Guest guest Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Namaste friends, Congratulations to all those who predicted that Bush would win! Also, my humble thanks to those of you who congratulated me and others who predicted a Bush victory. * * * Dear Mukund, > Predicting a Bush win was a no-brainer. I predicted a Bush win > without looking at any of the correct or incorrect charts floating > around. You stubbornly keep saying that predicting a Bush victory was a no- brainer. That is so untrue. All the respected opinion polls before the election showed that the race was a statistical deadheat. Some showed Bush in the lead and some showed Kerry in the lead, but the lead was within the margin of error in almost all cases. After all, had 150,000 people (2%) voted differently in Ohio, Kerry would've won. So, until yesterday, Bush and Kerry both had a realistic chance (almost 50-50). Your view is based on emotions and personal biases rather than objective analysis of available data. Your attempt to take credit away from the few of us who predicted a Bush victory is very unfortunate. > Ya, if someone had predicted a Kerry win and Kerry had indeed won, > then it would be a cause to congrajulate as well as learn the > technique used by the successful astrologer. This is unfair. Those of us who predicted Bush victory deserve to be congratulated too. As for learning the technique, I gave several technical reasons behind my prediction. You can read my pointers at: vedic astrology/message/45170 I predicted that Bush would gain decisive momentum in the last week (which is perhaps correct looking at all the polls). I did not give the reasons behind it (I will do so later). But the reasons behind the basic prediction that Bush would prevail were given. > Well, here is my new prediction NOT based on Jyotish--Hillary Clinton > will run for president in 2008 and will have a grand victory over her > republican opponent. In the same post mentioned above, I mentioned 2008 election as one of the factors behind my prediction of a Bush victory this time. I did look at the charts of Al Gore and Hillary Clinton for 2008. I tend to think that Al Gore has a brilliant chance in 2008. However, there is still more time to make that prediction! * * * Dear Sundeep, > That said, I must say that only one person's prediction stands out - > specifically "nameisego"'s prediction. Because he predicted the re- > emergence of Osama before the win, and it can easily be argued that > it was the emergence of Osama that immediately refocussed the > Americans on security issues, where Bush is the clear leader. That > prediction is statistically significant, i.e. not easily dismissable > as being a chance occurrence or a fluke. But "nameisego" wasnt even > using SJC techniques was he? Normally, I don't like commenting on another person's performance. But, because you are exggerating one person's correct prediction, belittling others and commenting on "SJC techniques" all at the same time, I feel compelled to point out one simple fact. The exact words of "nameisego" were: "A SURPRISE IN THE FORM OF MAY BE OSAMA BIN LADEN'S CAPTURE or an Attack by so called FUNDAMENTALISTS and George Bush's actions there of would swing the scales in his favour". Neither happened. While nameisego deserves credit for expecting a clear mandate, he did not get it right regarding Osama. Don't get me wrong. "Nameisego" deserves congratulations for predicting Bush victory and kudos for having the guts to make a risky prediction that Osama would be captured or there would be a terror attack. But you cannot call that prediction correct just because an Osama tape surfaced. In fact, based on all the opinion polls, the Osama tape did not work to Bush's advantage. Some pollsters said it worked to Kerry's advantage a little bit. Moreover, according to the exit polls, the main issue in the minds of people was "values" and not security or even Iraq. Simply, more conservative voters turned up for the election on Nov 2, 2004 than on Nov 7, 2000. The gamble made by Rove and Bush with respect to their right wing positioning paid off. My only problem is your exaggeration of one person's prediction and applying loose standards when judging it, while dismissing other correct predictions as possible flukes. I certainly do not find fault with nameisego's prediction of Osama's capture or a terror attack. He saw it and made his call. I too was honestly expecting some surprise, though I did not mention it. That is in fact one of the reasons for my predicting that Bush would gain decisive momentum in the last week before election. In the lunar eclipse chart of last Wednesday night, cast at Washington DC, the 10th lord Jupiter was in 4th from Gemini lagna and aspecting 10th (good). The 3rd lord Sun was in debility and afflicted by Ketu (bad). This shows problems for the opposition leaders (3rd lord) and good for the rulers (10th lord), after the eclipse. Because Bush has Jupiter with lagna lord and Kerry has Sun in lagna, the planets involved also fit. So I was expecting Bush to gain momentum after the eclipse and Kerry to lose momentum. I was expecting Kerry to fall behind due to some "Ketu" factors. I too thought it would be terrorism, though I did not say it. But, in hindsight, it seems like Ketu stands for conservatives, evangelicals etc here and not terrorists. It was they who caused the decisive fall of Kerry. This illustrates how one's logic can be almost perfect and yet the prediction totally wrong (or vice versa). In any case, I did not want to be too specific and just predicted that Bush would gain decisive momentum in the final week. Of course, there was another reason behind it and I will mention it later. May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Hello Narasimha: Nice to hear from you. Ya, I re-read my posting several times after reading this note from you and it appears that I may have inadvertantly hurt the feelings of Jyotishas who predicted a Bush victory, I remember you predicted a close contest and a Bush victory. I apologize for the insensitivity in my "Bush vs Kerry" posting. Well, that's Jyotish at work in my life--I've been training myself to evaluate my day to day actions in terms of them being good or bad, truthful or untruthful, egotistical or humble and am attepting to conduct myself truthfully and humbly. Well, it my time to be humble and apologize for my "no-brainer" comments on Bush victory. Even though the election was so close, I still feel that "culturally" Bush had better chances to win. Likewise, I feel Hillary Clinton will definitely run and win in 2008. See Narasimha, it just feels too weird using Jyotisha to predict elections. --Jyotish should be used to reveal/understand karmic signatures in the horoscope of people who've exhausted EVERY effort their free will provided them in seeking happiness and peace. Just look at my own life--Using Jyotish, I've understood that my karmic calling is to be kind and helpful to young women and I'm attempting to do just that--couple of months back HR recruited a totally incompetent female assistant for me and rather than recommending her termination, I'm helping her learn the ropes. Advising people on the karmic signatures and karmic goals in their horoscopes/lives should be the goal of Jyotish, not predicting elections for a few moments of cyber-glory. Mukund vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote: > > Namaste friends, > > Congratulations to all those who predicted that Bush would win! > Also, my humble thanks to those of you who congratulated me and > others who predicted a Bush victory. > > * * * > > Dear Mukund, > > > Predicting a Bush win was a no-brainer. I predicted a Bush win > > without looking at any of the correct or incorrect charts floating > > around. > > You stubbornly keep saying that predicting a Bush victory was a no- > brainer. That is so untrue. All the respected opinion polls before > the election showed that the race was a statistical deadheat. Some > showed Bush in the lead and some showed Kerry in the lead, but the > lead was within the margin of error in almost all cases. After all, > had 150,000 people (2%) voted differently in Ohio, Kerry would've > won. So, until yesterday, Bush and Kerry both had a realistic chance > (almost 50-50). Your view is based on emotions and personal biases > rather than objective analysis of available data. > > Your attempt to take credit away from the few of us who predicted a > Bush victory is very unfortunate. > > > Ya, if someone had predicted a Kerry win and Kerry had indeed won, > > then it would be a cause to congrajulate as well as learn the > > technique used by the successful astrologer. > > This is unfair. Those of us who predicted Bush victory deserve to be > congratulated too. > > As for learning the technique, I gave several technical reasons > behind my prediction. > > You can read my pointers at: > > vedic astrology/message/45170 > > I predicted that Bush would gain decisive momentum in the last week > (which is perhaps correct looking at all the polls). I did not give > the reasons behind it (I will do so later). But the reasons behind > the basic prediction that Bush would prevail were given. > > > Well, here is my new prediction NOT based on Jyotish--Hillary > Clinton > > will run for president in 2008 and will have a grand victory over > her > > republican opponent. > > In the same post mentioned above, I mentioned 2008 election as one > of the factors behind my prediction of a Bush victory this time. I > did look at the charts of Al Gore and Hillary Clinton for 2008. I > tend to think that Al Gore has a brilliant chance in 2008. However, > there is still more time to make that prediction! > > * * * > > Dear Sundeep, > > > That said, I must say that only one person's prediction stands > out - > > specifically "nameisego"'s prediction. Because he predicted the re- > > emergence of Osama before the win, and it can easily be argued > that > > it was the emergence of Osama that immediately refocussed the > > Americans on security issues, where Bush is the clear leader. That > > prediction is statistically significant, i.e. not easily > dismissable > > as being a chance occurrence or a fluke. But "nameisego" wasnt > even > > using SJC techniques was he? > > Normally, I don't like commenting on another person's performance. > But, because you are exggerating one person's correct prediction, > belittling others and commenting on "SJC techniques" all at the same > time, I feel compelled to point out one simple fact. > > The exact words of "nameisego" were: "A SURPRISE IN THE FORM OF MAY > BE OSAMA BIN LADEN'S CAPTURE or an Attack by so called > FUNDAMENTALISTS and George Bush's actions there of would swing the > scales in his favour". Neither happened. While nameisego deserves > credit for expecting a clear mandate, he did not get it right > regarding Osama. > > Don't get me wrong. "Nameisego" deserves congratulations for > predicting Bush victory and kudos for having the guts to make a > risky prediction that Osama would be captured or there would be a > terror attack. But you cannot call that prediction correct just > because an Osama tape surfaced. > > In fact, based on all the opinion polls, the Osama tape did not work > to Bush's advantage. Some pollsters said it worked to Kerry's > advantage a little bit. Moreover, according to the exit polls, the > main issue in the minds of people was "values" and not security or > even Iraq. Simply, more conservative voters turned up for the > election on Nov 2, 2004 than on Nov 7, 2000. The gamble made by Rove > and Bush with respect to their right wing positioning paid off. > > My only problem is your exaggeration of one person's prediction and > applying loose standards when judging it, while dismissing other > correct predictions as possible flukes. I certainly do not find > fault with nameisego's prediction of Osama's capture or a terror > attack. He saw it and made his call. > > I too was honestly expecting some surprise, though I did not mention > it. That is in fact one of the reasons for my predicting that Bush > would gain decisive momentum in the last week before election. In > the lunar eclipse chart of last Wednesday night, cast at Washington > DC, the 10th lord Jupiter was in 4th from Gemini lagna and aspecting > 10th (good). The 3rd lord Sun was in debility and afflicted by Ketu > (bad). This shows problems for the opposition leaders (3rd lord) and > good for the rulers (10th lord), after the eclipse. Because Bush has > Jupiter with lagna lord and Kerry has Sun in lagna, the planets > involved also fit. So I was expecting Bush to gain momentum after > the eclipse and Kerry to lose momentum. I was expecting Kerry to > fall behind due to some "Ketu" factors. I too thought it would be > terrorism, though I did not say it. But, in hindsight, it seems like > Ketu stands for conservatives, evangelicals etc here and not > terrorists. It was they who caused the decisive fall of Kerry. This > illustrates how one's logic can be almost perfect and yet the > prediction totally wrong (or vice versa). In any case, I did not > want to be too specific and just predicted that Bush would gain > decisive momentum in the final week. Of course, there was another > reason behind it and I will mention it later. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 4, 2004 Report Share Posted November 4, 2004 Dear Kumanan Namaste Here are my some of wild thoughts about why astrologers fail or interpret differently? You attributed to Incomplete subject Lost information because of Gurukulam mode of teaching Techniques used - Lack of knowledge of certain techniques, Using Wrong techniques or experimenting with new techniques Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the modern world Last but not least is deep knowledge about the event that you are predicting Lets take one by one, Jyotish as incomplete subject is not a very strong argument as it surfaces only when jyotisha fails. What who gets it correct? Does that mean correct predictions with incomplete knowledge? It is a very popular argument regarding Vedic Jyotish that most of the ancient text are not avialble in totality and hence at times astrologer may fail in his predictions. Even if we take this argument I think we have enough available ancient text to predict the correct event provided we apply it correctly. The event which otherwise will be 50% right or wrong based on only two persons is not a matter of testing our astrological knowledge. Lost information is no more a concern now a days when people are coming up with new theory like HP and all. People are able to predict moreorless corectly with these new ways of predictions as well which does not have solid ancient base. As regards to techenique used again there is a problem. The person who is using it makes or breaks the case. A novice like you and me if we use a technique, we may apply it wrongly without knowing it. But when Gurus fail do we have to believe that Gurus as well apply the theory wrongly? Certainly not. Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the modern world this is again a point worth for novice like you and me but not the heros in this fields. Most of the people who predicted correctly are shishyas of our main Guru but the main Guru has failed this time. Does that mean the shishyas are applying technique in consistent manner and not the Guru. It is basically matter of performing your Sadahna correctly. See Sanjay ji tried to say about the event when there was no 'enviornmnet' for the event. He predicted because of his knowledge and power of Intution. Intution comes because of Sadhana. Possibly he was little bit short of his Sadhana now a days and may require to concentrate on that aspect . I am sure who predicted it correct by whatever method must be strong in their Intution and daily Sadhana. Knowledge of the event which we are predicting is the most dangerous concern and rather biggest hurdle in astrology. Sanjay ji predicted about the event when he had no current knowledge about the moods and happenings in the US elections. It was his unbiased opinion and hence made purely on knowledge and Intution. His knowledge is perfect but he was wrong in his final iterpretation bcause of Intution. The number of astrological factors involved in causing an event are somestimes discombobulating that one at times may find it difficult to sort out the specific combination. Here comes the power of astrologer called as Intution. Power of Intution makes the astrolger to hit on the appropriate combination. This happens only when the person is very pure in his/her Sadhana. When predictions fail it is sure sign beyond doubt that he/she is failing in his/her Sadhana. When Intution fails astrolger is forced to interpret the knowledge in different manner and hence astrolger come up with different interpretations as every astrolger has some element of Insution inside him/her. So the gist is that those who fail or come up with different interpretations about an event possibly because of power of Intutution failing for them. Thanks a lot for your Time and Sapce. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar vedic astrology, Kumanan Rajamanikkam <rkumanan> wrote: > Hi Mukund, > > I just want to address one of your main concerns about > why all astrologers don't predict the same thing? I > understand your concern that this is affecting the > image of Jyotish in general. This is one question I > had in my mind before I started learning Jyotisha 6 > weeks back. After getting to know more about Jyotisha > I understood the reason why. > > Here is my belief. I attribute it to the following > > Incomplete subject > Lost information because of Gurukulam mode of > teaching > Techniques used - Lack of knowledge of certain > techniques, Using Wrong techniques or experimenting > with new techniques > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the > modern world > Last but not least is deep knowledge about the event > that you are predicting > > Narasimha said it best. Astrology is an incomplete > subject and we are all trying to understand it. We > don't have all the sacred texts of Jyotisha. Jyotisha > is part of Vedic knowledge and it is said that we have > access to only a small percentage of Vedic knowledge. > May be if we had access to all these ancient sacred > texts, Jyotisha would have been a complete subject. > Some information must have been lost because of > Gurukulam mode of teaching. Gurukulam way of teaching > ensured that the sacred knowledge of Jyotisha didn't > end up in wrong hands. But unfortunately some > information / wisdom / techniques could have been lost > if a guru was not able to pass it on to his next > generation. > > When you are dealing with an incomplete subject, > controversies are bound to be prevalent because there > is no authoritative reference from the creator. This > results in different camps with different beliefs. > Some people consider Sage Parashara's book as the > ultimate. Some mix and match techniques from other > ancient books. > > Some techniques are preserved as family secrets and > they get passed from generation to generation. Some > techniques are passed only through Guru - sishya > relationship. Few astrologers are privileged to have > access to these techniques. Other astrologers may > never know it unless they come to know of it through > other sources or through their own research and > experience. > > An astrologer may be using a proven technique but for > a wrong scenario unknowingly. Although he will get > wiser over experience it is impossible in a life time > to get it all right because the science of Jyotisha is > an ocean. > > Some astrologers may be experimenting with new > techniques such as "Rahu centric" theory. So the > results of these new experimental techniques could be > different from the other standard techniques. > > Interpretation of ancient text for the modern world > might be different for different astrologers as well. > This is largely done by experimentation and I don't > think there is a consensus and not all the areas are > covered yet. One example is how Narasimha said that > Ketu could be attributed to conservativeness or > values. If you think about it, it makes sense, since > Ketu is associated with religion / spirituality. > > And lastly in my humble view, to predict an specific > event and to translate the ancient text to the modern > world correctly, you need to have a good knowledge > about the event that you are predicting. For example > when you are predicting the outcome of US election, it > is essential that you are knowledged about the US > culture, their beliefs, concerns and issues. That's > the only way you can correctly translate the cause of > why a presidential candidate would win or lose. This > knowledge will be different for different astrologers > as well. > > So if you take any learned astrologer, most of what he > knows and follows will be right and some of them may > not be right. It all depends on his guru, the books he > read, his ancestral jyotisha knowledge, techniques > that he believes in, how he interprets the ancient > texts in a modern world and his knowledge of the event > that he is predicting about. > > Clearly there is bound to be a difference between > predictions of even learned and gifted astrologers. > > On a final note, if all learned astrologers arrive at > the same conclusion based on a given chart than that > means there is a systematic way of predicting things. > If that is true then we can completely automate > predictions through computer software and we don't > need astrologers anymore. Fortunately or unfortunately > it is not true. Systematic way of prediction is > specific per astrologer based on his beliefs not > general consensus. > > Hats off to SJC, Sanjay Rath and Narasimha who have > provided us a forum where we are able to analyze the > techniques used in the predictions and learn why some > techniques didn't give a correct result and why some > did. This is definitely an environment where everybody > can benefit from each other. Over the years we will > all learn so much from both the good / bad predictions > and get a better understanding of this complicated > science. I am sure future will look thankfully to SJC. > > > I am just a complete novice in Jyotisha and this is my > first serious post. Please enlighten / pardon me if I > am wrong. > > -Kumanan > > > > --- monmuk111 <monmuk111> wrote: > > > > > Hello Narasimha: > > > > Nice to hear from you. Ya, I re-read my posting > > several times after > > reading this note from you and it appears that I may > > have > > inadvertantly hurt the feelings of Jyotishas who > > predicted a Bush > > victory, I remember you predicted a close contest > > and a Bush victory. > > > > I apologize for the insensitivity in my "Bush vs > > Kerry" posting. > > Well, that's Jyotish at work in my life--I've been > > training myself to > > evaluate my day to day actions in terms of them > > being good or bad, > > truthful or untruthful, egotistical or humble and am > > attepting to > > conduct myself truthfully and humbly. > > > > Well, it my time to be humble and apologize for my > > "no-brainer" > > comments on Bush victory. Even though the election > > was so close, I > > still feel that "culturally" Bush had better chances > > to win. > > Likewise, I feel Hillary Clinton will definitely run > > and win in 2008. > > > > See Narasimha, it just feels too weird using > > Jyotisha to predict > > elections. > > > > --Jyotish should be used to reveal/understand karmic > > signatures in > > the horoscope of people who've exhausted EVERY > > effort their free will > > provided them in seeking happiness and peace. > > > > Just look at my own life--Using Jyotish, I've > > understood that my > > karmic calling is to be kind and helpful to young > > women and I'm > > attempting to do just that--couple of months back HR > > recruited a > > totally incompetent female assistant for me and > > rather than > > recommending her termination, I'm helping her learn > > the ropes. > > > > Advising people on the karmic signatures and karmic > > goals in their > > horoscopes/lives should be the goal of Jyotish, not > > predicting > > elections for a few moments of cyber-glory. > > > > Mukund > > > > > > > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" > > <pvr@c...> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste friends, > > > > > > Congratulations to all those who predicted that > > Bush would win! > > > Also, my humble thanks to those of you who > > congratulated me and > > > others who predicted a Bush victory. > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > Dear Mukund, > > > > > > > Predicting a Bush win was a no-brainer. I > > predicted a Bush win > > > > without looking at any of the correct or > > incorrect charts > > floating > > > > around. > > > > > > You stubbornly keep saying that predicting a Bush > > victory was a no- > > > brainer. That is so untrue. All the respected > > opinion polls before > > > the election showed that the race was a > > statistical deadheat. Some > > > showed Bush in the lead and some showed Kerry in > > the lead, but the > > > lead was within the margin of error in almost all > > cases. After all, > > > had 150,000 people (2%) voted differently in Ohio, > > Kerry would've > > > won. So, until yesterday, Bush and Kerry both had > > a realistic > > chance > > > (almost 50-50). Your view is based on emotions and > > personal biases > > > rather than objective analysis of available data. > > > > > > Your attempt to take credit away from the few of > > us who predicted a > > > Bush victory is very unfortunate. > > > > > > > Ya, if someone had predicted a Kerry win and > > Kerry had indeed > > won, > > > > then it would be a cause to congrajulate as well > > as learn the > > > > technique used by the successful astrologer. > > > > > > This is unfair. Those of us who predicted Bush > > victory deserve to > > be > > > congratulated too. > > > > > > As for learning the technique, I gave several > > technical reasons > > > behind my prediction. > > > > > > You can read my pointers at: > > > > > > > > > vedic astrology/message/45170 > > > > > > I predicted that Bush would gain decisive momentum > > in the last week > > > (which is perhaps correct looking at all the > > polls). I did not give > > > the reasons behind it (I will do so later). But > > the reasons behind > > > the basic prediction that Bush would prevail were > > given. > > > > > > > Well, here is my new prediction NOT based on > > Jyotish--Hillary > > > Clinton > > > > will run for president in 2008 and will have a > > grand victory over > > > her > > > > republican opponent. > > > > > > In the same post mentioned above, I mentioned 2008 > > election as one > > > of the factors behind my prediction of a Bush > > victory this time. I > > > did look at the charts of Al Gore and Hillary > > Clinton for 2008. I > > > tend to think that Al Gore has a brilliant chance > > in 2008. However, > > > there is still more time to make that prediction! > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > Dear Sundeep, > > > > > > > That said, I must say that only one person's > > prediction stands > > > out - > > > > specifically "nameisego"'s prediction. Because > > he predicted the > > re- > > > > emergence of Osama before the win, and it can > > easily be argued > > > that > > > > it was the emergence of Osama that immediately > > refocussed the > > > > Americans on security issues, where Bush is the > > clear leader. > > That > > > > prediction is statistically significant, i.e. > > not easily > > > dismissable > > > > as being a chance occurrence or a fluke. But > > "nameisego" wasnt > > > even > > > > using SJC techniques was he? > > > > > > Normally, I don't like commenting on another > > person's performance. > > > But, because you are exggerating one person's > > correct prediction, > > > belittling others and commenting on "SJC > > techniques" all at the > > same > > > time, I feel compelled to point out one simple > > fact. > > > > > > The exact words of "nameisego" were: "A SURPRISE > > IN THE FORM OF MAY > > > BE OSAMA BIN LADEN'S CAPTURE or an Attack by so > > called > > > FUNDAMENTALISTS and George Bush's actions there of > > would swing the > > > scales in his favour". Neither happened. While > > nameisego deserves > > > credit for expecting a clear mandate, he did not > > get it right > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > Check out the new Front Page. > www. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2004 Report Share Posted November 6, 2004 Dear Prabodh Namaste Thank you for your reply. I agree with you in that Intuition plays a big part as well. But I find it hard to convince myself that it is only intuition and nothing else. The reasons I gave in my opinion applies to learned and gifted astrologers as well. I think even gifted astrologers won't agree or come to a consensus on something as fundamental as effects of retrogression. It seems people don't even agree with Parashara, considered father of astrology on exaltation / debilitation points of Rahu/ketu. I attribute this to incomplete subject and personal beliefs / experience. I am not sure that all the great astrologers would translate the ancient texts for modern world in a consistent way. There is no reference. Again it is all based on his experience and source of knowledge. Coming to knowledge about the event being predicted, it is probably not necessary if you are just going to predict who will win or lose. To predict something very specific like what causes his downfall requires knowledge about the event. Just my thoughts. Thanks Kumanan vedic astrology, "amolmandar" <amolmandar> wrote: > > Dear Kumanan Namaste > > Here are my some of wild thoughts about why astrologers fail or > interpret differently? > > You attributed to > > Incomplete subject > Lost information because of Gurukulam mode of teaching > Techniques used - Lack of knowledge of certain techniques, Using > Wrong techniques or experimenting with new techniques > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the modern world > Last but not least is deep knowledge about the event that you are > predicting > > Lets take one by one, > > Jyotish as incomplete subject is not a very strong argument as it > surfaces only when jyotisha fails. What who gets it correct? Does > that mean correct predictions with incomplete knowledge? It is a > very popular argument regarding Vedic Jyotish that most of the > ancient text are not avialble in totality and hence at times > astrologer may fail in his predictions. Even if we take this > argument I think we have enough available ancient text to predict > the correct event provided we apply it correctly. The event which > otherwise will be 50% right or wrong based on only two persons is > not a matter of testing our astrological knowledge. > > Lost information is no more a concern now a days when people are > coming up with new theory like HP and all. People are able to > predict moreorless corectly with these new ways of predictions as > well which does not have solid ancient base. > > As regards to techenique used again there is a problem. The person > who is using it makes or breaks the case. A novice like you and me > if we use a technique, we may apply it wrongly without knowing it. > But when Gurus fail do we have to believe that Gurus as well apply > the theory wrongly? Certainly not. > > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the modern world > this is again a point worth for novice like you and me but not the > heros in this fields. Most of the people who predicted correctly are > shishyas of our main Guru but the main Guru has failed this time. > Does that mean the shishyas are applying technique in consistent > manner and not the Guru. It is basically matter of performing your > Sadahna correctly. See Sanjay ji tried to say about the event when > there was no 'enviornmnet' for the event. He predicted because of > his knowledge and power of Intution. > > Intution comes because of Sadhana. Possibly he was little bit short > of his Sadhana now a days and may require to concentrate on that > aspect . I am sure who predicted it correct by whatever method must > be strong in their Intution and daily Sadhana. > > Knowledge of the event which we are predicting is the most dangerous > concern and rather biggest hurdle in astrology. Sanjay ji predicted > about the event when he had no current knowledge about the moods and > happenings in the US elections. It was his unbiased opinion and > hence made purely on knowledge and Intution. His knowledge is > perfect but he was wrong in his final iterpretation bcause of > Intution. The number of astrological factors involved in causing an > event are somestimes discombobulating that one at times may find it > difficult to sort out the specific combination. Here comes the power > of astrologer called as Intution. Power of Intution makes the > astrolger to hit on the appropriate combination. This happens only > when the person is very pure in his/her Sadhana. When predictions > fail it is sure sign beyond doubt that he/she is failing in his/her > Sadhana. When Intution fails astrolger is forced to interpret the > knowledge in different manner and hence astrolger come up with > different interpretations as every astrolger has some element of > Insution inside him/her. > > So the gist is that those who fail or come up with different > interpretations about an event possibly because of power of > Intutution failing for them. > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Sapce. > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > Har Har Shankar > vedic astrology, Kumanan Rajamanikkam > <rkumanan> wrote: > > Hi Mukund, > > > > I just want to address one of your main concerns about > > why all astrologers don't predict the same thing? I > > understand your concern that this is affecting the > > image of Jyotish in general. This is one question I > > had in my mind before I started learning Jyotisha 6 > > weeks back. After getting to know more about Jyotisha > > I understood the reason why. > > > > Here is my belief. I attribute it to the following > > > > Incomplete subject > > Lost information because of Gurukulam mode of > > teaching > > Techniques used - Lack of knowledge of certain > > techniques, Using Wrong techniques or experimenting > > with new techniques > > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the > > modern world > > Last but not least is deep knowledge about the event > > that you are predicting > > > > Narasimha said it best. Astrology is an incomplete > > subject and we are all trying to understand it. We > > don't have all the sacred texts of Jyotisha. Jyotisha > > is part of Vedic knowledge and it is said that we have > > access to only a small percentage of Vedic knowledge. > > May be if we had access to all these ancient sacred > > texts, Jyotisha would have been a complete subject. > > Some information must have been lost because of > > Gurukulam mode of teaching. Gurukulam way of teaching > > ensured that the sacred knowledge of Jyotisha didn't > > end up in wrong hands. But unfortunately some > > information / wisdom / techniques could have been lost > > if a guru was not able to pass it on to his next > > generation. > > > > When you are dealing with an incomplete subject, > > controversies are bound to be prevalent because there > > is no authoritative reference from the creator. This > > results in different camps with different beliefs. > > Some people consider Sage Parashara's book as the > > ultimate. Some mix and match techniques from other > > ancient books. > > > > Some techniques are preserved as family secrets and > > they get passed from generation to generation. Some > > techniques are passed only through Guru - sishya > > relationship. Few astrologers are privileged to have > > access to these techniques. Other astrologers may > > never know it unless they come to know of it through > > other sources or through their own research and > > experience. > > > > An astrologer may be using a proven technique but for > > a wrong scenario unknowingly. Although he will get > > wiser over experience it is impossible in a life time > > to get it all right because the science of Jyotisha is > > an ocean. > > > > Some astrologers may be experimenting with new > > techniques such as "Rahu centric" theory. So the > > results of these new experimental techniques could be > > different from the other standard techniques. > > > > Interpretation of ancient text for the modern world > > might be different for different astrologers as well. > > This is largely done by experimentation and I don't > > think there is a consensus and not all the areas are > > covered yet. One example is how Narasimha said that > > Ketu could be attributed to conservativeness or > > values. If you think about it, it makes sense, since > > Ketu is associated with religion / spirituality. > > > > And lastly in my humble view, to predict an specific > > event and to translate the ancient text to the modern > > world correctly, you need to have a good knowledge > > about the event that you are predicting. For example > > when you are predicting the outcome of US election, it > > is essential that you are knowledged about the US > > culture, their beliefs, concerns and issues. That's > > the only way you can correctly translate the cause of > > why a presidential candidate would win or lose. This > > knowledge will be different for different astrologers > > as well. > > > > So if you take any learned astrologer, most of what he > > knows and follows will be right and some of them may > > not be right. It all depends on his guru, the books he > > read, his ancestral jyotisha knowledge, techniques > > that he believes in, how he interprets the ancient > > texts in a modern world and his knowledge of the event > > that he is predicting about. > > > > Clearly there is bound to be a difference between > > predictions of even learned and gifted astrologers. > > > > On a final note, if all learned astrologers arrive at > > the same conclusion based on a given chart than that > > means there is a systematic way of predicting things. > > If that is true then we can completely automate > > predictions through computer software and we don't > > need astrologers anymore. Fortunately or unfortunately > > it is not true. Systematic way of prediction is > > specific per astrologer based on his beliefs not > > general consensus. > > > > Hats off to SJC, Sanjay Rath and Narasimha who have > > provided us a forum where we are able to analyze the > > techniques used in the predictions and learn why some > > techniques didn't give a correct result and why some > > did. This is definitely an environment where everybody > > can benefit from each other. Over the years we will > > all learn so much from both the good / bad predictions > > and get a better understanding of this complicated > > science. I am sure future will look thankfully to SJC. > > > > > > I am just a complete novice in Jyotisha and this is my > > first serious post. Please enlighten / pardon me if I > > am wrong. > > > > -Kumanan > > > > > > > > --- monmuk111 <monmuk111> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello Narasimha: > > > > > > Nice to hear from you. Ya, I re-read my posting > > > several times after > > > reading this note from you and it appears that I may > > > have > > > inadvertantly hurt the feelings of Jyotishas who > > > predicted a Bush > > > victory, I remember you predicted a close contest > > > and a Bush victory. > > > > > > I apologize for the insensitivity in my "Bush vs > > > Kerry" posting. > > > Well, that's Jyotish at work in my life--I've been > > > training myself to > > > evaluate my day to day actions in terms of them > > > being good or bad, > > > truthful or untruthful, egotistical or humble and am > > > attepting to > > > conduct myself truthfully and humbly. > > > > > > Well, it my time to be humble and apologize for my > > > "no-brainer" > > > comments on Bush victory. Even though the election > > > was so close, I > > > still feel that "culturally" Bush had better chances > > > to win. > > > Likewise, I feel Hillary Clinton will definitely run > > > and win in 2008. > > > > > > See Narasimha, it just feels too weird using > > > Jyotisha to predict > > > elections. > > > > > > --Jyotish should be used to reveal/understand karmic > > > signatures in > > > the horoscope of people who've exhausted EVERY > > > effort their free will > > > provided them in seeking happiness and peace. > > > > > > Just look at my own life--Using Jyotish, I've > > > understood that my > > > karmic calling is to be kind and helpful to young > > > women and I'm > > > attempting to do just that--couple of months back HR > > > recruited a > > > totally incompetent female assistant for me and > > > rather than > > > recommending her termination, I'm helping her learn > > > the ropes. > > > > > > Advising people on the karmic signatures and karmic > > > goals in their > > > horoscopes/lives should be the goal of Jyotish, not > > > predicting > > > elections for a few moments of cyber-glory. > > > > > > Mukund > > > > > > > > > > > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" > > > <pvr@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Namaste friends, > > > > > > > > Congratulations to all those who predicted that > > > Bush would win! > > > > Also, my humble thanks to those of you who > > > congratulated me and > > > > others who predicted a Bush victory. > > > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > > > Dear Mukund, > > > > > > > > > Predicting a Bush win was a no-brainer. I > > > predicted a Bush win > > > > > without looking at any of the correct or > > > incorrect charts > > > floating > > > > > around. > > > > > > > > You stubbornly keep saying that predicting a Bush > > > victory was a no- > > > > brainer. That is so untrue. All the respected > > > opinion polls before > > > > the election showed that the race was a > > > statistical deadheat. Some > > > > showed Bush in the lead and some showed Kerry in > > > the lead, but the > > > > lead was within the margin of error in almost all > > > cases. After all, > > > > had 150,000 people (2%) voted differently in Ohio, > > > Kerry would've > > > > won. So, until yesterday, Bush and Kerry both had > > > a realistic > > > chance > > > > (almost 50-50). Your view is based on emotions and > > > personal biases > > > > rather than objective analysis of available data. > > > > > > > > Your attempt to take credit away from the few of > > > us who predicted a > > > > Bush victory is very unfortunate. > > > > > > > > > Ya, if someone had predicted a Kerry win and > > > Kerry had indeed > > > won, > > > > > then it would be a cause to congrajulate as well > > > as learn the > > > > > technique used by the successful astrologer. > > > > > > > > This is unfair. Those of us who predicted Bush > > > victory deserve to > > > be > > > > congratulated too. > > > > > > > > As for learning the technique, I gave several > > > technical reasons > > > > behind my prediction. > > > > > > > > You can read my pointers at: > > > > > > > > > > > > > vedic astrology/message/45170 > > > > > > > > I predicted that Bush would gain decisive momentum > > > in the last week > > > > (which is perhaps correct looking at all the > > > polls). I did not give > > > > the reasons behind it (I will do so later). But > > > the reasons behind > > > > the basic prediction that Bush would prevail were > > > given. > > > > > > > > > Well, here is my new prediction NOT based on > > > Jyotish--Hillary > > > > Clinton > > > > > will run for president in 2008 and will have a > > > grand victory over > > > > her > > > > > republican opponent. > > > > > > > > In the same post mentioned above, I mentioned 2008 > > > election as one > > > > of the factors behind my prediction of a Bush > > > victory this time. I > > > > did look at the charts of Al Gore and Hillary > > > Clinton for 2008. I > > > > tend to think that Al Gore has a brilliant chance > > > in 2008. However, > > > > there is still more time to make that prediction! > > > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > > > Dear Sundeep, > > > > > > > > > That said, I must say that only one person's > > > prediction stands > > > > out - > > > > > specifically "nameisego"'s prediction. Because > > > he predicted the > > > re- > > > > > emergence of Osama before the win, and it can > > > easily be argued > > > > that > > > > > it was the emergence of Osama that immediately > > > refocussed the > > > > > Americans on security issues, where Bush is the > > > clear leader. > > > That > > > > > prediction is statistically significant, i.e. > > > not easily > > > > dismissable > > > > > as being a chance occurrence or a fluke. But > > > "nameisego" wasnt > > > > even > > > > > using SJC techniques was he? > > > > > > > > Normally, I don't like commenting on another > > > person's performance. > > > > But, because you are exggerating one person's > > > correct prediction, > > > > belittling others and commenting on "SJC > > > techniques" all at the > > > same > > > > time, I feel compelled to point out one simple > > > fact. > > > > > > > > The exact words of "nameisego" were: "A SURPRISE > > > IN THE FORM OF MAY > > > > BE OSAMA BIN LADEN'S CAPTURE or an Attack by so > > > called > > > > FUNDAMENTALISTS and George Bush's actions there of > > > would swing the > > > > scales in his favour". Neither happened. While > > > nameisego deserves > > > > credit for expecting a clear mandate, he did not > > > get it right > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Check out the new Front Page. > > www. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2004 Report Share Posted November 6, 2004 Dear Shri Kumanan ji and Prabodh ji It was interesting to read your mails. Let me express my humble views. One correct prediction does not make one a great astrologer nor a bad one will turn learned scholars like Pandit Rath or Chandrashekhar ji as less learned. With intution one may predict a yes or no question.But explaining events consistently using the same yardstick is what is lacking. When one uses numerous techniques one can be happy always - because one has the advantage of leaning the excuses for failure on one of the techniques. I am a beginner but my humble opinion is any astrologer should be able to understand and explain events based on a standard technique consistently over a period of time.Say some years.Without this no one is going to get any objectivity. I have seen many learned members going for different systems like KP and what not - as they are unable to time events consistently. I beleive everyone wants some formula to predict correct.Unfortunately they are unable to find that magical formula after experimenting with numerous systems and start abusing the system. Knowing numerous techniques is always good to cross check.But how useful is it if one is not even a master of one technique?I mean if a person cannot consistently explain events using - say the most accepted Vomshottari dasha what is the use of employing other techniques. Thus i beleive one may employ the same technique over a number of years using the standard basic rules as advised by parashara.In todays world there is a false impression that the more complex techniques you employ the great you are.Unfortunately in a divine science like astrology it is not complexities that matter rather how you understand and employ the basics properly.I am a student and i know it will take many years for me to understand atleast the basics. As learned astrologers advise just try with dasha and antardasha alone for some years and then start using pratyantar dasha. why? you may be able to 'explain' things well at pratyantara level but the dasha and antara may not match.Here we are under an assumption and beleive our prediction is correct.Next time we fail.And we use another dasha and succeed and next time we fail ...it is a neverending loop.One should try employing the same technique for many years applying same yardsticks and basic rules. This may help astrology to be accepted as objective. Saturn in Karka in the case of Bush is again proving to be a position giver,especially when in lagna.Antardasha lord jupiter is 3/11 with dasha lord.Saturn in transit is also in karka.Kendradhipati dosha of saturn is nullified due to kendra ownership.I have to learn but a learned scholar will definitely be able to explain things better purely using Vimshottari.It is only a matter of applying oneself and employing all the basics properly. Let all of us be blessed with true knowledge! Thanks Pradeep vedic astrology, "Kumanan" <rkumanan> wrote: > > Dear Prabodh Namaste > > Thank you for your reply. I agree with you in that Intuition plays a > big part as well. > > But I find it hard to convince myself that it is only intuition and > nothing else. The reasons I gave in my opinion applies to learned > and gifted astrologers as well. > > I think even gifted astrologers won't agree or come to a consensus > on something as fundamental as effects of retrogression. It seems > people don't even agree with Parashara, considered father of > astrology on exaltation / debilitation points of Rahu/ketu. I > attribute this to incomplete subject and personal beliefs / > experience. > > I am not sure that all the great astrologers would translate the > ancient texts for modern world in a consistent way. There is no > reference. Again it is all based on his experience and source of > knowledge. > > Coming to knowledge about the event being predicted, it is probably > not necessary if you are just going to predict who will win or lose. > To predict something very specific like what causes his downfall > requires knowledge about the event. > > Just my thoughts. > > Thanks > Kumanan > > vedic astrology, "amolmandar" > <amolmandar> wrote: > > > > Dear Kumanan Namaste > > > > Here are my some of wild thoughts about why astrologers fail or > > interpret differently? > > > > You attributed to > > > > Incomplete subject > > Lost information because of Gurukulam mode of teaching > > Techniques used - Lack of knowledge of certain techniques, Using > > Wrong techniques or experimenting with new techniques > > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the modern world > > Last but not least is deep knowledge about the event that you are > > predicting > > > > Lets take one by one, > > > > Jyotish as incomplete subject is not a very strong argument as it > > surfaces only when jyotisha fails. What who gets it correct? Does > > that mean correct predictions with incomplete knowledge? It is a > > very popular argument regarding Vedic Jyotish that most of the > > ancient text are not avialble in totality and hence at times > > astrologer may fail in his predictions. Even if we take this > > argument I think we have enough available ancient text to predict > > the correct event provided we apply it correctly. The event which > > otherwise will be 50% right or wrong based on only two persons is > > not a matter of testing our astrological knowledge. > > > > Lost information is no more a concern now a days when people are > > coming up with new theory like HP and all. People are able to > > predict moreorless corectly with these new ways of predictions as > > well which does not have solid ancient base. > > > > As regards to techenique used again there is a problem. The person > > who is using it makes or breaks the case. A novice like you and me > > if we use a technique, we may apply it wrongly without knowing it. > > But when Gurus fail do we have to believe that Gurus as well apply > > the theory wrongly? Certainly not. > > > > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the modern world > > this is again a point worth for novice like you and me but not the > > heros in this fields. Most of the people who predicted correctly > are > > shishyas of our main Guru but the main Guru has failed this time. > > Does that mean the shishyas are applying technique in consistent > > manner and not the Guru. It is basically matter of performing your > > Sadahna correctly. See Sanjay ji tried to say about the event when > > there was no 'enviornmnet' for the event. He predicted because of > > his knowledge and power of Intution. > > > > Intution comes because of Sadhana. Possibly he was little bit > short > > of his Sadhana now a days and may require to concentrate on that > > aspect . I am sure who predicted it correct by whatever method > must > > be strong in their Intution and daily Sadhana. > > > > Knowledge of the event which we are predicting is the most > dangerous > > concern and rather biggest hurdle in astrology. Sanjay ji > predicted > > about the event when he had no current knowledge about the moods > and > > happenings in the US elections. It was his unbiased opinion and > > hence made purely on knowledge and Intution. His knowledge is > > perfect but he was wrong in his final iterpretation bcause of > > Intution. The number of astrological factors involved in causing > an > > event are somestimes discombobulating that one at times may find > it > > difficult to sort out the specific combination. Here comes the > power > > of astrologer called as Intution. Power of Intution makes the > > astrolger to hit on the appropriate combination. This happens only > > when the person is very pure in his/her Sadhana. When predictions > > fail it is sure sign beyond doubt that he/she is failing in > his/her > > Sadhana. When Intution fails astrolger is forced to interpret the > > knowledge in different manner and hence astrolger come up with > > different interpretations as every astrolger has some element of > > Insution inside him/her. > > > > So the gist is that those who fail or come up with different > > interpretations about an event possibly because of power of > > Intutution failing for them. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Sapce. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vedic astrology, Kumanan Rajamanikkam > > <rkumanan> wrote: > > > Hi Mukund, > > > > > > I just want to address one of your main concerns about > > > why all astrologers don't predict the same thing? I > > > understand your concern that this is affecting the > > > image of Jyotish in general. This is one question I > > > had in my mind before I started learning Jyotisha 6 > > > weeks back. After getting to know more about Jyotisha > > > I understood the reason why. > > > > > > Here is my belief. I attribute it to the following > > > > > > Incomplete subject > > > Lost information because of Gurukulam mode of > > > teaching > > > Techniques used - Lack of knowledge of certain > > > techniques, Using Wrong techniques or experimenting > > > with new techniques > > > Inconsistent interpretation of ancient texts for the > > > modern world > > > Last but not least is deep knowledge about the event > > > that you are predicting > > > > > > Narasimha said it best. Astrology is an incomplete > > > subject and we are all trying to understand it. We > > > don't have all the sacred texts of Jyotisha. Jyotisha > > > is part of Vedic knowledge and it is said that we have > > > access to only a small percentage of Vedic knowledge. > > > May be if we had access to all these ancient sacred > > > texts, Jyotisha would have been a complete subject. > > > Some information must have been lost because of > > > Gurukulam mode of teaching. Gurukulam way of teaching > > > ensured that the sacred knowledge of Jyotisha didn't > > > end up in wrong hands. But unfortunately some > > > information / wisdom / techniques could have been lost > > > if a guru was not able to pass it on to his next > > > generation. > > > > > > When you are dealing with an incomplete subject, > > > controversies are bound to be prevalent because there > > > is no authoritative reference from the creator. This > > > results in different camps with different beliefs. > > > Some people consider Sage Parashara's book as the > > > ultimate. Some mix and match techniques from other > > > ancient books. > > > > > > Some techniques are preserved as family secrets and > > > they get passed from generation to generation. Some > > > techniques are passed only through Guru - sishya > > > relationship. Few astrologers are privileged to have > > > access to these techniques. Other astrologers may > > > never know it unless they come to know of it through > > > other sources or through their own research and > > > experience. > > > > > > An astrologer may be using a proven technique but for > > > a wrong scenario unknowingly. Although he will get > > > wiser over experience it is impossible in a life time > > > to get it all right because the science of Jyotisha is > > > an ocean. > > > > > > Some astrologers may be experimenting with new > > > techniques such as "Rahu centric" theory. So the > > > results of these new experimental techniques could be > > > different from the other standard techniques. > > > > > > Interpretation of ancient text for the modern world > > > might be different for different astrologers as well. > > > This is largely done by experimentation and I don't > > > think there is a consensus and not all the areas are > > > covered yet. One example is how Narasimha said that > > > Ketu could be attributed to conservativeness or > > > values. If you think about it, it makes sense, since > > > Ketu is associated with religion / spirituality. > > > > > > And lastly in my humble view, to predict an specific > > > event and to translate the ancient text to the modern > > > world correctly, you need to have a good knowledge > > > about the event that you are predicting. For example > > > when you are predicting the outcome of US election, it > > > is essential that you are knowledged about the US > > > culture, their beliefs, concerns and issues. That's > > > the only way you can correctly translate the cause of > > > why a presidential candidate would win or lose. This > > > knowledge will be different for different astrologers > > > as well. > > > > > > So if you take any learned astrologer, most of what he > > > knows and follows will be right and some of them may > > > not be right. It all depends on his guru, the books he > > > read, his ancestral jyotisha knowledge, techniques > > > that he believes in, how he interprets the ancient > > > texts in a modern world and his knowledge of the event > > > that he is predicting about. > > > > > > Clearly there is bound to be a difference between > > > predictions of even learned and gifted astrologers. > > > > > > On a final note, if all learned astrologers arrive at > > > the same conclusion based on a given chart than that > > > means there is a systematic way of predicting things. > > > If that is true then we can completely automate > > > predictions through computer software and we don't > > > need astrologers anymore. Fortunately or unfortunately > > > it is not true. Systematic way of prediction is > > > specific per astrologer based on his beliefs not > > > general consensus. > > > > > > Hats off to SJC, Sanjay Rath and Narasimha who have > > > provided us a forum where we are able to analyze the > > > techniques used in the predictions and learn why some > > > techniques didn't give a correct result and why some > > > did. This is definitely an environment where everybody > > > can benefit from each other. Over the years we will > > > all learn so much from both the good / bad predictions > > > and get a better understanding of this complicated > > > science. I am sure future will look thankfully to SJC. > > > > > > > > > I am just a complete novice in Jyotisha and this is my > > > first serious post. Please enlighten / pardon me if I > > > am wrong. > > > > > > -Kumanan > > > > > > > > > > > > --- monmuk111 <monmuk111> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Narasimha: > > > > > > > > Nice to hear from you. Ya, I re-read my posting > > > > several times after > > > > reading this note from you and it appears that I may > > > > have > > > > inadvertantly hurt the feelings of Jyotishas who > > > > predicted a Bush > > > > victory, I remember you predicted a close contest > > > > and a Bush victory. > > > > > > > > I apologize for the insensitivity in my "Bush vs > > > > Kerry" posting. > > > > Well, that's Jyotish at work in my life--I've been > > > > training myself to > > > > evaluate my day to day actions in terms of them > > > > being good or bad, > > > > truthful or untruthful, egotistical or humble and am > > > > attepting to > > > > conduct myself truthfully and humbly. > > > > > > > > Well, it my time to be humble and apologize for my > > > > "no-brainer" > > > > comments on Bush victory. Even though the election > > > > was so close, I > > > > still feel that "culturally" Bush had better chances > > > > to win. > > > > Likewise, I feel Hillary Clinton will definitely run > > > > and win in 2008. > > > > > > > > See Narasimha, it just feels too weird using > > > > Jyotisha to predict > > > > elections. > > > > > > > > --Jyotish should be used to reveal/understand karmic > > > > signatures in > > > > the horoscope of people who've exhausted EVERY > > > > effort their free will > > > > provided them in seeking happiness and peace. > > > > > > > > Just look at my own life--Using Jyotish, I've > > > > understood that my > > > > karmic calling is to be kind and helpful to young > > > > women and I'm > > > > attempting to do just that--couple of months back HR > > > > recruited a > > > > totally incompetent female assistant for me and > > > > rather than > > > > recommending her termination, I'm helping her learn > > > > the ropes. > > > > > > > > Advising people on the karmic signatures and karmic > > > > goals in their > > > > horoscopes/lives should be the goal of Jyotish, not > > > > predicting > > > > elections for a few moments of cyber-glory. > > > > > > > > Mukund > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" > > > > <pvr@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namaste friends, > > > > > > > > > > Congratulations to all those who predicted that > > > > Bush would win! > > > > > Also, my humble thanks to those of you who > > > > congratulated me and > > > > > others who predicted a Bush victory. > > > > > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mukund, > > > > > > > > > > > Predicting a Bush win was a no-brainer. I > > > > predicted a Bush win > > > > > > without looking at any of the correct or > > > > incorrect charts > > > > floating > > > > > > around. > > > > > > > > > > You stubbornly keep saying that predicting a Bush > > > > victory was a no- > > > > > brainer. That is so untrue. All the respected > > > > opinion polls before > > > > > the election showed that the race was a > > > > statistical deadheat. Some > > > > > showed Bush in the lead and some showed Kerry in > > > > the lead, but the > > > > > lead was within the margin of error in almost all > > > > cases. After all, > > > > > had 150,000 people (2%) voted differently in Ohio, > > > > Kerry would've > > > > > won. So, until yesterday, Bush and Kerry both had > > > > a realistic > > > > chance > > > > > (almost 50-50). Your view is based on emotions and > > > > personal biases > > > > > rather than objective analysis of available data. > > > > > > > > > > Your attempt to take credit away from the few of > > > > us who predicted a > > > > > Bush victory is very unfortunate. > > > > > > > > > > > Ya, if someone had predicted a Kerry win and > > > > Kerry had indeed > > > > won, > > > > > > then it would be a cause to congrajulate as well > > > > as learn the > > > > > > technique used by the successful astrologer. > > > > > > > > > > This is unfair. Those of us who predicted Bush > > > > victory deserve to > > > > be > > > > > congratulated too. > > > > > > > > > > As for learning the technique, I gave several > > > > technical reasons > > > > > behind my prediction. > > > > > > > > > > You can read my pointers at: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vedic astrology/message/45170 > > > > > > > > > > I predicted that Bush would gain decisive momentum > > > > in the last week > > > > > (which is perhaps correct looking at all the > > > > polls). I did not give > > > > > the reasons behind it (I will do so later). But > > > > the reasons behind > > > > > the basic prediction that Bush would prevail were > > > > given. > > > > > > > > > > > Well, here is my new prediction NOT based on > > > > Jyotish--Hillary > > > > > Clinton > > > > > > will run for president in 2008 and will have a > > > > grand victory over > > > > > her > > > > > > republican opponent. > > > > > > > > > > In the same post mentioned above, I mentioned 2008 > > > > election as one > > > > > of the factors behind my prediction of a Bush > > > > victory this time. I > > > > > did look at the charts of Al Gore and Hillary > > > > Clinton for 2008. I > > > > > tend to think that Al Gore has a brilliant chance > > > > in 2008. However, > > > > > there is still more time to make that prediction! > > > > > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > > > > > Dear Sundeep, > > > > > > > > > > > That said, I must say that only one person's > > > > prediction stands > > > > > out - > > > > > > specifically "nameisego"'s prediction. Because > > > > he predicted the > > > > re- > > > > > > emergence of Osama before the win, and it can > > > > easily be argued > > > > > that > > > > > > it was the emergence of Osama that immediately > > > > refocussed the > > > > > > Americans on security issues, where Bush is the > > > > clear leader. > > > > That > > > > > > prediction is statistically significant, i.e. > > > > not easily > > > > > dismissable > > > > > > as being a chance occurrence or a fluke. But > > > > "nameisego" wasnt > > > > > even > > > > > > using SJC techniques was he? > > > > > > > > > > Normally, I don't like commenting on another > > > > person's performance. > > > > > But, because you are exggerating one person's > > > > correct prediction, > > > > > belittling others and commenting on "SJC > > > > techniques" all at the > > > > same > > > > > time, I feel compelled to point out one simple > > > > fact. > > > > > > > > > > The exact words of "nameisego" were: "A SURPRISE > > > > IN THE FORM OF MAY > > > > > BE OSAMA BIN LADEN'S CAPTURE or an Attack by so > > > > called > > > > > FUNDAMENTALISTS and George Bush's actions there of > > > > would swing the > > > > > scales in his favour". Neither happened. While > > > > nameisego deserves > > > > > credit for expecting a clear mandate, he did not > > > > get it right > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Check out the new <a href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=1&k=front%20page" onmouseover="window.status='Front Page'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">Front Page</a>. > > > www. 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.