Pradeep and Satya Are Fighting NOW (They dont have ANY Work to do)

[Guest guest]

Hi Pradeep and Satya,

 

Why do you want to fight among yourselves. You both are Pain in my ASS.

 

Both of you did NOT care or bother to prdict my future Accurately, and you

know to fight and spit on others. You are all ASSHOLES MOTHER FUCKERS

 

vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

Dear Satya ji

 

As you find my comments useless,it would be advisable that you ignore

me.

 

It will also give me more time to respond to members who are

interested.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

, " Satya Sai Kolachina "

<skolachi wrote:

>

> Dear Sri Prafulla,

>

> I changed the heading of the thread, as I feel it inappropriate to

> see Sri KN Rao's name for such a useless discussion, that too in

the

> message header.

>

> When Sri Pradeep calls all those astrologers who use D-charts and

> aspects therein as not following basics, his comment applies to

> everyone; after all, all those who use D-charts, use them for a

> reason and they have a right to use them. This comment is not

> specified by astrologers' names.

>

> Sri Pradeep tactically provocates the group so that his topic

remains

> alive. He has no honesty of looking back to his 200+ mails and see

> what he talked about other members on their basics. The very

quality

> required of an astrologer is to be honest to what he/she says.

> Something that is recorded in the groups' database archive, he is

> trying to escape from his comments. What else you can say? I can

> challenge you; even after you type 1000 mails, his response will be

> same, as that basic honesty is missing in his tone. He is neither

> bold nor honest enough to accept his comments and the way he looked

> down other astrologers. Instead he can twist the same and say it

> differently now.

>

> He only honors those who do not oppose his theory. This is his

> fundamental logic. Let his supporters continue to support him. I

> don't think we lose anything. I believe that if we leave him ALONE,

> he may atleast stop looking down on other astrologers who do not

> support his theory. Once I noticed this level of dishonesty in his

> approach, I decided not to respond to him. He thinks and says that

> whatever he says is final and every one has to accept it; otherwise

> they dont follow basics.

>

> This is nothing but waste of time. Every minute we are spending

here

> in this group, remember we are losing that minute in our valuable

> lifetime.

>

> Very honestly I want this thread to be closed. The only way that

> appears to me is just ignore these useless comments from him. I

hope

> you do not mind my friendly words. If I hurt you, please excuse me.

>

> Best regards,

> Satya S Kolachina

>

>

>

> , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Shri Pradeep 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.

> >

> > [Prafulla] Please re read your initial mails on the thread, and in

> > particular - where Shri Satya objected. You were clear that people

> > using d chakra have wrongly interpreted without any basis. You

> > objected to making even casting D chakra. It is your own

statements

> > sir - for the people, who use D chakra.

> >

> >

> > >

> > > 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.

> >

> > [Prafulla] what PRAMANA. Pramana in jyotish is predictive

> applications

> > - not your sanskrit translations. Pramana includes the exhibition

of

> > predictive fallacies of people, using contrary methods. Please

list

> me

> > one pramana produced by you - except quoting one prediction on

> Gordon

> > chart - that too in past 2 years.

> >

> >

> > >

> > > 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.

> >

> > [Prafulla] so if everything was to follow later, and you are not

> ready

> > - then why even initialize the thread and waste time of forum

> members?

> >

> > Shri Chandrasekhar's assumption of partial aspects can not be a

> > conclusive proof, if kalyan varma has used at so many places. I

> quoted

> > you Satyacharya also - now do not tell me, that you do not

approve

> of

> > his interpretation.

> >

> > >

> > > 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.

> >

> > [Prafulla] You are conveniently using one line in his translation

> book

> > and ignoring his own case studies. Great way to misquote a learned

> > soul. How can planet opposite in D9 chakra be taken from

> longitudinal

> > perspective? please clarify. But then if you do not use late

> > Santhanam's view on D chakra interpretation, why selectively

> > misquoting him on aspects in d chakra. When someone's view becomes

> > incorrect ab initio, then furhter views are never referred. This

is

> > basis of any deductive or inductive logic - if you persist on the

> > words - tarka and pramana.

> >

> > >

> > > You may keep on trying to create rift between people,if you

love

> to

> > > do so.Let us see whether you succeed or not.

> >

> >

> > [Prafulla] Rift between whom? I have not created any rift or

> > disrespected even by implied statement. if your own statements can

> > hurt someone, why blame others.. Why should Shri Rao be upset with

> > your own mails posted on forum on " basics " - if you feel you are

> > right. So why all these political statements? I will appreciate,

if

> > you clarify on rift between whom?

> >

> > each one of us live on our karma. Why should I be worried about

> > success or failure, when I am not causing any rift. Your own

mails,

> if

> > can cause it - then please do not blame others.

> >

> > >

> > > 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.

> > >

> >

> > [Prafulla] What tactics? I sincerely request you to stop using

this

> > foul allegation. You have been misquoting, selectively answering,

> > questioning member's basics and twisting the thread ..and now you

> have

> > started playing one level low - by accusing of using bad tactics.

> > Indeed interesting ploy !! We asked for predictive application on

> your

> > theory - did you do it. But you have time to answer 250+ mails

and

> lot

> > more in past 2/3 years - but do not have courtesy to stop

presenting

> > your theory - until you are ready and until you can prove by

> > predictive application. Who is unfair dear on this forum and

> thread?

> >

> > Sorry - each of the members did present various things - including

> > quoting satyacharya, kalyan varma, santhanam's case studies and

so

> on.

> > What more technical writings do you want now? Of course - we can

not

> > present your theory and predictive application for you. It is your

> > call - and you failed to do, in spite of so many members'

persistent

> > request. members asked you questions beyond D9 through charts -

but

> > you skipped.

> >

> > > I would like to remind you politely,efforts to create rift will

> > > remain unsuccesful.But whether to continue this or not is upto

> you.

> > >

> >

> > [Prafulla] Sir question again - rift between whom? and are we

> > proposing to reproduce your mails with modifications? so you

should

> > take responsibility for your mails..why blame others..and But no

one

> > is trying to twist contents of your own original mails?

> >

> > > 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.

> > >

> >

> > [Prafulla] After all these months and years, if you want to say

> that -

> > now you will prepare things to prove your point..then i can only

> feel

> > bad for the waste of time on the forum for your incomplete

> > presentation until now. it is highly unethical conduct for any

> jyotish

> > scholar to present - which he can not prove instantly through

charts

> > in front of him. and for his incompleteness, he kept on wasting

time

> > of people on the forum mercilessly...

> >

> > > Regds

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> >

> > regards / Prafulla

> >

> >

> > > , 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

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Got a little couch potato?

Check out fun summer activities for kids.