From: sukhwinder <astroremedies.in@gmail.com>
To: astrostudents@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, January 13, 2011 11:31:59 PM
Subject: [astrostudents] Re: Regarding Suggestion
Respected Rajinder Bhatia Ji,
I am not a intermediary or an agent of Pandit Bhooshan Priya Ji.You have challenged Bhooshan Priya Ji's modus opernadi and i am supporting him because I have seen the results, and I am not the single person who is been benefited by the remedies suggested by him.I have full faith in the system used by Pandit Bhooshan Priya Ji of Bhav Spasth for rectifying the varshphal table.He is ready to answer on a public forum but i think you don't have the guts to face the challenge.Anyhow i am forwarding you the reply which is written by Pandit Bhooshan Priya Ji on the public forum of Lal Kitab _Discussion group.
with regards
Sukhwinder Sharma
Dear Goel Saheb,
I appreciate the effort made by Sreenadh ji in trying to find out the algorithm used in the Varsh Phal table of the Lal Kitab. I feel grateful that a scholar of Sreenadh’s eminence takes interest in Lal Kitab.
At some stage or the other, some of us had tried to find out the logic, but had failed. Here is some one else who has taken up the task; instead of encouraging him we are trying to discourage him through our comments.
You as an engineer know very well that whenever numbers are generated, they have to follow a law, an inherent logic, howsoever complex it may be; so must the LK varsh phal table too.
Studying this logic falls in the domain of mathematics/statistics. It is a technique which is not system specific. For a mathematician / statistician it doesn’t make a difference whether he is analyzing a table from LK or the Economic Survey of India. Therefore the plea that Sreenadh ji isn’t familiar with Lal Kitab is not relevant.
On the contrary, the Varshphal table is absolutely "system specific"; actually LalKitab specific. It is utterly illogical to compare it to the likes of market fluctuations or laws of supply and demand or combinatorial or statistical mathematics. As I have said before, this table is not populated based on a single formula. Numerous unique sets of rules have been used to populate different sets of years (or perhaps each row.) If one can't find a pattern of how each row is populated, then it is quite logical to conclude that each row or a small subset of rows has a specific formula known only to the originator of this table and unfortunately, lost for ever. The inability to find that formula or formulae does not make this table a suspect (unless Priyaji and other practitioners have experienced problems with the use of this table but have kept it to themselves.) The real key to this table does not lie in statistical patterns; to look for that would be silly.
Sreenadh ji has made a preliminary investigation into the table. It is not complete yet as he himself said, â€Å"There seems to be something more to it, related to the possibility of permutation combination possible in metrics of numbers.â€
Therefore let us not jump to conclusions.
However, didn't Mr. Sreenadh jump to conclusions ? (Please re-read the portion that I quoted in my previous Email.) Ms. Priya also did not hesitate to immediately agree with him. That is what I strongly objected to. Mr. Sreenadh not having any experience in LalKitab system immediately condemned the Varshphal table and declared it erroneous and corrupted. Priyaji, with vast experience in LK under her belt, unfortunately, did not lose a breath agreeing with that. If she suspected its accuracy, then why didn't she, while using it all these years, say something like: "...based on my vast experience with this system, I see this table not working satisfactorily during such and such years or such and such houses" -- something to that effect. In that case, suspecting the effectiveness of the table would be justified. She has remained quiet all these years and suddenly it dawns upon her that the table needs rectification. The rectification of this table on unfounded and unknown basis will misguide astrological community. That would be an extremely irresponsible deed.
Yes, if Sreenadh ji, or any body else for that matter, finds the algorithm used in the LK table and also detects a few errors, then I will accept the modified version to experiment with. If the logic is known and the table gets modified, then yes it could mean that not only me, but every body else too, had been using a table which had a few errors.
We do not consider the LK varsh phal table as a divine revelation. For us it is a man made table, a human effort, in which a possibility of a few errors could always exist.
Now, if balderdash, illogical thinking and utter nonsense were to be packaged all-in-one statement, then this would be it! What an illogical premise and conclusion -- "... since it is man-made, it has to be errorneous..." Three cheers for their deductive reasoning!!
Now coming to the issue of Bhav-Spashtha
Long back we had already discussed about the Bhav-Spashtha.
We, the Aligarh Group of Lal Kitab, use Ptolemaic or modus equalis system of Bhav spashtha.
Initially I had used the Porphyry's system because this was the one
I learnt first when I worked out the Ascendant and the Dasham
manually. Later I used the Lahiri ephemeris for it.
Through our experience we found that the equal house system suits us
best.
Your comment was â€Å"The use of equal house division is very rational and goes well with Indian Astrological system.â€
With great regards,
Bhooshan Priya
No comments:
Post a Comment