Guest guest Posted May 18, 2002 Report Share Posted May 18, 2002 Dear Vivek you <<In vedic astrology,the process is descending--that is you have to first accept the whole thing with faith without asking for proof.>> me That is according to our surrender. When we are sure that we can have a 100% trust in our astrologer, then we do not need any proof. However, astrology should be based on verifible facts, and thus we can verify if we want so, the planetary combinations. In the beginning we may not be able to read those planetary combinations indicating some facts, but later on we may be able to read them, once that we have advanced more in our knowledge. Blind faith may be useful in the beginning, but i do not want "blind"followers. I want followers that can "see" the path. Blind faith is prone to be exploited by cheaters, who can tell any story so satisfy their false ego. We should be aware of cheaters. Best wishes Natabara Das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2002 Report Share Posted May 18, 2002 statician had to say about Gauquelin's research being tainted...I can't remember which is inverted logic and which is the other branch of it--deductive? logic? If anyone wishes to examine the Gauquelin findings, a good start might be at the following website: Gauquelin Sectors (if it doesn't show as an underlined link, try cut and paste with the following address) http://www.cd-b.com/gauquelin_sectors.htm Happy day to all! Carol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2002 Report Share Posted May 19, 2002 well his research was bad and my guru shri k n rao has written many aticles explaning how he was wrong and what was bad in his horoscope .and he also has discussed his horoscope do look in shri k n rao books deepak singh On Sun, 19 May 2002 Carolhook wrote : >In a message dated 5/17/2002 1:10:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >venerablebede writes: > > statician had to say about Gauquelin's > > research being tainted...I can't remember which is inverted >logic and which > > is the other branch of it--deductive? logic? > > If anyone wishes to examine the Gauquelin findings, a good >start might be >at the following website: <A >HREF="http://www.cd-b.com/gauquelin_sectors.htm">Gauquelin >Sectors</A> > >(if it doesn't show as an underlined link, try cut and paste with >the >following address) >http://www.cd-b.com/gauquelin_sectors.htm > >Happy day to all! > Carol _______ Click below to visit monsterindia.com and review jobs in India or Abroad http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs 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.