Fwd: Dating of Ramayana period.

[Guest guest]

, " a_krishen " <jyotirved wrote:

 

Shri Suresh Hattangadiji,

Namste!

Thanks for your response.

<I am not siding with Mr Bhatnagar's research.I am also still not endorsing

your language.>

In other words, you endorse the conclusions arrived at by me that:

1. The date of birth of Bhagwan Ram as January 10, 5114 BCE is anything but

correct.

2. The plaentary positions shown to be tallying exactly with that of the Valmiki

Ramayana by Shri Pushkar Bhatnagar is just a manipulation.

3. That the astrological combinations of the Valmiki Ramayana are impossible

astronomically.

If you ponder on the consequences these false presentations/manipulations have

on the general public as a whole, I am sure you will be more anguished than me

and may use even stronger words for such activities of some " Vedic

astrologers " / " Vedic astronomers " , especially if they say that their " scienfitic

findings are most accurate and there is no need for any further proofs " .

What pains me all the more is that all the knowledgeable " Vedic astrologers "

kept silent for an inefinite period even after seeing such statements that the

findings. even if they ae wrong, should not be subjected to any further

scrutiny!

 

With regards,

A K Kaul

 

, " hattangadi_suresh " <hattangadi_suresh@>

wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Kaul,

> I am not siding with Mr Bhatnagar's research.I am also still not endorsing

your language.If you go through your post again just think whether the language

used by you would have been acceptable to you if somebody else had used it

against you.I am certain Mr.P.V.R.Narasimha Rao would hesitate to use similar

language.It is not merely point by point rebuttal but language used is also

important.I hope you understand my point.

>

 

--- End forwarded message ---