Guest guest Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 Dedar Members esp RR ji,Vinay ji, others in the thread of SKB as I had asked for self moderation y'day IHOPE all of u do follow it on ur own and not be reminded by me or anyone else. time to move on and move ahead on Other subjects rrJI U HAVE MY DATA and is there in the forums where I am or was a member I am not sure of my Tula is strong but that is what is required of my role over here even as a member i have said so when topics went overboard. as moderator when I see these threads it does sadden me like other members on the time wasted. fortunately there r loud differences than abuses but still we can do with more on discussions, debates, readings analysisi of cases here with all our varied knowledge base. Prashant ________________________________ Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 Thursday, July 16, 2009 1:10:39 PM Re: Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! Stop this " systemic discrimination " against a happening for which I have already apologised thrice, and said I will tender no apology henceforth, yet some " magna " members use this opportunity to post sarcastic remarks against me. I did not commit any crime, I did not know SKB (Mr Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya) was not a member here. It was SKB who started posting his replies to other fora without informing me. It was unjustified. I later found it, and concluded it was his method of " winning " a debate by not allowing me to answer. Thus, " systemic discrimination " was started by SKB, not by me. Rohini Ji has recently been informed by SKB that I had invited SKB to join those fora where I am able to answer him, because he wanted to discuss some points in AIA which I had left. Thereafter, he joined these fora, mainly with a view to waste my time over non-astrological issues. Had I known he will not discuss astrology, I would not have invited him. I am an active member of only three fora : JR, JG and VA (besides a forum of my own reserved exclusively for topics related to software problems and Suryasiddhantic discussuions) . After my invitation, SKB joined these fora. I believed he joined all these three fora where I am active. Later , I was told he was not a member in JR. SKB recently said to Rohini Ji that he joined these fora after my invitation ; if SKB did not join one of those three fora where I am active, it was his fault and not mine. He should have informed me that he did not want to join JR after I invited him. Later, he neglected the offer of Prashant Ji also (the reason is SKB is an active member of Mr Sreenadh's team). Other persons do not know all these facts. But Rohini Ji knows these facts well. Hence, he is completely unjustified in putting the blame on me. He knows well well how many times SKB abused me, without a single abusive remark from me. I even started calling SKB " Da " to get rid of his barbaric mails. Rohini Ji himself tried to divert or mitigate the abusive discussions, but to no avail. Now, I have dacided to stop this nonsense by SKB for good. I will refrain from abusing him, but I will expose him thoroughly, esp in these two fora, and I am now also planning to expose him in all those where he is a member, because I have failed in all milder alternatives. Discussions can be carried out without personal attacks, but RR Ji wants to teach all manners only to me, never to SKB. RR Ji expelled me from his Cryatal Pages, without ever warning or informing me about his grievances gagainst me. I still do not know why I was expelled by him. In JR, I tendered apologies thrice, but now I am retracting all my apologies. I was fully justifiesd in posting a reply to SKB here because SKB accepted my offer of joining these fora as he recently informed RR Ji, and it was SKB who started posting copies of replies in other fora. I suspect he might be posting messages about me in fora where I am not a member. I will now search. I found some other members also doing the same about me : posting messages about me elsewhere without my knowledge. I do not want to name here, but such a member cannot be expelled from Crystal_Pages because she likes to discuss non-astrological topics likke cats and dogs. Rohini Ji has clearly told me that he will not discuss astrology with me because I am out of the way (or outdated, he does not clarify). I was asked by many members in JR to post case studies, which wasted over 200 hours of my time, and those members have no time to read those case studies. Therefore, I took up nobler tasks of starting a new Vedic Gurukul and adding modules to my softwares which are being used by a large number of persons who keep away from abusive fora. After an apology, the thread should have been closed. But even after the appeal of moderator, I am being charged of " systemic discrimination " . The use of a word " systematic " is not unintentional. It means my post was not a mistake but " systematic " . That is why even after three apologies, I was not forgiven by a magna and RR Ji. hence, I have to retract my apologies and state plainly that I was perfectly right in posting my message about SKB here because RR Ji is himself a witness of SKB's acceptace of the fact that SKB was invited by me to join these fora instead of inviting me again to AIA (SKB had invited me to AIA, because he was not convinced that I was abused sufficiently) . I will now start analyzing the chart of Mr Rohiniranjan Ji who had once reprimanded me for mentioning exalted planets in his chart : I had to reply that the mention of exalted planets is not derogatory and I was surprized at his hot response at my eulogy. But now he is doing the same mistake : by eulogizing Tula in Prashant Ji's chart. Or are these rules applicable only in my case ?? I know many members of abuse me in private mails : some members have forwarded me such mails. Now, will Rohini Ji call these abuses as wrong in abusing me behind my back, or will he declare those persons guilty of breach of confidence who forwarded such mails to me ?? The depends on Theory of Relativity, ie, on your own attitude towards the protagonists and theor ideas. Rohini Ji knows well how many time I have been abused. Perhaps no astrologer was abused so much in a " systematic " manner over public fora just on account of theoretical differences over academic issues, which ought to have been carried out without personal attacks. SKB goes t the extent of saying that I am " obsessed with wine and women " . These mails are fit for a libel suit but I have nobler tasks at hand. SKB is carrying out a campaign of character assanination against me, and Rohini Ji never felt uneasy about it. Rohini Ji feels bad when I retort. It is because of those very exalted planets in Rohini Ji's horoscope. Normally, exalted planets are beneficial and make a person exalted in nature. But it depends on which planet is exalted. If cruel planets are exalted, one may be exalted in cruelty. It is for the first time I am using such words for Rohini Ji. I am compelled, because he is chargind me of of " systematic " discrimination agains an absentee, even after three apologies by me. " Syatematic " means I had a plan and I had a history of such acts. On the contrary, Rohini Ji carried out a " systematic " discrimination against me by expelling me from his forum wigthout my knowledge. he also declined to join my forum. And he turned down the offer a research article for a new astrological research magazine started by a recognized Sanskrit university. This time, I will not apologize for my words against Rohini Ji's " systematic " discrimination against me, because I am fed up with these fora which ask me to show proofs and when I show proofs then discussions are diverted to other topics. I am now in a mood to resign , or being expelled from all fora. but I am in a calm mood, because I know it will give me more time for more reative works. SKB does not even allow me to make further time on chart analysis, and keeps me engaged in non-astrological topics.He has no other task than to waste my time, and persons like Rohini Ji refuse to see " systematric discrimination " against me, and says he does not want to discuss astrology with me, which is a proof of hius own " systematic " discrimination : he discusses astrology only with those whom he certifies as real astrologers. Sanskrit scholars of Jyotisha are idiots, rascals, fools, & c & c. There is nothing more to say. -VJ ============ ========= ========= == ==== ____________ _________ _________ __ Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ hotmail.com> Thursday, July 16, 2009 8:56:44 AM Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! Kumar ji, Very balanced decision! You must have a strong Tula rashi in your chart I am guessing. No need to respond!! We should not talk behind anyone's back, when they are not part of the forum or have left! It is hurtful because it is what systemic discrimination is, really! Talk, criticise, marginalize, punish, deprive 'those' who are not even part of the discussion, conversation or communication! What is sad is that this conversation is happening not just here but elsewhere on other Jyotish Fora all of which are supposed to be LIGHTED HALLS and not dark corridors in some damp dungeon sub-terranian from where neither the sky nor the planets or stars are visible! I rest my case! RR , Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar@. ..> wrote: > > > > Member > > pl rest the topic in peace now... > not part of our group so lets avoid any ref in further, SKB has not become part of this group so it is not right to say more than already said. > which went thru in unmoderated posts. pl observe self moderation. > > prashant > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > apusmagna <apusmagna@. ..> > > Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:18:56 PM > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! > > > > > > Well, charity begins at home or so they say Jha ji! > My apologies for butting in, Rohini-jee, the message was addressed to > you :-) > And Jha ji, how about issuing a weekly, or at least a fortnightly > BULLETin on the outcome of this historic marathon between you and SKB. > That could be really *STRIKING*, I guess! > Apus > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > wrote: > > > > Rohini Da, > > > > <<< I have never questioned those who have found their path nor ever > tried too hard to change their chosen destiny and divine decree! >>> > > > > We can change only ourselves, not others. Even God can change only > those who are ready for it. Was it possible to change a Ravana or a > Duryodhana ? > > > > The problem is we are always trying to find the Ravana in others, not > within ourselves. The Collective Unconscious of Jung is the triguni > Prakriti which is Jada/Jara (Unconscious) . It is present in all of us. > It must be got rid of ; that is moksha. > > > > -VJ > > ============ ========= ========= ====== === > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Rohiniranjan rohini_ranjan@ ... > > > > Wednesday, July 15, 2009 11:24:43 AM > > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay-Ji, > > > > Only Bhikaris who have nothing remaining to give in this lifetime are > blessed to *give*, in a sense! > > > > When I was a small child we used to be visited by a bhikari. He was > blind and looking back and remembering he had white opaque corneas > probably secondary to small pox or other infection. At first I used to > be scared of him because he looked kind of strange. He looked pathetic > and still had this smile that perplexed me as a child. It was a smile or > a plea for help, but so fixed! And the white corneas and all that. > > > > Unfortunately, though we gave him alms always. Sadly, neither of my > parents who were quite kind and dedicated individuals ever discussed it > or shared their feelings about all of this, nor did I ask because back > in 50s that was not done. > > > > Then suddenly one day my father showed us a blanket and said that > winter was coming and he was worried about the bhikari and his obviously > failing health. I was touched! Modern children would have hugged their > parents and all that, of course that was a NO NO back then but I was > touched within! > > > > When Bhikari-ji arrived next day, he was presented with the blanket I > was surprised because I was expecting him to jump in glee and so on. He > had the same gleeful kind of fixed expression and he left with the > blanket and so on. > > > > He showed up a few days later as usual. He had the same expression on > his face with no change. He did not have the blanket around him. It was > a chilly day and he was visibly shivering@ > > > > I was really perplexed and confused that day! I was actually sad! Why > did he not wear the blanket that we gave him with so much love? > > > > Until I figured it out much much later when I grew up and began to > learn Karma and Astrology -- I was not meant to understand why! > > > > I think I very quickly figured out thereafter why the Bhikari decided > to not change his path and practice! > > > > Thereafter, I have never questioned those who have found their path > nor ever tried too hard to change their chosen destiny and divine > decree! Hence my cautious approach regarding prescribing *remedials* too > glibly and recklessly! > > > > Best regards, > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > ...> wrote: > > > > > > <<<Only on Internet can the two beggars and the villager meet and > share > > > their experiences freely so that others can avoid the mistakes they > > > have made!>>> > > > > > > well said Rohini Da !! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ ...> > > > > > > Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:18:55 AM > > > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > But look at the bright side, Shenoy ji! Only on Internet can the two > beggars and the villager meet and share their experiences freely so that > others can avoid the mistakes they have made! > > > > > > When I was a small boy in India, we used to have a very popular > brank of cycle named Atlas. One day beggar wondered, " Just because Atlas > is carrying me, I must be as important as Planet Earth (a little > Sumerian joke!) " > > > > > > Then he began laughing! He retained his balance though and did not > fall off the bike ;-) > > > > > > He must have been very special! The only beggar I ever saw who owned > a bicycle! > > > > > > RR > > > > > > , " sureshbabuag " > <sureshbabuag@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prashant ji, > > > > > > > > I don't know what is this game on the net. > > > > > > > > All these arguments about dwaitha, adwaitha & scriptures only > looks likes..... > > > > > > > > Two beggars were fighting over which car is better - Bently or > rolls roice based on somebody's article. > > > > > > > > The funny thing is, one person who had used bently all his life > wrote that it is the ultimate in luxury but has not owned Rolls roice. > > > > > > > > Similarly the other author wrote of Rolls roice which he owned and > loved all his life and claimed it is the best. He has not even seen a > bently. > > > > > > > > Reading these an old man from a remote village said what bently! > what Rolls roice! there is nothing better than my old rugged amaby. It > takes me to where ever I want to go and what do you know? it is not very > costly to maintain too. > > > > > > > > A few years passed by. Eventually one of the beggar saved a little > money and bought a cycle - dearming one day he will attain the ultimate > in luxury. > > > > > > > > You can hear them still arguing about which car is better, when > you pass by them near the busy market corner. > > > > > > > > A.G.Suresh Babu Shenoy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Suresh ji, Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > this is a cross posted message of another group/s and bascially > NOT ALLOWED IN MOST GROUPS AS A POLICY but is selectively abused by > some owners, moderators with a agenda of their own > > > > > > > > > > at times with a good intention of a GOOD TOPIC to be shared, and > some with vested interests against some ppl. indulge in > gossip/entertainmen t than discussion on such threads. > > > > > > > > > > here it is a member who hass been positing on several topics > here and other groups > > > > > > > > > > except this threads related to sunil bhattacharya ji's posts > others have been discussed here as well > > > > > > > > > > if he becomes part of this group it MAKES SENSE I've SAID that > ALREADY SO UP TO HIM to pursue it here and wherever this has appeared > > > > > > > > > > FOR ME IT WAS only a part of the message i replied which has > universal appeal > > > > > > > > > > that Almight can be seen only by the blessed ones and it is not > a matter of debate as we r all too small to even coment on such souls > who can see god even now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prashant > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > sureshbabuag <sureshbabuag@ > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:20:27 PM > > > > > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly > !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay Jha, > > > > > > > > > > Pardon me for saying so, This massage seems to out of tune & > context. > > > > > > > > > > The so called " Sunil Battacharjya " has not posted any such > message here in the forum. It might be a personal message or posted in > any other forum. Hence, don't you think it is better to reply in the > same way or in the forum he might have posted it?. > > > > > > > > > > Hope you understand > > > > > A.G.Suresh Babu Shenoy > > > > > > > > > > , " vinayjhaa16 " > <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is my answer to a deliberately false message from Mr > Sunil > > > > > > Bhattacharjya : > > > > > > > > > > > > To Sunil Da & To All concerned, > > > > > > > > > > > > You say: > > > > > > > > > > > > <<< " He (Kapil Muni) said that Ishvara is " Asiddha " and then > left it at > > > > > > that. " >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > You are citing it out of context with a view to invert the > original > > > > > > meaning. The context in ch-1 sutras 87-92 is " pratyaksha > pramaana " , and > > > > > > Kapil Muni says that Ishvava cannot be proven through senses > (ie, > > > > > > pratyaksha pramaana), which you are taking out of context. > Because of > > > > > > your lack of any knowledge of Sanskrit, you take verses and > sutras > > > > > > without going into the full context. You applied same trick in > the case > > > > > > of divya varsha, by neglecting the context in preceding verses > which > > > > > > defined divya varsha. Sutra 89 defines pratyaksha pramaana and > sutra > > > > > > 90-91 show exceptions in yogis, and sutra 92 show the > exception in > > > > > > Ishvara, Who cannot be proven or perceived through nornal > pratyaksha > > > > > > pramaana. If any doubt, following words of Kapil Muni remove > it : > > > > > > > > > > > > Ch-3 sutra-55 says that Prakriti is not a Work (of Ishvara), > yet is > > > > > > Paravasha. Hence, Ishvara is the controller of Prakriti. > > > > > > > > > > > > Next sutra make it clear : He (ishvara) is Omniscient > (sarva-vit) and > > > > > > Sarva-kartaa (ie, cause of all actions). > > > > > > > > > > > > And next sutra says : " idrish-ishvara- siddhih siddhah " , ie > " thus the > > > > > > existence of Ishvara is siddha / proven " . > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, Sunil Bhattacharjya' s habit of deliberately misquoting > from > > > > > > ancient texts is again proven here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not only in Ishvara, Saamkhya believes in Brahman and the need > of > > > > > > Brahmacharya for attaining siddhi in spiritual knowledge : > > > > > > > > > > > > Ch-5, sutra-116 expalins Brahma-roopataa in Samaadhi, Sushupti > and > > > > > > Moksha, but normal mortals are ignorant to these three states, > hence > > > > > > they do not know Brahman. A long practice under some good gura > with > > > > > > Brahmacharya is needed for siddhi which Indra got and > Virochana failed > > > > > > in as mentioned in Chhaandogya Upanishada, Kapil Muni says so > in ch-4, > > > > > > sutras 17-19. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am surprised at your distorted renderings of ancient texts, > made out > > > > > > of context. Yet you say " You have not read Kapila Muni's work > and yet > > > > > > you talk about that to one who read both the works of Kapila. > " I do not > > > > > > want to make similar insulting statements about you. as for > your denial > > > > > > of Purusha being Ishvara, read Purusha-sukta of RV and YV, > which is > > > > > > reproduced in Vishnu Purana with minor changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ishvara is not the same as Brahman, and Saamkhya makes it > amply clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > You call it my " zero knowledge " because you want to study > ancient > > > > > > scriptures against the method prescribed in them : Kapil Muni > said > > > > > > spiritual knowledge cannot be attained without long > Brahmacharya. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <<< " By saying that Svetasvatara does not talk about Sankhya > you are > > > > > > showing your utter ignorance as you have not read Svetasvatara > > > > > > Upanisha " >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat " Svetasvatara Upanishad does not mention Saamkhya > even once. " > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of abusing me, why you do not show the verse if I am a > liar ??? > > > > > > Please do not lie. Why you are making false quotations > deliberately ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You make a mockery of Gita by saying its first six chapters > are Dvaita > > > > > > and rest are Advaita. You imply Lord Krishna was either a > hypocrite or a > > > > > > schizophrenic, by believing in two different philosophies. > > > > > > > > > > > > <<< One who says that there is no mention of Sankhya in > Svetasvatara has > > > > > > to be an idiot as all scholars know that Svetasvatara > Upanishad speaks > > > > > > about Sankhya. You false statement shows your utter ignorance > and lack > > > > > > of regard for truth.only.> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Svetasvatara Upanishada is freely available online and anyone > can see > > > > > > whether Saamkhya is mentioned in Svetasvatara Upanishada. The > subject > > > > > > matter of Samkhya and various upanishadas overlap : they talk > about soul > > > > > > and Brahman, but it does not mean Svetasvatara Upanishada can > be falsely > > > > > > cited, without providing the verses, for its imaginary > references to > > > > > > Saamkhya. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from retorting to personal abuses by a fellow > who has a > > > > > > habit of quoting falasely from scriptures as proven above, who > has no > > > > > > training in Sankrit disciplines and is not fit to sit even > among my > > > > > > students who are now heads of departments. > > > > > > > > > > > > I had not abused you, but you are using abusing remarks > against me just > > > > > > because I caught you red handed while you were falsely quoting > ancient > > > > > > texts. Instead of accepting your errors, you are taking > recourse to > > > > > > further lies and abuses, calling me idiot, non-Hindu, etc. I > am not > > > > > > going to use your abusive language. > > > > > > > > > > > > Show the reference about Saamkkhya in Svetasvatara Upanishada, > which > > > > > > will decide who is a real idiot and a liar. I have already > shown the > > > > > > reference to siddhi of Ishvara in Saamkhya against your false > > > > > > out-of-context misinterpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > ============ ========= == == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 Prashant Ji, Even after you called for an end to this thread, I was charged of " systematic " discrimination against SKB. It was my duty to show the truth. Truth is sometimes harsh. I told RR Ji earlier that we should mend ourselves, not others. All the trouble in this world is rooted in the fact that we try to mend others, not ourselves. When I apologized thrice for my error , two members used derogatory remarks against me, taking my apologies as a token of my acceptance of guilt. If RR Ji has any respect for truth, he MUST tell SKB the truth about following verse : " trinshadyaani tu varshaani divyo maasastu sa smritah " (verse-11, chapter-142, Matsya Mahapurana) Entire Matsya Mahapurana is available online at the website of Maharishi University of Management http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/puran.htm (p.515 in the internet version, downloadable pdf file). This verse means : " 30 years are said to be one divya maasa " , which implies one divya varsha is equal to 360 (human/solar) years. This chapter describes the topic in detail. SKB defies all references sent by me, and it is because all " learned " astrtologers watch the drama of his falsehood and abuses against me with amusement, and RR Ji sometimes intervenes to add spices, instead of telling the truth boldly. If someone thinks he can remain neutral in a debate between truth and falsehood, he is mistaken. Watching injustice with neutrality is not neutrality, and gods see this. It falsehood triumphs in this false world, it is not due to shortcoming in truth, but due to lack of courage in socalled good people who chose to remain aloof. I know RR Ji will NOT tell SKB to respect scriptures and refrain from citing falsely, because RR Ji is a good person and does not want to fight for Puranas and Quranas. -VJ ========================= ====== ________________________________ Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar Thursday, July 16, 2009 3:11:47 PM Re: Re: SKB, RRji, VJ ji...!! Dedar Members esp RR ji,Vinay ji, others in the thread of SKB as I had asked for self moderation y'day IHOPE all of u do follow it on ur own and not be reminded by me or anyone else. time to move on and move ahead on Other subjects rrJI U HAVE MY DATA and is there in the forums where I am or was a member I am not sure of my Tula is strong but that is what is required of my role over here even as a member i have said so when topics went overboard. as moderator when I see these threads it does sadden me like other members on the time wasted. fortunately there r loud differences than abuses but still we can do with more on discussions, debates, readings analysisi of cases here with all our varied knowledge base. Prashant ____________ _________ _________ __ Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > Thursday, July 16, 2009 1:10:39 PM Re: Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! Stop this " systemic discrimination " against a happening for which I have already apologised thrice, and said I will tender no apology henceforth, yet some " magna " members use this opportunity to post sarcastic remarks against me. I did not commit any crime, I did not know SKB (Mr Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya) was not a member here. It was SKB who started posting his replies to other fora without informing me. It was unjustified. I later found it, and concluded it was his method of " winning " a debate by not allowing me to answer. Thus, " systemic discrimination " was started by SKB, not by me. Rohini Ji has recently been informed by SKB that I had invited SKB to join those fora where I am able to answer him, because he wanted to discuss some points in AIA which I had left. Thereafter, he joined these fora, mainly with a view to waste my time over non-astrological issues. Had I known he will not discuss astrology, I would not have invited him. I am an active member of only three fora : JR, JG and VA (besides a forum of my own reserved exclusively for topics related to software problems and Suryasiddhantic discussuions) . After my invitation, SKB joined these fora. I believed he joined all these three fora where I am active. Later , I was told he was not a member in JR. SKB recently said to Rohini Ji that he joined these fora after my invitation ; if SKB did not join one of those three fora where I am active, it was his fault and not mine. He should have informed me that he did not want to join JR after I invited him. Later, he neglected the offer of Prashant Ji also (the reason is SKB is an active member of Mr Sreenadh's team). Other persons do not know all these facts. But Rohini Ji knows these facts well. Hence, he is completely unjustified in putting the blame on me. He knows well well how many times SKB abused me, without a single abusive remark from me. I even started calling SKB " Da " to get rid of his barbaric mails. Rohini Ji himself tried to divert or mitigate the abusive discussions, but to no avail. Now, I have dacided to stop this nonsense by SKB for good. I will refrain from abusing him, but I will expose him thoroughly, esp in these two fora, and I am now also planning to expose him in all those where he is a member, because I have failed in all milder alternatives. Discussions can be carried out without personal attacks, but RR Ji wants to teach all manners only to me, never to SKB. RR Ji expelled me from his Cryatal Pages, without ever warning or informing me about his grievances gagainst me. I still do not know why I was expelled by him. In JR, I tendered apologies thrice, but now I am retracting all my apologies. I was fully justifiesd in posting a reply to SKB here because SKB accepted my offer of joining these fora as he recently informed RR Ji, and it was SKB who started posting copies of replies in other fora. I suspect he might be posting messages about me in fora where I am not a member. I will now search. I found some other members also doing the same about me : posting messages about me elsewhere without my knowledge. I do not want to name here, but such a member cannot be expelled from Crystal_Pages because she likes to discuss non-astrological topics likke cats and dogs. Rohini Ji has clearly told me that he will not discuss astrology with me because I am out of the way (or outdated, he does not clarify). I was asked by many members in JR to post case studies, which wasted over 200 hours of my time, and those members have no time to read those case studies. Therefore, I took up nobler tasks of starting a new Vedic Gurukul and adding modules to my softwares which are being used by a large number of persons who keep away from abusive fora. After an apology, the thread should have been closed. But even after the appeal of moderator, I am being charged of " systemic discrimination " . The use of a word " systematic " is not unintentional. It means my post was not a mistake but " systematic " . That is why even after three apologies, I was not forgiven by a magna and RR Ji. hence, I have to retract my apologies and state plainly that I was perfectly right in posting my message about SKB here because RR Ji is himself a witness of SKB's acceptace of the fact that SKB was invited by me to join these fora instead of inviting me again to AIA (SKB had invited me to AIA, because he was not convinced that I was abused sufficiently) . I will now start analyzing the chart of Mr Rohiniranjan Ji who had once reprimanded me for mentioning exalted planets in his chart : I had to reply that the mention of exalted planets is not derogatory and I was surprized at his hot response at my eulogy. But now he is doing the same mistake : by eulogizing Tula in Prashant Ji's chart. Or are these rules applicable only in my case ?? I know many members of abuse me in private mails : some members have forwarded me such mails. Now, will Rohini Ji call these abuses as wrong in abusing me behind my back, or will he declare those persons guilty of breach of confidence who forwarded such mails to me ?? The depends on Theory of Relativity, ie, on your own attitude towards the protagonists and theor ideas. Rohini Ji knows well how many time I have been abused. Perhaps no astrologer was abused so much in a " systematic " manner over public fora just on account of theoretical differences over academic issues, which ought to have been carried out without personal attacks. SKB goes t the extent of saying that I am " obsessed with wine and women " . These mails are fit for a libel suit but I have nobler tasks at hand. SKB is carrying out a campaign of character assanination against me, and Rohini Ji never felt uneasy about it. Rohini Ji feels bad when I retort. It is because of those very exalted planets in Rohini Ji's horoscope. Normally, exalted planets are beneficial and make a person exalted in nature. But it depends on which planet is exalted. If cruel planets are exalted, one may be exalted in cruelty. It is for the first time I am using such words for Rohini Ji. I am compelled, because he is chargind me of of " systematic " discrimination agains an absentee, even after three apologies by me. " Syatematic " means I had a plan and I had a history of such acts. On the contrary, Rohini Ji carried out a " systematic " discrimination against me by expelling me from his forum wigthout my knowledge. he also declined to join my forum. And he turned down the offer a research article for a new astrological research magazine started by a recognized Sanskrit university. This time, I will not apologize for my words against Rohini Ji's " systematic " discrimination against me, because I am fed up with these fora which ask me to show proofs and when I show proofs then discussions are diverted to other topics. I am now in a mood to resign , or being expelled from all fora. but I am in a calm mood, because I know it will give me more time for more reative works. SKB does not even allow me to make further time on chart analysis, and keeps me engaged in non-astrological topics.He has no other task than to waste my time, and persons like Rohini Ji refuse to see " systematric discrimination " against me, and says he does not want to discuss astrology with me, which is a proof of hius own " systematic " discrimination : he discusses astrology only with those whom he certifies as real astrologers. Sanskrit scholars of Jyotisha are idiots, rascals, fools, & c & c. There is nothing more to say. -VJ ============ ========= ========= == ==== ____________ _________ _________ __ Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ hotmail.com> Thursday, July 16, 2009 8:56:44 AM Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! Kumar ji, Very balanced decision! You must have a strong Tula rashi in your chart I am guessing. No need to respond!! We should not talk behind anyone's back, when they are not part of the forum or have left! It is hurtful because it is what systemic discrimination is, really! Talk, criticise, marginalize, punish, deprive 'those' who are not even part of the discussion, conversation or communication! What is sad is that this conversation is happening not just here but elsewhere on other Jyotish Fora all of which are supposed to be LIGHTED HALLS and not dark corridors in some damp dungeon sub-terranian from where neither the sky nor the planets or stars are visible! I rest my case! RR , Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar@. ..> wrote: > > > > Member > > pl rest the topic in peace now... > not part of our group so lets avoid any ref in further, SKB has not become part of this group so it is not right to say more than already said. > which went thru in unmoderated posts. pl observe self moderation. > > prashant > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > apusmagna <apusmagna@. ..> > > Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:18:56 PM > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! > > > > > > Well, charity begins at home or so they say Jha ji! > My apologies for butting in, Rohini-jee, the message was addressed to > you :-) > And Jha ji, how about issuing a weekly, or at least a fortnightly > BULLETin on the outcome of this historic marathon between you and SKB. > That could be really *STRIKING*, I guess! > Apus > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > wrote: > > > > Rohini Da, > > > > <<< I have never questioned those who have found their path nor ever > tried too hard to change their chosen destiny and divine decree! >>> > > > > We can change only ourselves, not others. Even God can change only > those who are ready for it. Was it possible to change a Ravana or a > Duryodhana ? > > > > The problem is we are always trying to find the Ravana in others, not > within ourselves. The Collective Unconscious of Jung is the triguni > Prakriti which is Jada/Jara (Unconscious) . It is present in all of us. > It must be got rid of ; that is moksha. > > > > -VJ > > ============ ========= ========= ====== === > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Rohiniranjan rohini_ranjan@ ... > > > > Wednesday, July 15, 2009 11:24:43 AM > > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay-Ji, > > > > Only Bhikaris who have nothing remaining to give in this lifetime are > blessed to *give*, in a sense! > > > > When I was a small child we used to be visited by a bhikari. He was > blind and looking back and remembering he had white opaque corneas > probably secondary to small pox or other infection. At first I used to > be scared of him because he looked kind of strange. He looked pathetic > and still had this smile that perplexed me as a child. It was a smile or > a plea for help, but so fixed! And the white corneas and all that. > > > > Unfortunately, though we gave him alms always. Sadly, neither of my > parents who were quite kind and dedicated individuals ever discussed it > or shared their feelings about all of this, nor did I ask because back > in 50s that was not done. > > > > Then suddenly one day my father showed us a blanket and said that > winter was coming and he was worried about the bhikari and his obviously > failing health. I was touched! Modern children would have hugged their > parents and all that, of course that was a NO NO back then but I was > touched within! > > > > When Bhikari-ji arrived next day, he was presented with the blanket I > was surprised because I was expecting him to jump in glee and so on. He > had the same gleeful kind of fixed expression and he left with the > blanket and so on. > > > > He showed up a few days later as usual. He had the same expression on > his face with no change. He did not have the blanket around him. It was > a chilly day and he was visibly shivering@ > > > > I was really perplexed and confused that day! I was actually sad! Why > did he not wear the blanket that we gave him with so much love? > > > > Until I figured it out much much later when I grew up and began to > learn Karma and Astrology -- I was not meant to understand why! > > > > I think I very quickly figured out thereafter why the Bhikari decided > to not change his path and practice! > > > > Thereafter, I have never questioned those who have found their path > nor ever tried too hard to change their chosen destiny and divine > decree! Hence my cautious approach regarding prescribing *remedials* too > glibly and recklessly! > > > > Best regards, > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > ...> wrote: > > > > > > <<<Only on Internet can the two beggars and the villager meet and > share > > > their experiences freely so that others can avoid the mistakes they > > > have made!>>> > > > > > > well said Rohini Da !! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ ...> > > > > > > Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:18:55 AM > > > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > But look at the bright side, Shenoy ji! Only on Internet can the two > beggars and the villager meet and share their experiences freely so that > others can avoid the mistakes they have made! > > > > > > When I was a small boy in India, we used to have a very popular > brank of cycle named Atlas. One day beggar wondered, " Just because Atlas > is carrying me, I must be as important as Planet Earth (a little > Sumerian joke!) " > > > > > > Then he began laughing! He retained his balance though and did not > fall off the bike ;-) > > > > > > He must have been very special! The only beggar I ever saw who owned > a bicycle! > > > > > > RR > > > > > > , " sureshbabuag " > <sureshbabuag@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prashant ji, > > > > > > > > I don't know what is this game on the net. > > > > > > > > All these arguments about dwaitha, adwaitha & scriptures only > looks likes..... > > > > > > > > Two beggars were fighting over which car is better - Bently or > rolls roice based on somebody's article. > > > > > > > > The funny thing is, one person who had used bently all his life > wrote that it is the ultimate in luxury but has not owned Rolls roice. > > > > > > > > Similarly the other author wrote of Rolls roice which he owned and > loved all his life and claimed it is the best. He has not even seen a > bently. > > > > > > > > Reading these an old man from a remote village said what bently! > what Rolls roice! there is nothing better than my old rugged amaby. It > takes me to where ever I want to go and what do you know? it is not very > costly to maintain too. > > > > > > > > A few years passed by. Eventually one of the beggar saved a little > money and bought a cycle - dearming one day he will attain the ultimate > in luxury. > > > > > > > > You can hear them still arguing about which car is better, when > you pass by them near the busy market corner. > > > > > > > > A.G.Suresh Babu Shenoy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Suresh ji, Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > this is a cross posted message of another group/s and bascially > NOT ALLOWED IN MOST GROUPS AS A POLICY but is selectively abused by > some owners, moderators with a agenda of their own > > > > > > > > > > at times with a good intention of a GOOD TOPIC to be shared, and > some with vested interests against some ppl. indulge in > gossip/entertainmen t than discussion on such threads. > > > > > > > > > > here it is a member who hass been positing on several topics > here and other groups > > > > > > > > > > except this threads related to sunil bhattacharya ji's posts > others have been discussed here as well > > > > > > > > > > if he becomes part of this group it MAKES SENSE I've SAID that > ALREADY SO UP TO HIM to pursue it here and wherever this has appeared > > > > > > > > > > FOR ME IT WAS only a part of the message i replied which has > universal appeal > > > > > > > > > > that Almight can be seen only by the blessed ones and it is not > a matter of debate as we r all too small to even coment on such souls > who can see god even now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prashant > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > sureshbabuag <sureshbabuag@ > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:20:27 PM > > > > > Re: Sunil Bhattacharjya Cites Scriptures Wrongly > !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay Jha, > > > > > > > > > > Pardon me for saying so, This massage seems to out of tune & > context. > > > > > > > > > > The so called " Sunil Battacharjya " has not posted any such > message here in the forum. It might be a personal message or posted in > any other forum. Hence, don't you think it is better to reply in the > same way or in the forum he might have posted it?. > > > > > > > > > > Hope you understand > > > > > A.G.Suresh Babu Shenoy > > > > > > > > > > , " vinayjhaa16 " > <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is my answer to a deliberately false message from Mr > Sunil > > > > > > Bhattacharjya : > > > > > > > > > > > > To Sunil Da & To All concerned, > > > > > > > > > > > > You say: > > > > > > > > > > > > <<< " He (Kapil Muni) said that Ishvara is " Asiddha " and then > left it at > > > > > > that. " >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > You are citing it out of context with a view to invert the > original > > > > > > meaning. The context in ch-1 sutras 87-92 is " pratyaksha > pramaana " , and > > > > > > Kapil Muni says that Ishvava cannot be proven through senses > (ie, > > > > > > pratyaksha pramaana), which you are taking out of context. > Because of > > > > > > your lack of any knowledge of Sanskrit, you take verses and > sutras > > > > > > without going into the full context. You applied same trick in > the case > > > > > > of divya varsha, by neglecting the context in preceding verses > which > > > > > > defined divya varsha. Sutra 89 defines pratyaksha pramaana and > sutra > > > > > > 90-91 show exceptions in yogis, and sutra 92 show the > exception in > > > > > > Ishvara, Who cannot be proven or perceived through nornal > pratyaksha > > > > > > pramaana. If any doubt, following words of Kapil Muni remove > it : > > > > > > > > > > > > Ch-3 sutra-55 says that Prakriti is not a Work (of Ishvara), > yet is > > > > > > Paravasha. Hence, Ishvara is the controller of Prakriti. > > > > > > > > > > > > Next sutra make it clear : He (ishvara) is Omniscient > (sarva-vit) and > > > > > > Sarva-kartaa (ie, cause of all actions). > > > > > > > > > > > > And next sutra says : " idrish-ishvara- siddhih siddhah " , ie > " thus the > > > > > > existence of Ishvara is siddha / proven " . > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, Sunil Bhattacharjya' s habit of deliberately misquoting > from > > > > > > ancient texts is again proven here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not only in Ishvara, Saamkhya believes in Brahman and the need > of > > > > > > Brahmacharya for attaining siddhi in spiritual knowledge : > > > > > > > > > > > > Ch-5, sutra-116 expalins Brahma-roopataa in Samaadhi, Sushupti > and > > > > > > Moksha, but normal mortals are ignorant to these three states, > hence > > > > > > they do not know Brahman. A long practice under some good gura > with > > > > > > Brahmacharya is needed for siddhi which Indra got and > Virochana failed > > > > > > in as mentioned in Chhaandogya Upanishada, Kapil Muni says so > in ch-4, > > > > > > sutras 17-19. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am surprised at your distorted renderings of ancient texts, > made out > > > > > > of context. Yet you say " You have not read Kapila Muni's work > and yet > > > > > > you talk about that to one who read both the works of Kapila. > " I do not > > > > > > want to make similar insulting statements about you. as for > your denial > > > > > > of Purusha being Ishvara, read Purusha-sukta of RV and YV, > which is > > > > > > reproduced in Vishnu Purana with minor changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ishvara is not the same as Brahman, and Saamkhya makes it > amply clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > You call it my " zero knowledge " because you want to study > ancient > > > > > > scriptures against the method prescribed in them : Kapil Muni > said > > > > > > spiritual knowledge cannot be attained without long > Brahmacharya. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <<< " By saying that Svetasvatara does not talk about Sankhya > you are > > > > > > showing your utter ignorance as you have not read Svetasvatara > > > > > > Upanisha " >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > I repeat " Svetasvatara Upanishad does not mention Saamkhya > even once. " > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of abusing me, why you do not show the verse if I am a > liar ??? > > > > > > Please do not lie. Why you are making false quotations > deliberately ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You make a mockery of Gita by saying its first six chapters > are Dvaita > > > > > > and rest are Advaita. You imply Lord Krishna was either a > hypocrite or a > > > > > > schizophrenic, by believing in two different philosophies. > > > > > > > > > > > > <<< One who says that there is no mention of Sankhya in > Svetasvatara has > > > > > > to be an idiot as all scholars know that Svetasvatara > Upanishad speaks > > > > > > about Sankhya. You false statement shows your utter ignorance > and lack > > > > > > of regard for truth.only.> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Svetasvatara Upanishada is freely available online and anyone > can see > > > > > > whether Saamkhya is mentioned in Svetasvatara Upanishada. The > subject > > > > > > matter of Samkhya and various upanishadas overlap : they talk > about soul > > > > > > and Brahman, but it does not mean Svetasvatara Upanishada can > be falsely > > > > > > cited, without providing the verses, for its imaginary > references to > > > > > > Saamkhya. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from retorting to personal abuses by a fellow > who has a > > > > > > habit of quoting falasely from scriptures as proven above, who > has no > > > > > > training in Sankrit disciplines and is not fit to sit even > among my > > > > > > students who are now heads of departments. > > > > > > > > > > > > I had not abused you, but you are using abusing remarks > against me just > > > > > > because I caught you red handed while you were falsely quoting > ancient > > > > > > texts. Instead of accepting your errors, you are taking > recourse to > > > > > > further lies and abuses, calling me idiot, non-Hindu, etc. I > am not > > > > > > going to use your abusive language. > > > > > > > > > > > > Show the reference about Saamkkhya in Svetasvatara Upanishada, > which > > > > > > will decide who is a real idiot and a liar. I have already > shown the > > > > > > reference to siddhi of Ishvara in Saamkhya against your false > > > > > > out-of-context misinterpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > ============ ========= == == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.