > > > > that - > > > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this > tarka > > > and > > > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known > to > > > him. > > > > > and > > > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - > so > > > he > > > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of > any > > > rift? > > > > > If > > > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your > > > call > > > > > dear. > > > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " > including > > > of > > > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > > > > on " basics " , > > > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > > > Truth,but to > > > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan > > > Varma), > > > > > case > > > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned > > > people. > > > > > But > > > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now > asking > > > for > > > > > truth > > > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by > you > > > all > > > > > the > > > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those > things, > > > which > > > > > you > > > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is > > > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve > challenges on > > > the > > > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You > > > ignored > > > > > so > > > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always > opted > > > to > > > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited > your > > > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would > not > > > have > > > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and > select > > > the > > > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of > > > mails to > > > > > be > > > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > > > > understanding > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that > > > scholar > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create > rift > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect > > > towards > > > > > > > learned > > > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned > the > > > basics > > > > > of > > > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion > then, > > > what > > > > > is > > > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a > single > > > > > negative > > > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar > ji > > > > > explained > > > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed > those > > > > > sages. At > > > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read > Dashadhayayi. > > > So > > > > > sir > > > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups > or > > > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc > as > > > in > > > > > > > politics > > > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to > closed > > > > > minded > > > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting > your > > > > > argument - > > > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > > > astrologer is > > > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then > only > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright > ideas - > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who > are > > > > > choosing > > > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar > says - > > > and > > > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > > > > predictive > > > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any > astrological > > > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who > > > believe > > > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who > > > don't. " > > > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free > Radio > > > & > > > > > MP3 > > > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 This rat always comes back whenever he comes to know that the ship is not going to sink anymore. This rat always comes back when Bhaskar is treated bad by any member. This rat always uses others shoulders to display his vehemance on Bhaskar. This rat has not realised still that he is a born rat. sincerely, Bhaskar. , " Raja Gursahani " <rajagursahani wrote: > > I have not left. I am never going to be silent when it comes to the abuse of > Bhaskar. that man is so abominable. I will never leave this group. I have > much to learn and must to appease ever since the return of Bhaskar. may this > man fix the malefic nature of his rising and may he realize the spiritual > truths of astrology. this man has done nothing but to act humble one moment > and then blast his horn the next. I am with you about moderating this group. > this is the only way to provide a working space for all members. despite of > my lack of qualifications in the realms of slokas etc, I still feel that my > voice is warranted as I do feel a mutual association with all members. > > > > sincerely, > > > > __________ > > Raja G. Gursahani > *: 314.761.3134 (Clovis, CA) > *: rajagursahani(atgmail.com) > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear Bhaskar ji, You know why people do not take you seriously. And it is exactly for this reason you flare up to be noticed. This is counter-productive. Regards, RP Singh , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear RP Singh ji, > > Buy why me only ? > > Why would you not comment when Sreenadh or Raja Gursahani > or venkat yasmin uses uncivilised language ? > Why this bias? > > What wrong have i done you ? > What harm have I caused You ? > > If you dont care about me, then why did you comment in > the first place. And again you are talking on behalf of > others, that no one takes me seriously. Why ? Are you > their leader ? > > > regards, > Bhaskar. > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > > > > I will comment if you will use uncivilised language for any one. I > > don't care about your comments. No one takes you seriously any way. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear RP Singh ji, > > > > > > I do not wish to comment on Pradeepji. He is as much > > > dear to me as others are.And about you, too I do not > > > wish to comment unnecessarily. For me its a simple > > > rule, if one comments on me, then I comment on him, > > > otherwise I do not. > > > > > > Another thing, one cannot turn humble by slapping > > > some one and then suddenly saying that I am humble. > > > > > > So lets not tow that line. > > > > > > I hope you would not comment on me again, and give me the > > > opportunity to retaliate. > > > > > > best wishes, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > > > > > > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble > > from > > > > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > RP Singh, > > > > > > > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > > > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > > > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > > > > You feel guilty. > > > > > > > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > > > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > > > > are smart. > > > > > > > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > > > > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > > > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > > > > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > > > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > > > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > > > > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > > > > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > > > > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > > > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > > > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > > > > cause ? > > > > > > > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > > > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > > > > to contribute. > > > > > > > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > > > > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > > > > show that you are good. > > > > > > > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > > > > the Forum > > > > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > > > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > > > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > > > > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > > > > that you kept quiet that time? > > > > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > > > > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > > > > Are you their leader ? > > > > > > > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > > > > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " > > <rpsingh2710@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say the > > > > least. > > > > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " or " > > > > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels the > > same > > > > way. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to stop > > such > > > > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a fortnight ? > > > > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a > > vulnerable > > > > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your idiotic > > > > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever in > > > > > > doubt.This > > > > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is your > > > > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji has > > > > understood > > > > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be > > having > > > > his > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and > > Pramana.Now i > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who wish > > can > > > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > > > > too.Supporting > > > > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste > > Santhanam > > > > has > > > > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point in > > > > > > discussing > > > > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect it as > > > > > > personal > > > > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if > > you > > > > love > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu Bhattathiri > > > > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try this > > > > tactic > > > > > > again > > > > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create > > rift > > > > will > > > > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not > > is > > > > upto > > > > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have > > been an > > > > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > > > > <jyotish@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding the > > > > attempts > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > by a > > > > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the basics - > > It > > > > > > is ''high > > > > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know > > basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on forum > > can > > > > not > > > > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another one > > for > > > > > > members > > > > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's basics, > > but > > > > it > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members with > > > > respect to > > > > > > D > > > > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning that > > > > sages > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > > > > mentioned. > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be > > subjected to > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all those > > > > people, > > > > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should > > have > > > > been > > > > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of the > > > > people > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of Tarka > > and > > > > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and > > Pramana.Unfortunately > > > > it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji and > > his > > > > > > students as > > > > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having > > good > > > > > > rapport > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to see > > your > > > > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN rao > > > > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not > > twist > > > > your > > > > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you mean > > to > > > > say > > > > > > that - > > > > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this > > tarka > > > > and > > > > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also known > > to > > > > him. > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise you - > > so > > > > he > > > > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question of > > any > > > > rift? > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was your > > > > call > > > > > > dear. > > > > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " > > including > > > > of > > > > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your mail > > > > > > on " basics " , > > > > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > > > > Truth,but to > > > > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics (Kalyan > > > > Varma), > > > > > > case > > > > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many learned > > > > people. > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now > > asking > > > > for > > > > > > truth > > > > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but by > > you > > > > all > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those > > things, > > > > which > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your sankstri > > > > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one is > > > > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve > > challenges on > > > > the > > > > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. You > > > > ignored > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always > > opted > > > > to > > > > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which suited > > your > > > > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we would > > not > > > > have > > > > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails and > > select > > > > the > > > > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list of > > > > mails to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to take > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a particular > > > > > > understanding > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading that > > > > scholar > > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to create > > rift > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as disrespect > > > > towards > > > > > > > > learned > > > > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who questioned > > the > > > > basics > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion > > then, > > > > what > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a > > single > > > > > > negative > > > > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri Chandrasekhar > > ji > > > > > > explained > > > > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed > > those > > > > > > sages. At > > > > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read > > Dashadhayayi. > > > > So > > > > > > sir > > > > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion groups > > or > > > > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji etc > > as > > > > in > > > > > > > > politics > > > > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to > > closed > > > > > > minded > > > > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when suiting > > your > > > > > > argument - > > > > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > > > > astrologer is > > > > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, then > > only > > > > it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called bright > > ideas - > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - who > > are > > > > > > choosing > > > > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each scholar > > says - > > > > and > > > > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with the > > > > > > predictive > > > > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any > > astrological > > > > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those who > > > > believe > > > > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those who > > > > don't. " > > > > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get Free > > Radio > > > > & > > > > > > MP3 > > > > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear RP Singh ji, If You think I am bad, then so be it. Please feel happy with that knowledge. You may continue your tirade towards me. regards, Bhaskar. , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710 wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > > You know why people do not take you seriously. And it is exactly for > this reason you flare up to be noticed. This is counter-productive. > > Regards, > > RP Singh , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear RP Singh ji, > > > > Buy why me only ? > > > > Why would you not comment when Sreenadh or Raja Gursahani > > or venkat yasmin uses uncivilised language ? > > Why this bias? > > > > What wrong have i done you ? > > What harm have I caused You ? > > > > If you dont care about me, then why did you comment in > > the first place. And again you are talking on behalf of > > others, that no one takes me seriously. Why ? Are you > > their leader ? > > > > > > regards, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " <rpsingh2710@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > > > > > > I will comment if you will use uncivilised language for any one. > I > > > don't care about your comments. No one takes you seriously any > way. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear RP Singh ji, > > > > > > > > I do not wish to comment on Pradeepji. He is as much > > > > dear to me as others are.And about you, too I do not > > > > wish to comment unnecessarily. For me its a simple > > > > rule, if one comments on me, then I comment on him, > > > > otherwise I do not. > > > > > > > > Another thing, one cannot turn humble by slapping > > > > some one and then suddenly saying that I am humble. > > > > > > > > So lets not tow that line. > > > > > > > > I hope you would not comment on me again, and give me the > > > > opportunity to retaliate. > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " > <rpsingh2710@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, > > > > > > > > > > You can go on with your comments. I have learnt to be humble > > > from > > > > > Pradeep ji, who is a scholar with unmatched knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > RP Singh, > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes You were one of the friends that time who > > > > > > supported Sreenadh. And I know why you can co-relate > > > > > > with the word I used " Stupid friends " and " rats " . > > > > > > You feel guilty. > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of trying to push Bhaskar away, why dont > > > > > > you talk sensible on astrology and prove that You > > > > > > are smart. > > > > > > > > > > > > At least I am honest. and talk from the heart. > > > > > > > > > > > > At least I am trying to stop the > > > > > > unnecessary arguments from continuing. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you have some sense then note that I am not > > > > > > taking any sides, but talking the truth > > > > > > and want all to mantain their self respect. > > > > > > > > > > > > I wish no fights should continue here. > > > > > > > > > > > > What has been your contribution ? > > > > > > > > > > > > This is your 4th or 5th mail > > > > > > where you have shown your jealousy and inadequacy by > > > > > > trying to take the Moderators sympathy,but for what > > > > > > cause ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr RP Singh, dont confirm that all Singhs are stupid, > > > > > > by this mail. Dont enter any thread if you have nothing > > > > > > to contribute. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dont try to take sides of injustice. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dont try to look good when you have nothing to > > > > > > show that you are good. > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you ask the Moderator to remove Sreenadh from > > > > > > the Forum > > > > > > 'when he used the word " Mother fuc..r " for me ? > > > > > > Where was your Punjabi Manliness gone that time > > > > > > or Your Bhraminness ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Were you sleeping with a overdose of Depressants > > > > > > that you kept quiet that time? > > > > > > Why suddenly awakened now ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Why talk on behalf of the silent majority ? > > > > > > Are you their leader ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Who made you their leader ? What proof ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Just be away and keep quiet. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " rpsingh2710 " > > > <rpsingh2710@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respected moderator, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, the message of Mr Bhaskar is very offensive to say > the > > > > > least. > > > > > > > He has no right to use such words as " stupid friends " > or " > > > > > > > rats " , " idiotic and senseless tark " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that the silent majority in the group feels > the > > > same > > > > > way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, I think you should put the group on moderation to > stop > > > such > > > > > > > occurings over and over again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RP Singh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who does not mind sweeping, is fit > > > > > > > > to sit on the Kings throne. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only a person who knows to request for pardon, > > > > > > > > and accept his mistakes can control others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us face the truth. You have done only tarka > > > > > > > > and no pramana has come forth from your side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet without even proper clothing to face the > > > > > > > > freezing cold, and with a small blunt knife > > > > > > > > not even good enought to cut vegetables ,You > > > > > > > > are trying to be a great warrior on the Kargil > > > > > > > > front, is amusing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your stupid friends have left. Sreenadh,Satish or > > > > > > > > Sateesh whatever and few others. It is a clear > > > > > > > > display of rats skipmpering and leaving the ship > > > > > > > > first when it is about to sink. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The first rat- Sreenadh- who also misquotes the > > > > > > > > Shastras and misinterprets them to his advantage, > > > > > > > > to create artificial hype in public , about his > > > > > > > > greatness,has left. Whatever little knowledge > > > > > > > > you had was contributed from him, as he projects > > > > > > > > in all Forums, as soon as he left, you had nothing > > > > > > > > to contribute, but just defending yourself like a > > > > > > > > women with transparent clothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeepji, I respect you much, to see you in > > > > > > > > such a position. Have you not seen how Chandrasekharji > > > > > > > > has rubbed you everyday with his mails since a > fortnight ? > > > > > > > > And he was right, and you were wrong. Therefore he had > > > > > > > > full right to rub you. But why were you in such a > > > vulnerable > > > > > > > > position ? because You kept yourself open,with your > idiotic > > > > > > > > and senseless tarka without any pramana and sang ( > > > > > > > > Companionship) of fools whom you thought > > > > > > > > would support you and defend your interpretations or > > > > > > > > misinterpretations. But where are these rats now ? > > > > > > > > Why are you left alone ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who knows for real that who is right ? > > > > > > > > Either You or Chandrasekharji ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only time would show. Till then why dont you > > > > > > > > keep quiet, instead of allowing yourself > > > > > > > > to be rubbed by one and all. What is the harm in > > > > > > > > accepting your defeat ? Why such a Big EGO ? > > > > > > > > For the time being accept that You may be wrong and > > > > > > > > they may be right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile consolidate your studies, do some > > > > > > > > research, prove your principles through theseis and > > > > > > > > publish them. Then all those who have been rubbing > > > > > > > > you, would start touching Your feet . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But at the moment you have no ammunitions > > > > > > > > to defend yourself, so just dont > > > > > > > > make a fool of yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Accept silence and pardon. > > > > > > > > Period, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat,we have to take a relook at basics whenever > in > > > > > > > doubt.This > > > > > > > > > does not mean K.N.Raoji does not know basics -it is > your > > > > > > > > > interpretation.I am no man to judge whether Raoji > has > > > > > understood > > > > > > > > > basics or not.It is beyond my capacities.He may be > > > having > > > > > his > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > reasons.It is upto him to say whe he use aspects.Not > me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me i have presented my case with Tarka and > > > Pramana.Now i > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > present my views in a structured fashion.Those who > wish > > > can > > > > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding,Kalyan Varma etc ...explanations were > > > > > > > given.Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > ji had explained to shri Rohini ranjan in the past > > > > > > > too.Supporting > > > > > > > > > Pramana will be given in the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Late Santhanams view -no more comment.When Lste > > > Santhanam > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > written in plain English in BPHS...there is no point > in > > > > > > > discussing > > > > > > > > > your views about opposition,though one can respect > it as > > > > > > > personal > > > > > > > > > view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may keep on trying to create rift between > people,if > > > you > > > > > love > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijayaads Pradeep is different from > > > > > > > > > Srutakeerthi,Jeevasharma,Garga,Thalakkulathu > Bhattathiri > > > > > > > etc.Thus it > > > > > > > > > is not my Sanskrit interpretation.But you may try > this > > > > > tactic > > > > > > > again > > > > > > > > > if you have nothing technical to offer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to > create > > > rift > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or > not > > > is > > > > > upto > > > > > > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me if i have to concentrate on my duties and > > > > > > > > > promises.Oppoistions and obstacles are normal.I have > > > been an > > > > > > > > > optimist and will always remain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang > > > > > <jyotish@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to mention a few words regarding > the > > > > > attempts > > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > > by a > > > > > > > > > > > some. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)When one is asked to have a relook at the > basics - > > > It > > > > > > > is ''high > > > > > > > > > > > lighted'' by some as ''K.N.Rao does not know > > > basics''. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Well, Pradeep ji - your statements on > forum > > > can > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > have two meanings - one for Shri KN Rao and another > one > > > for > > > > > > > members > > > > > > > > > arguing with you. We did not comment on anyone's > basics, > > > but > > > > > it > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > you who were questioning " basics " of the members > with > > > > > respect to > > > > > > > D > > > > > > > > > chakra and its interpretation. You were mentioning > that > > > > > sages > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > this, whereas they were your opinion on what " sages " > > > > > mentioned. > > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > when people not agreeing to your opinion can be > > > subjected to > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > forceful questioning on " basics " , then why not all > those > > > > > people, > > > > > > > > > whose views are in contrast to your view. You should > > > have > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > careful in your comments in questioning " basics " of > the > > > > > people > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > are not agreeing to your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)When Points are presented with the help of > Tarka > > > and > > > > > > > > > Pramana,one > > > > > > > > > > > may counter them through Tarka and > > > Pramana.Unfortunately > > > > > it > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > > > > as a vehicle to create rift between K.N.Raoji > and > > > his > > > > > > > students as > > > > > > > > > > > well as between K.N.Raoji and individuals having > > > good > > > > > > > rapport > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Pradeep ji, I am indeed surprised to > see > > > your > > > > > > > > > objections, if your opinion is conveyed to Shri KN > rao > > > > > > > > > in " verbatim " . Trust me, If I meet him - I will not > > > twist > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > words, but will produce your own mails. So now you > mean > > > to > > > > > say > > > > > > > that - > > > > > > > > > those mails must not be applicable to him? Let this > > > tarka > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > pramana theory from your own perspective, be also > known > > > to > > > > > him. > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > With my rapport with him since 1993, let me advise > you - > > > so > > > > > he > > > > > > > > > likes jyotish exploration. So where is the question > of > > > any > > > > > rift? > > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > it is your own words are troubling you, then it was > your > > > > > call > > > > > > > dear. > > > > > > > > > None of the other members, questioned the " basics " > > > including > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Satya did object to your contents of your > mail > > > > > > > on " basics " , > > > > > > > > > but you persisted with forceful conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover some are not interested in knowing the > > > > > Truth,but to > > > > > > > > > > > aggravate things and create rift and fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? We all presented classics > (Kalyan > > > > > Varma), > > > > > > > case > > > > > > > > > studies (late Santhanam) and opinion of so many > learned > > > > > people. > > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > > you kept on overruling them for your whims and now > > > asking > > > > > for > > > > > > > truth > > > > > > > > > and praman. It was never twisted or misquoted - but > by > > > you > > > > > all > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > time to win the argument. Can truth only be those > > > things, > > > > > which > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > propogated?. and Can pramana can only be your > sankstri > > > > > > > translations? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3)When such comments are ignored - some say,one > is > > > > > selective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] is it? You ignored the predicitve > > > challenges on > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > chart. You ignored case studies of Late Santhanam. > You > > > > > ignored > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > many areas, where members presented - but you always > > > opted > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > consider those points (even in articles), which > suited > > > your > > > > > > > > > argument. So sir, had we been closed minded - we > would > > > not > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > discussed at all. But if you reread all the mails > and > > > select > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > points skipped - then it may taken another long list > of > > > > > mails to > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so sad to see how people are unable to > take > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > debates in > > > > > > > > > > > an objective sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If somebody is not in agreement with a > particular > > > > > > > understanding > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > > > scholar - it can no way mean,one is degrading > that > > > > > scholar > > > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > > > > whole.But unfortunately some are trying to > create > > > rift > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > individuals and twist Jyotish debates as > disrespect > > > > > towards > > > > > > > > > learned > > > > > > > > > > > men. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] Who degraded any scholar? who > questioned > > > the > > > > > basics > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the people? Sir - if you are so sure of your opinion > > > then, > > > > > what > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > the problem? None of us except you, have implied a > > > single > > > > > > > negative > > > > > > > > > comment on any learned person. When Shri > Chandrasekhar > > > ji > > > > > > > explained > > > > > > > > > the views available in classics - you even rediculed > > > those > > > > > > > sages. At > > > > > > > > > one stage, you said that BV Raman did not read > > > Dashadhayayi. > > > > > So > > > > > > > sir > > > > > > > > > please restrain defending your lies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case there is no need for discussion > groups > > > or > > > > > > > > > debates.Every > > > > > > > > > > > one can say i am in the group of Raoji,Sanjayji > etc > > > as > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > politics > > > > > > > > > > > and support individual manifestos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Prafulla] well - if any argument is restricted to > > > closed > > > > > > > minded > > > > > > > > > approach with trust being implied, ponly when > suiting > > > your > > > > > > > argument - > > > > > > > > > then certainly such debates have no place. But if > > > > > astrologer is > > > > > > > > > capable to predict with his interpretation model, > then > > > only > > > > > it > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > called PRAMANA. Until then - it is only called > bright > > > ideas - > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > necessarily genuine one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No one is supporting any manifestos. It is you - > who > > > are > > > > > > > choosing > > > > > > > > > political terms. We simply respect, what each > scholar > > > says - > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > want to see it it works or not? Can you prove with > the > > > > > > > predictive > > > > > > > > > challenges? if yes - we can have debates on any > > > astrological > > > > > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regds > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > > > > > > > > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " There are two kinds of people in the world, those > who > > > > > believe > > > > > > > > > there are two kinds of people in the world and those > who > > > > > don't. " > > > > > > > > > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > > > > > > > Listen & Record Music from Internet Radio - Get > Free > > > Radio > > > > > & > > > > > > > MP3 > > > > > > > > > Player & Recorder > > > > > > > > > > Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 //I do feel a mutual association with all members. // //my love for chandrashekharji is boundless and I hope to prove to him one day that I am worthy of his association. with deep love // Dear Raja, Please spare me I have told you a hundred times. I am not that type. We all know your inclinations and preferences.You need not mouth them again and again. sincerely, namaskaar. Bhaskar. , " Raja Gursahani " <rajagursahani wrote: > > I have not left. I am never going to be silent when it comes to the abuse of > Bhaskar. that man is so abominable. I will never leave this group. I have > much to learn and must to appease ever since the return of Bhaskar. may this > man fix the malefic nature of his rising and may he realize the spiritual > truths of astrology. this man has done nothing but to act humble one moment > and then blast his horn the next. I am with you about moderating this group. > this is the only way to provide a working space for all members. despite of > my lack of qualifications in the realms of slokas etc, I still feel that my > voice is warranted as I do feel a mutual association with all members. > > > > sincerely, > > > > __________ > > Raja G. Gursahani > *: 314.761.3134 (Clovis, CA) > *: rajagursahani(atgmail.com) > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 Dear SRi Bhaskar, Ignoring such mails is the best way to control them. If he abuses you, let him do. Do you know that after sometime one gets tired and has to stop abusing. Those who really look for quality messages, can easily see who is contributing for quality messages and who is not. Just a friendly advice; I hope you dont mind. If you feel hurt, excuse me. You have good knowledge and I dont want you get distracted towards unwanted threads/messages. Regards, Satya S Kolachina , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > //I do feel a mutual association with all members. // > > //my love for chandrashekharji is boundless and I hope to > prove to him one day that I am worthy of his association. > with deep love // > > Dear Raja, Please spare me I have told you a hundred > times. I am not that type. We all know your inclinations > and preferences.You need not mouth them again and again. > > sincerely, > namaskaar. > > Bhaskar. > > > > , " Raja Gursahani " > <rajagursahani@> wrote: > > > > I have not left. I am never going to be silent when it comes to the > abuse of > > Bhaskar. that man is so abominable. I will never leave this group. I > have > > much to learn and must to appease ever since the return of Bhaskar. > may this > > man fix the malefic nature of his rising and may he realize the > spiritual > > truths of astrology. this man has done nothing but to act humble one > moment > > and then blast his horn the next. I am with you about moderating > this group. > > this is the only way to provide a working space for all members. > despite of > > my lack of qualifications in the realms of slokas etc, I still feel > that my > > voice is warranted as I do feel a mutual association with all members. > > > > > > > > sincerely, > > > > > > > > __________ > > > > Raja G. Gursahani > > *: 314.761.3134 (Clovis, CA) > > *: rajagursahani(atgmail.com) > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.