Guest guest Posted October 16, 2001 Report Share Posted October 16, 2001 I'm impressed by how Purushottam looked up and shared those references establishing the basis for that dasha. Just wanted to say "wow". Manoj, first saying it wasn't classical, then when being shown it is, just saying "Good, so use it", is to me an odd string of positions to take. Seems more appropriate at this point to perhaps say "Woops, thanks for sharing" or something a bit more retractive or humble, don't you think? Myself, I am rather undeducated and not real well read, so I keep my head down about taking heavy stands in matters I've not studied. das g. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2001 Report Share Posted October 16, 2001 I said so, because, I never wanted to generate another set of controversy. Once Sateesh had asked me about something and I had told him, "it works well for me, if you like it use it, if you dont like throw it" thats my way. So only I said, "great, so use it". Only with a view to end the endless debate which only the Kaal (time) would resolve. I hope I am clear. Manoj >Das Goravani <> >gjlist >gjlist >[GJ] Narayan Dasha >Tue, 16 Oct 2001 04:39:35 -0700 > > >I'm impressed by how Purushottam looked up and shared those references >establishing the basis for that dasha. Just wanted to say "wow". > >Manoj, first saying it wasn't classical, then when being shown it is, >just saying "Good, so use it", is to me an odd string of positions to >take. Seems more appropriate at this point to perhaps say "Woops, thanks >for sharing" or something a bit more retractive or humble, don't you think? > >Myself, I am rather undeducated and not real well read, so I keep my >head down about taking heavy stands in matters I've not studied. > >das g. > > > >Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya; Hare Krishna; Om Tat Sat >: gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2001 Report Share Posted October 16, 2001 Manoj wrote: At 05:45 PM 10/16/01 +0530, you wrote: >I said so, because, I never wanted to generate another set of controversy. >Once Sateesh had asked me about something and I had told him, "it works well >for me, if you like it use it, if you dont like throw it" thats my way. So >only I said, "great, so use it". Only with a view to end the endless debate >which only the Kaal (time) would resolve. > >I hope I am clear. > >Manoj Not really clear, Manoj. Das is making the point, that if you challenge a guru or teacher's classical background, at least so far as his teachings are concerned, then be prepared when the response comes in. To challenge Sanjay Rath's position, knowing full well that many of his students and followers are on this list, and then not assume any level of humility when your challenge is returned with scriptural and classical evidence, seems a bit odd to me as well. You can't just dismiss it all, saying "well, there's too little Kaal to discuss these things anyway, so lets just drop it". Unfortunately, in forums like this, you have to "eat crow" when you say something whimsically. Better to take a humble position instead. Best wishes, Robert ===================================== Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer Faculty Member, SJVC and ACVA Phone: 541-318-0248 visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail rk. rk and rkoch rkoch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2001 Report Share Posted October 16, 2001 Dear Manoj, Great - so I can use S.A. here, as it works for me, correct? And I can use Remedial measures as they work for me, correct? Cool - thanks for your advice and permission - I feel much happier now. Cheers - Sateesh. ======== - "Manoj Pathak" <manojpathak <gjlist> 16 October 2001 13:15 Re: [GJ] Narayan Dasha : I said so, because, I never wanted to generate another set of controversy. : Once Sateesh had asked me about something and I had told him, "it works well : for me, if you like it use it, if you dont like throw it" thats my way. So : only I said, "great, so use it". Only with a view to end the endless debate : which only the Kaal (time) would resolve. : : I hope I am clear. : : Manoj ======== : >Das Goravani <> : >gjlist : >gjlist : >[GJ] Narayan Dasha : >Tue, 16 Oct 2001 04:39:35 -0700 : > : > : >I'm impressed by how Purushottam looked up and shared those references : >establishing the basis for that dasha. Just wanted to say "wow". : > : >Manoj, first saying it wasn't classical, then when being shown it is, : >just saying "Good, so use it", is to me an odd string of positions to : >take. Seems more appropriate at this point to perhaps say "Woops, thanks : >for sharing" or something a bit more retractive or humble, don't you think? : > : >Myself, I am rather undeducated and not real well read, so I keep my : >head down about taking heavy stands in matters I've not studied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2001 Report Share Posted October 16, 2001 Dear Sateesh, Whats wrong in it. If you believe in one thing, go ahead do it and realise for yourself, whether your belief is correct or wrong. Let time decide it. Whenever a new thing comes in, there is always a stiff opposition to it by traditionalists. It has happened in Development of Science, it is happening in astrology, it will keep happening. And moreoever, how can you disallow others from pursuing their beliefs. Thats how I am made. And I made that statement with all sincerity and humbleness though for some it might have sounded as arrogant. Manoj >"Sateesh Batas" <makara >gjlist ><gjlist> >Re: [GJ] Narayan Dasha >Tue, 16 Oct 2001 19:09:27 +0100 > >Dear Manoj, > >Great - so I can use S.A. here, as it works for me, correct? And I can use >Remedial measures as they work for me, correct? Cool - thanks for your >advice and permission - I feel much happier now. > >Cheers - Sateesh. > >======== > > >- >"Manoj Pathak" <manojpathak ><gjlist> >16 October 2001 13:15 >Re: [GJ] Narayan Dasha > > >: I said so, because, I never wanted to generate another set of >controversy. >: Once Sateesh had asked me about something and I had told him, "it works >well >: for me, if you like it use it, if you dont like throw it" thats my way. >So >: only I said, "great, so use it". Only with a view to end the endless >debate >: which only the Kaal (time) would resolve. >: >: I hope I am clear. >: >: Manoj > >======== > > >: >Das Goravani <> >: >gjlist >: >gjlist >: >[GJ] Narayan Dasha >: >Tue, 16 Oct 2001 04:39:35 -0700 >: > >: > >: >I'm impressed by how Purushottam looked up and shared those references >: >establishing the basis for that dasha. Just wanted to say "wow". >: > >: >Manoj, first saying it wasn't classical, then when being shown it is, >: >just saying "Good, so use it", is to me an odd string of positions to >: >take. Seems more appropriate at this point to perhaps say "Woops, thanks >: >for sharing" or something a bit more retractive or humble, don't you >think? >: > >: >Myself, I am rather undeducated and not real well read, so I keep my >: >head down about taking heavy stands in matters I've not studied. > > > > > >Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya; Hare Krishna; Om Tat Sat >: gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2001 Report Share Posted October 16, 2001 Robert, You have not understood the meaning of the mail at all. And see my answer to Sanjay's Mail, perhaps you get your answers there. One who rides a horse would only fall, not the people standing in ringside. Manoj >"Robert A. Koch" <rkoch >gjlist >gjlist >Re: [GJ] Narayan Dasha >Tue, 16 Oct 2001 10:37:57 -0700 > >Manoj wrote: > >At 05:45 PM 10/16/01 +0530, you wrote: > >I said so, because, I never wanted to generate another set of >controversy. > >Once Sateesh had asked me about something and I had told him, "it works >well > >for me, if you like it use it, if you dont like throw it" thats my way. >So > >only I said, "great, so use it". Only with a view to end the endless >debate > >which only the Kaal (time) would resolve. > > > >I hope I am clear. > > > >Manoj > >Not really clear, Manoj. Das is making the point, that if you challenge a >guru or teacher's classical background, at least so far as his teachings >are concerned, then be prepared when the response comes in. To challenge >Sanjay Rath's position, knowing full well that many of his students and >followers are on this list, and then not assume any level of humility when >your challenge is returned with scriptural and classical evidence, seems a >bit odd to me as well. You can't just dismiss it all, saying "well, >there's too little Kaal to discuss these things anyway, so lets just drop >it". Unfortunately, in forums like this, you have to "eat crow" when you >say something whimsically. Better to take a humble position instead. > >Best wishes, >Robert > >===================================== >Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer >Faculty Member, SJVC and ACVA >Phone: 541-318-0248 >visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail >rk. rk and >rkoch rkoch > > > > >Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya; Hare Krishna; Om Tat Sat >: gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2001 Report Share Posted October 17, 2001 Manoj, At 11:06 AM 10/17/01 +0530, you wrote: >Robert, > >You have not understood the meaning of the mail at all. > >And see my answer to Sanjay's Mail, perhaps you get your answers there. One >who rides a horse would only fall, not the people standing in ringside. No, I understand where you are coming from completely. First, you challenge Sanjay Rath's teachings as being non-traditional. Then, when someone proves its traditional basis with relevance to shastra, especially in *older* and esteemed books on Jaimini Sutram such as that written by B. Suryanarain Rao (the grandfather of the late B. V Raman), you do not retract or show humility. This is not acceptable, Manoj. The clear message being sent out to you is, don't levy a criticism, without having the courage to back it up. Courage in this instance, is admitting you are wrong. Best wishes, Robert ===================================== Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer Faculty Member, SJVC and ACVA Phone: 541-318-0248 visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail rk. rk and rkoch rkoch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2001 Report Share Posted October 17, 2001 Let Time reveal itself. Manoj >"Robert A. Koch" <rkoch >gjlist >gjlist >Re: [GJ] Narayan Dasha >Wed, 17 Oct 2001 10:56:03 -0700 > >Manoj, > >At 11:06 AM 10/17/01 +0530, you wrote: > >Robert, > > > >You have not understood the meaning of the mail at all. > > > >And see my answer to Sanjay's Mail, perhaps you get your answers there. >One > >who rides a horse would only fall, not the people standing in ringside. > >No, I understand where you are coming from completely. First, you >challenge Sanjay Rath's teachings as being non-traditional. Then, when >someone proves its traditional basis with relevance to shastra, especially >in *older* and esteemed books on Jaimini Sutram such as that written by B. >Suryanarain Rao (the grandfather of the late B. V Raman), you do not >retract or show humility. This is not acceptable, Manoj. The clear >message being sent out to you is, don't levy a criticism, without having >the courage to back it up. Courage in this instance, is admitting you are >wrong. > >Best wishes, >Robert > >===================================== >Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer >Faculty Member, SJVC and ACVA >Phone: 541-318-0248 >visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail >rk. rk and >rkoch rkoch > > > > >Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya; Hare Krishna; Om Tat Sat >: gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp 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.