CLN
0
Shri suba42,
My omission of the use of 'Shri' preceding 'suba42' in my post #174 was just that - a simple and silly omission on my part. It was purely unintentional. In fact I noticed it only after you had pointed it out in your post #174. I am truly sorry for it. If you care to verify all my postings in all the threads in which I have posted my comments, I have ALWAYS used either 'Shri' or 'ji' or 'Mr' while addressing any body. When you mentioned your dislike of the use of 'Mr' for you, I used to address you always with 'Shri', afterwards. So, sorry, once again!
I just do not understand your "Do not get tensed up unnecessarily. What makes you lose your patience?" Neither I felt tensed up while I wrote that post nor did I have any cause for losing patience. Losing patience with whom or what? I just don't understand your remarks, nor am I interested to know about it now any way. So, let us leave it at that.
Your reply has made one thing very clear to me - that you have completely missed the import of my arguments in it. Now, it is not important any more; so, let us leave it also at that!
Regarding your article on "About this Universe and the Maker of this Universe" and the excerpts from it you posted in support of your likening the basic interactive forces to Gods in Hindu mythology, I gave my comments in a reply post to the best of my knowledge, but as I felt that Shri KRS, being a theoretical physics expert, would be able to add value through his comments, I just made an appeal to him to that effect in that post itself, as you well know. But it is entirely up to him to choose to make a comment or not. No one in this Forum posts according to the dictates of another. Hence, I really do not understand what made you write the post #170 addressed to me, about your eagerly waiting for the reply from Shri KRS, instead of addressing him straightaway!
I also cannot see why you "double-deared" me in the same post and once again in post #172 and even called me "Poojya Guruji" in another post - perhaps only in preparation to teach me the basic etiquettes in your post # 174? If so, thank you very much.
My omission of the use of 'Shri' preceding 'suba42' in my post #174 was just that - a simple and silly omission on my part. It was purely unintentional. In fact I noticed it only after you had pointed it out in your post #174. I am truly sorry for it. If you care to verify all my postings in all the threads in which I have posted my comments, I have ALWAYS used either 'Shri' or 'ji' or 'Mr' while addressing any body. When you mentioned your dislike of the use of 'Mr' for you, I used to address you always with 'Shri', afterwards. So, sorry, once again!
I just do not understand your "Do not get tensed up unnecessarily. What makes you lose your patience?" Neither I felt tensed up while I wrote that post nor did I have any cause for losing patience. Losing patience with whom or what? I just don't understand your remarks, nor am I interested to know about it now any way. So, let us leave it at that.
Your reply has made one thing very clear to me - that you have completely missed the import of my arguments in it. Now, it is not important any more; so, let us leave it also at that!
Regarding your article on "About this Universe and the Maker of this Universe" and the excerpts from it you posted in support of your likening the basic interactive forces to Gods in Hindu mythology, I gave my comments in a reply post to the best of my knowledge, but as I felt that Shri KRS, being a theoretical physics expert, would be able to add value through his comments, I just made an appeal to him to that effect in that post itself, as you well know. But it is entirely up to him to choose to make a comment or not. No one in this Forum posts according to the dictates of another. Hence, I really do not understand what made you write the post #170 addressed to me, about your eagerly waiting for the reply from Shri KRS, instead of addressing him straightaway!
I also cannot see why you "double-deared" me in the same post and once again in post #172 and even called me "Poojya Guruji" in another post - perhaps only in preparation to teach me the basic etiquettes in your post # 174? If so, thank you very much.