Guest guest Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 Namaste Syzenith: I've included your comments from several messages on this thread including your last one. My response is below each of your statements. MaryJo and friends: It's ALWAYS about the rudrakshas. Suraj Syzenith:Namaste Suraj, Just answering your questions to the best of my knowledge, no more and no less. So don't take offence but I'm gonna be blunt: My response: How else does one answer questions? We all make statements "to the best of our knowledge". Syzenith once said, "Personally I'm detached, hence I'm able to stomach everything that is said to me. Don't worry, I only view all this as "Discussion" and to learn from one another. My response: Good. This should come in handy as I'm sure you'll be able to "stomach" all that is said "with detachment". Syzenith:Getting personal is only when an individual chooses to see it this way. It is your individual perception, not necessarily Chandrashekharji's or mine. My response: I disagree. This statement, alongwith the "I'm detached so I can stomach everything" is , IMO, a way to say whatever you want to about others and then use the "detachment" clause to say, but it's not personal. Syzenith:In feeling its getting personal, you are thus seeing 'duality'. You are correct, you haven't been privy. My response: Please spare me the neo-vedantic rhetoric. You said, "You are asking him who calls himself "Senior Scientist" but is online at this club 24 hours a day, conning people about his 'studies' of rudraksha." If this is not personal, I don't know what is. You haven't been privy to anything either except perhaps what you might have heard from Neeta. Syzenith: Chandrashekharji knows exactly which angle I was coming from, bless him. Although so far x locules/x seeds have not yet been published in peer journals, it does not mean it may not happen one of these days. My response: I'm told pigs can fly too. However until I see one or it's published in a peer reviewed journal, I refuse to believe it. That is the whole point of having peer reviews otherwise anyone can claim as they fancy. Also, I'm surprised you fail to see the irony of saying others are "conning" people with their research when your own claims haven't been published yet. Syzenith:Again it is your perception that he is being discredited. Doesn't this compel you to take sides? What is your intention of this message then? My response: You said, "You are asking him who calls himself "Senior Scientist" but is online at this club 24 hours a day, conning people about his 'studies' of rudraksha." This is what is meant by discrediting. When I posted my message originally, I wasn't taking anyone's side. But I am now. My intention is very simple. People who have been on this group long enough will realize that anytime there is a possibility of an "alternate source" for Rudrakshas, the distributors get all shook up. My problem is with biases in information, which I'll get to at the end of this long message. This is bad for consumers but obviously great for distributors. This is not to say that Chandrashekhar's beads are genuine. I have no clue whether they are genuine or not and neither do you Syzenith. You may be privy to what Neeta tells you but you haven't seen the beads yourself. Syzenith: He jolly well knows I haven't discredited him and hasn't taken it that way. So, why are you carrying the can for him? I am sure he can speak for himself if he chooses to. My response: Not true. Go back and read his message where he says that he posted all this on the group site because you seemed to imply that he and his beads were fake. I'm not "carrying the can" for him, at least that wasn't my intention in the first message. He already has spoken for himself. He posted three detailed messages on the club site. Friends, just so you know, for the record, I don't know Chandrashekhar personally. I have no business dealings with him. After I posted my message, I received an email message from him saying he had been removed from the group and the 7 or so images he had sent Syzenith were not uploaded to the group site. He also said that if I support him my membership might be terminated. I don't know if this is true, but if it is, this is an unhealthy trend. This is a hosted by Rudra Center and the people who benefit from this are the distributors. I have no problem with that and to be fair, Chandrashekhar or anyone else can start their own site if they want to sell their beads. What I have a problem with is a monopoly on truth. Just so you know, I don't have a problem with my membership being cancelled. Syzenith:.Its always best to let someone discredit themselves eventually. My response: As you have ably demonstrated. Syzenith:For example, as he mentioned: "Give me a deposit and I will cut open the bead." First his 21 mukhi was some cheaper Rupees rate, then a few messages later, it went up to US$8800, as in 4 lakhs rupees I think. Is this consistency? My response: You got me here. I did read the posts by him but I don't recall the different rates. Syzenith:If anyone pays US$8,800- for one bead, and if I can afford this (without government or institutional funding), I would the satisfaction of cutting the bead open myself. This is the thrill of research, doing it yourself. Not pay someone else in a location thousands of miles away to cut open maybe a piece of resin instead, tamper whatever slides or pictures, then send them over. Research is hands on and the responsible researcher does not take such chances. Perhaps one day I may well go to Pune and have it cut open with him present, if and when funding turns up. This will be fun!! My response: Would you be willing to cut open one of Rudra Center's expensive beads for free, if I or anybody else doubt its authenticity? Also, if I read his response correctly, he asked for a deposit but I don't seem to recall his post saying that you couldn't cut it yourself. Syzenith:Along the way, if you really read each and every posting correctly to fully become aware of what they indicated, you would have realised a thing or two by now. How many more times do I have to say I agree that Miss Neeta and Shri Tanay aren't the only 2 people in the world who are experts with authentification of rudraksha? I certainly would move on. Dwelling on perceptions is a waste of time. My response: Alright we both admit that the folks at Rudra Center are not the only experts. Perhaps you'll stop dwelling on the perception that I'm taking sides. Actually, I am now but I wasn't in my original post. Syzenith:Miss Neeta and staff personally fly to different locations and travel for days up to a couple of weeks, to personally examine and select rudrakshas of high mukhis when the season is in. As for vast numbers of lower mukhi beads, her staff at the home office are well trained and experienced in quality grading. As the artisans string the malas, they see, touch, feel and string each bead as they go along. My response: I would imagine that anybody in this business will have to fly and travel to different locations. My point was that it is ridiculous to claim or imply that only Rudra Centre can do this. My interactions with Neeta, for the record, have been extremely pleasant. What I have a problem with is the high handedness of the distributors sometimes. Syzenith:Even a blind artisan can feel the difference between real and dud, when it comes to sorting into bins the garbage or the genuine bead. A spade is a spade. My response: Really! I was under the impression that it requires some level of expertise. Syzenith:So far he is the only person here who can really have a hearty discussion without taking it personally. My admiration for him is in other aspects, Suraj. My response: Does this include you as well? I don't know him or his work to admire him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 Namaste Suraj, Can't understand your purpose.. Taking on what you perceived to be a wrong done to someone else? The defensive "Poor me, I've been wronged and hard done by" is usually a sophisticated victim who is a deliberate manipulator :-) Anyway, just another human too. Scroll on please: ...... --- In , "surajraghavan2002" > My response: How else does one answer questions? We all make > statements "to the best of our knowledge". ********* Sy: Is it wrong to say reiterate it? > > My response: Good. This should come in handy as I'm sure you'll be > able to "stomach" all that is said "with detachment". ********** Sy: No other way bar detachment. > > My response: I disagree. This statement, alongwith the "I'm detached > so I can stomach everything" is , IMO, a way to say whatever you want > to about others and then use the "detachment" clause to say, but it's > not personal. ********* Sy: I'm detached. Are you? What are you hoping to achieve with all this? > > My response: Please spare me the neo-vedantic rhetoric. ********** Sy: Spare me the Vedantics. You > said, "You are asking him who calls himself "Senior Scientist" but is > online at this club 24 hours a day, conning people about > his 'studies' of rudraksha." If this is not personal, I don't know > what is. ********** Sy: You said, I said, he said,,,,, yes I said a hell lotta things and this still stands. Yes about "his studies". See what you want to see, no worries. > My response: I'm told pigs can fly too. ******* Sy: Hahaha..! Very funny! Lol.. I've been told that too. What's new? However until I see one or > it's published in a peer reviewed journal, I refuse to believe it. ********* Sy: Until anyone's testings and studies are published, I refuse to believe it 100% too. In the interval, it is up to any given person to continue sticking to what they believe at the time, is this wrong? I'm surprised you fail to see the irony of > saying others are "conning" people with their research when your own > claims haven't been published yet. ********* Sy: I don't go out of my way using botanical lingo to impress. To create an impression in a public forum such as this with some laymen, is in a way to 'con' about one's professional capability. Oh dear.. I mentioned to Chandrashekhar: "Still testing.." How can something that is still being tested, be published overnight? Also mentioned "it takes time". "Senior Scientist" but is online at this club 24 hours a day, conning people about his 'studies' of rudraksha." This is what is meant by discrediting. *******Sy: You're repeating yourself. Read above. When I posted my message originally, I wasn't taking > anyone's side. But I am now. ********* Sy: Good on you then. My intention is very simple. People who > have been on this group long enough will realize that anytime there > is a possibility of an "alternate source" for Rudrakshas, the > distributors get all shook up. ********* Sy: There are already "alternative sources" existing elsewhere. Whether distributors get shook up, is up to them and their faith or fickle mind or that of their clients'. Nothing to do with me. My problem is with biases in > information, which I'll get to at the end of this long message. This > is bad for consumers but obviously great for distributors. ******** Sy: Your problem, not mine. Distributors and consumers, they can make up their own minds. We can't make it up for them. This is > not to say that Chandrashekhar's beads are genuine. ******** Sy: Are you doubting him now? I have no clue > whether they are genuine or not and neither do you Syzenith. ******* Sy: He offered to send them for testing. I'm waiting for his beads to arrive, if they get here at all. Meantime, there should be a couple of pics in the Photos section of this site (should be uploaded by now). Take a look and form your own conclusions. > > My response: Not true. Go back and read his message where he says > that he posted all this on the group site because you seemed to imply that he and his beads were fake. *********** Sy: He jumped into someone else's conversation for an entree, then dipped his big toe in the main course. Then we were both trying to discuss about the "dessert". Hmmmm, gulab jamun time, hang on,,,,,, <<<I'm not "carrying the can" for him, > at least that wasn't my intention in the first message. He already > has spoken for himself. He posted three detailed messages on the club > site. Friends, just so you know, for the record, I don't know > Chandrashekhar personally. I have no business dealings with him. ********** Sy: Don't know why yourself and Chandrashekhar have to explain things so much, on and on... Is it necessary? Why is this need to validate yourselves so important? > After I posted my message, I received an email message from him > saying he had been removed from the group and the 7 or so images he > had sent Syzenith were not uploaded to the group site. *********** Sy: What?! He'd been removed? No wonder we haven't seen him around. Really would like to mull over dessert with this guy. You know, he is fun too. But there's always my email addy. Wonder why he hesitated to use that? Seeing as he didn't hesitate to email you informing he'd been removed and whatever else. ************ Sy: Its like him producing Dr. Coode's name. Now I've gotta find Dr. Coode's email addy. Then I'll be writing the man directly. Why use indirect methods of communication? He also said > that if I support him my membership might be terminated. ********* Sy: Ah, I see...cackles.....!! Seriously, if you back me, it doesn't make you right in doing so either. It also does not mean you will not be removed for backing me. We are all here at our own risk, so to speak. And we stand on our own 2 feet. I might be banned myself, for being outspoken and calling a spade, a spade, and a gem, a gem. Anyway, the point is, I don't need to use foot soldiers for this sorta conveyancing. ******** Sy: If you and I are removed, does it really matter? Does it matter so much to Chandrashekhar to be removed? Does it matter so much to you that Chandrashekhar had been removed? I don't know if this is true, ******* Sy: Me neither, its all a guess, isn't it? but if it is, this is an unhealthy trend. ******* Sy: Of course. This is a hosted by Rudra Center and the people who benefit from this are the distributors. ********** I'm not so sure about this statement Suraj. If I'm laughing all the way to the bank, I wouldn't have time to wag my chin on this forum, would I? Would be too busy counting kanchan or do what a lotta women do best: go shopping. I have no problem with that and to be > fair, Chandrashekhar or anyone else can start their own site if they want to sell their beads. ********** Sy: You are right about this. Why not? What I have a problem with is a monopoly on > truth. Just so you know, I don't have a problem with my membership > being cancelled. ********** Sy: Monopoly on truth? No person is forced to believe what they don't want to believe. Truth cannot be patented or sold. It is not a tangible commodity. *********** Sy: Is it important for me to know you don't give two hoots if your membership is terminated? What is the point you are trying to make? > My response: As you have ably demonstrated. *********** Sy: Cackles..gosh you're cute. Whatever you think, is up to you. Not here to sway you. > > My response: You got me here. I did read the posts by him but I don't > recall the different rates. ************Sy: Would you be kind enough to scour them again? I haven't the time right now. As it is, my hands are full with you. > > My response: Would you be willing to cut open one of Rudra Center's expensive beads for free, if I or anybody else doubt its > authenticity? ************ Sy: If yourself or someone else buys the expensive bead off me, then later dispute its authenticity, YES I will not hesitate to cut the bead open FOR FREE. Everyone who has had anything to do with me, knows that I have a 100% refund policy. Australia is a small place. Aussies can confirm this. As it is, I'm listed in the public phone directory. Anyone can find me, my address and phone number if they want to. Nothing for me to hide. Also, if I read his response correctly, he asked for a > deposit but I don't seem to recall his post saying that you couldn't cut it yourself. *********Sy: How's your cognition going? or is it "selective seeing"?? You call me "biased"...lol..! Go read his lines again. And please understand them correctly. Didn't he say along the lines of "Put a deposit, etc. I cut open the bead", etc. etc. The rupees are also stated there. Can't believe a scientist would say this. Obviously you can. > Perhaps you'll stop dwelling on the perception > that I'm taking sides. Actually, I am now but I wasn't in my original > post. ************* Sy: You weren't, then you are. Does it matter to you? > > My response: I would imagine that anybody in this business will have > to fly and travel to different locations. My point was that it is > ridiculous to claim or imply that only Rudra Centre can do this. ********* Sy: Did I *specifically* claim that only Rudra Centre can do this? You're putting words in my mouth and stating things I didnt' say, golly. Scatching my head. My > interactions with Neeta, for the record, have been extremely > pleasant. What I have a problem with is the high handedness of the > distributors sometimes. ********** Sy: See whatever you wanta see. Nobody stops you. However, please refrain from using "Distributors".. Of late, they've all been very quiet. Only the fruitloopy me has been ferreting about. So, please say "Distributor" - one distributor. > > My response: Really! I was under the impression that it requires some level of expertise. ******** Sy: Of course it does. You have no idea about people who are blind do you? They can "see" within and have highly developed sensibilities and some have siddhis. We with functional eyes, are more blind than they are. > > Syzenith:So far he is the only person here who can really have a > hearty discussion without taking it personally. My admiration for > him is in other aspects, Suraj. > > My response: Does this include you as well? I don't know him or his work to admire him. ********* Sy: What do you *specifically* mean by "Does it include you too?" Please rephrase this question so I understand it better. ********* Sy: Yes, he is still the only person who can have a darn good yarn without loosing his fur. Yes my admiration lies for him in other aspects: His willingness to exchange what he perceives to be his Truth, his readiness to provide photos and offering to send beads for testing. Any more you want to say Suraj? I'm still here :-) Om Namah Shivaya Sy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 Gosh Suraj, No --- In , "surajraghavan2002" <suraj_raghavan@h...> wrote: > Namaste Syzenith: > I've included your comments from several messages on this thread > including your last one. My response is below each of your statements. > MaryJo and friends: It's ALWAYS about the rudrakshas. > Suraj > > Syzenith:Namaste Suraj, > Just answering your questions to the best of my knowledge, no more > and no less. So don't take offence but I'm gonna be blunt: > > My response: How else does one answer questions? We all make > statements "to the best of our knowledge". > > Syzenith once said, "Personally I'm detached, hence I'm able to > stomach everything that is said to me. Don't worry, I only view all > this as "Discussion" and to learn from one another. > > My response: Good. This should come in handy as I'm sure you'll be > able to "stomach" all that is said "with detachment". > > Syzenith:Getting personal is only when an individual chooses to see > it this > way. It is your individual perception, not necessarily > Chandrashekharji's or mine. > > My response: I disagree. This statement, alongwith the "I'm detached > so I can stomach everything" is , IMO, a way to say whatever you want > to about others and then use the "detachment" clause to say, but it's > not personal. > > Syzenith:In feeling its getting personal, you are thus > seeing 'duality'. You are correct, you haven't been privy. > > My response: Please spare me the neo-vedantic rhetoric. You > said, "You are asking him who calls himself "Senior Scientist" but is > online at this club 24 hours a day, conning people about > his 'studies' of rudraksha." If this is not personal, I don't know > what is. You haven't been privy to anything either except perhaps > what you might have heard from Neeta. > > Syzenith: Chandrashekharji knows exactly which angle I was coming > from, bless him. Although so far x locules/x seeds have not yet been > published in peer journals, it does not mean it may not happen one of > these days. > > My response: I'm told pigs can fly too. However until I see one or > it's published in a peer reviewed journal, I refuse to believe it. > That is the whole point of having peer reviews otherwise anyone can > claim as they fancy. Also, I'm surprised you fail to see the irony of > saying others are "conning" people with their research when your own > claims haven't been published yet. > > Syzenith:Again it is your perception that he is being discredited. > Doesn't this compel you to take sides? What is your intention of > this message then? > > My response: You said, "You are asking him who calls himself "Senior > Scientist" but is online at this club 24 hours a day, conning people > about his 'studies' of rudraksha." This is what is meant by > discrediting. When I posted my message originally, I wasn't taking > anyone's side. But I am now. My intention is very simple. People who > have been on this group long enough will realize that anytime there > is a possibility of an "alternate source" for Rudrakshas, the > distributors get all shook up. My problem is with biases in > information, which I'll get to at the end of this long message. This > is bad for consumers but obviously great for distributors. This is > not to say that Chandrashekhar's beads are genuine. I have no clue > whether they are genuine or not and neither do you Syzenith. You may > be privy to what Neeta tells you but you haven't seen the beads > yourself. > > Syzenith: He jolly well knows I haven't discredited him and hasn't > taken it that way. So, why are you carrying the can for him? I am > sure he can speak for himself if he chooses to. > > My response: Not true. Go back and read his message where he says > that he posted all this on the group site because you seemed to imply > that he and his beads were fake. I'm not "carrying the can" for him, > at least that wasn't my intention in the first message. He already > has spoken for himself. He posted three detailed messages on the club > site. Friends, just so you know, for the record, I don't know > Chandrashekhar personally. I have no business dealings with him. > After I posted my message, I received an email message from him > saying he had been removed from the group and the 7 or so images he > had sent Syzenith were not uploaded to the group site. He also said > that if I support him my membership might be terminated. I don't know > if this is true, but if it is, this is an unhealthy trend. This is a > hosted by Rudra Center and the people who benefit from > this are the distributors. I have no problem with that and to be > fair, Chandrashekhar or anyone else can start their own site if they > want to sell their beads. What I have a problem with is a monopoly on > truth. Just so you know, I don't have a problem with my membership > being cancelled. > > Syzenith:.Its always best to let someone discredit themselves > eventually. > > My response: As you have ably demonstrated. > > Syzenith:For example, as he mentioned: "Give me a deposit and I will > cut open the bead." First his 21 mukhi was some cheaper Rupees rate, > then a few messages later, it went up to US$8800, as in 4 lakhs > rupees I think. Is this consistency? > > My response: You got me here. I did read the posts by him but I don't > recall the different rates. > > Syzenith:If anyone pays US$8,800- for one bead, and if I can afford > this (without government or institutional funding), I would the > satisfaction of cutting the bead open myself. This is the thrill of > research, doing it yourself. Not pay someone else in a location > thousands of miles away to cut open maybe a piece of resin instead, > tamper whatever slides or pictures, then send them over. Research is > hands on and the responsible researcher does not take such chances. > Perhaps one day I may well go to Pune and have it cut open with him > present, if and when funding turns up. This will be fun!! > > My response: Would you be willing to cut open one of Rudra Center's > expensive beads for free, if I or anybody else doubt its > authenticity? Also, if I read his response correctly, he asked for a > deposit but I don't seem to recall his post saying that you couldn't > cut it yourself. > > Syzenith:Along the way, if you really read each and every posting > correctly to fully become aware of what they indicated, you would > have realised a thing or two by now. How many more times do I have > to say I agree that Miss Neeta and Shri Tanay aren't the only 2 > people in the world who are experts with authentification of > rudraksha? I certainly would move on. Dwelling on perceptions is a > waste of time. > > My response: Alright we both admit that the folks at Rudra Center are > not the only experts. Perhaps you'll stop dwelling on the perception > that I'm taking sides. Actually, I am now but I wasn't in my original > post. > > Syzenith:Miss Neeta and staff personally fly to different locations > and travel for days up to a couple of weeks, to personally examine > and select rudrakshas of high mukhis when the season is in. As for > vast numbers of lower mukhi beads, her staff at the home office are > well trained and experienced in quality grading. As the artisans > string the malas, they see, touch, feel and string each bead as they > go along. > > My response: I would imagine that anybody in this business will have > to fly and travel to different locations. My point was that it is > ridiculous to claim or imply that only Rudra Centre can do this. My > interactions with Neeta, for the record, have been extremely > pleasant. What I have a problem with is the high handedness of the > distributors sometimes. > > Syzenith:Even a blind artisan can feel the difference between real > and dud, when it comes to sorting into bins the garbage or the > genuine bead. A spade is a spade. > > My response: Really! I was under the impression that it requires some > level of expertise. > > Syzenith:So far he is the only person here who can really have a > hearty discussion without taking it personally. My admiration for > him is in other aspects, Suraj. > > My response: Does this include you as well? I don't know him or his > work to admire him. 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.