Guest guest Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Dear Kanak, Since you are using Shri.Kuppu Ganapathi's KPDP regularly, you might be in a position to see if any of the 10 aspects considered for matching is more or less important based on experience. In your recent posting you said that aspect 4 is not that important for a valid reason. If you (and others?) have such experience to share, you could bring this to the attention of Shri.Kuppu Ganapathi so he can revisit the matching criteria and add or delete aspects. Or at least assign unequal weightage. Regards, Rangarajan , " Kanak Bosmia " <kanbosastro@h...> wrote: > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Dear Rangrajan ji, I am ask Kuppu ji somany time but i am sorry to say he never give any answer.i am self learned man and if he dont want to share his knowladge with us its ok. No one aspect is important individualy but in my opinion total % is more then 60 and specialy aspect no:10 is must more then 51( border line) is so-so matching .but if you found 85%in aspect no 10 and allover persent is 65 but both or one have dual marriage yoga or short life then it is not use full.only this 10 aspect is not sufficient.we have to judge all over chart also with this . i am read in any KP books i dont remember name) While comparing the horoscopes of bride and bridegroom, how to predict that this boy will marry only this girl or whether this girl will marry only this boy:-[a] At the time of matching If either is Running “A” Dasa “B” Bhukthi and “C” Anthra and note whether A, B, C are the R.P. at the time of birth of the other. The Planets deposited in the constellation of the above A, B, C Planets will be the R.P. at the time of birth of the other. Either (a) or (b) above should be there as per the dictum of our Guru and it is a certainty and in no case it will fail but this rule not work for me i have data of cuple who have about 85% marks in aspect no:10 but marriage not took place. i have a more then 350 data of matching of my cliant. regards kanak>"Rangarajan Krishnamoorthy" <ranga> > > Horoscope Matching - Experience>Wed, 27 Jul 2005 23:49:44 -0000>>Dear Kanak,>Since you are using Shri.Kuppu Ganapathi's KPDP regularly, you might>be in a position to see if any of the 10 aspects considered for>matching is more or less important based on experience. In your recent>posting you said that aspect 4 is not that important for a valid>reason. If you (and others?) have such experience to share, you could>bring this to the attention of Shri.Kuppu Ganapathi so he can revisit>the matching criteria and add or delete aspects. Or at least assign>unequal weightage.>>Regards,>Rangarajan> , "Kanak Bosmia" <kanbosastro@h...>>wrote:> >>> Get the NEW version of MSN Messenger with Video Conversation - it's FREE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Dear Kanak, Thank you for sharing your experience. Regards, Rangarajan , " Kanak Bosmia " <kanbosastro@h...> wrote: > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Dear Rangarajan, When you compare the poruthams individually and KPDP rule,there are difficulties in reconciliation. The best convenience is chose which appears more reasonable,after prelimnary checks on the charts as whole.the lagnas, moon jup,sat,mars etc. Plenty more live cases of known personalities need to be scrutinised,to arrive at factual position.It may end up like BOT rectn. Regards, Satish -- In , " Rangarajan Krishnamoorthy " <ranga@m...> wrote: > Dear Kanak, > Since you are using Shri.Kuppu Ganapathi's KPDP regularly, you might > be in a position to see if any of the 10 aspects considered for > matching is more or less important based on experience. In your recent > posting you said that aspect 4 is not that important for a valid > reason. If you (and others?) have such experience to share, you could > bring this to the attention of Shri.Kuppu Ganapathi so he can revisit > the matching criteria and add or delete aspects. Or at least assign > unequal weightage. > > Regards, > Rangarajan > , " Kanak Bosmia " <kanbosastro@h...> > wrote: > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Dear Kanak, It's worthy to note that stero-type saying of apply RPs whenever a doubt may not work in this matter of matching. Regards, tw , " Kanak Bosmia " <kanbosastro@h...> wrote: > 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.