discussion continued----- [ dr. rahul/ mr. nagesh ]

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Rahul and Mr. Nagesh,

Hope both of you are fine.

I want to put a understanding of mine before both of you in connection to the discussion took place on the role of sub of the sub lord.

From the discussion, i have understood that for a specific significance as per querry, only the 4 step theory should be taken . For the yes/no, sub of sublord should be seen but the 'significance of that "sub" of sublord' should not be added to that sub-lord in question.

Am I correct?

Because , In the astrosecrets part 1 , the writter has taken the 4 step theory + sub of sub-lord significance + planet conjoined with the sub lord + planet aspecting the sub lord + nodes sig [ if involved]. After taking everything into account he says that, the sig of the sub-lord in question should be understood.

Please clearify.

 

with regards.anurodh.Anurodh Kumar C1917 mini LIG Raja JI Puram LucknowU.P.-226017

E mail-

anurodh1, sampark_anurodhDo you ?

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Guest guest]

Dear Anurodh,

we all should examine this condition in each and every chart that we

study. this is in an evolution stage.

in the 4 steps, the first 2 steps tell us what event will occur and

the last 2 steps tell us what wil be the effect of the event- benefic

or malefic.

many charts go wrong when we consider all the 4 steps for event

signification.

what is your analysis?

1) getting all the 4 steps for event signification gives best results

or

2) getting only first two steps for event signification gives

accurate results

 

i hereby request all the members to give the feedback.

thank you,

dr.rahul.

 

l , Anurodh Kumar <anurodh1> wrote:

>

> Dear Dr. Rahul and Mr. Nagesh,

>

> Hope both of you are fine.

>

>

> I want to put a understanding of mine before both of you in

connection to the discussion took place on the role of sub of the sub

lord.

>

> From the discussion, i have understood that for a specific

significance as per querry, only the 4 step theory should be taken .

For the yes/no, sub of sublord should be seen but the 'significance

of that " sub " of sublord' should not be added to that sub-lord in

question.

>

>

> Am I correct?

>

> Because , In the astrosecrets part 1 , the writter has taken the 4

step theory + sub of sub-lord significance + planet conjoined with

the sub lord + planet aspecting the sub lord + nodes sig [ if

involved]. After taking everything into account he says that, the sig

of the sub-lord in question should be understood.

>

> Please clearify.

>

>

>

> with regards.

> anurodh.

>

>

>

> Anurodh Kumar

> C1917 mini LIG

> Raja JI Puram

> Lucknow

> U.P.-226017

>

> E mail-

>

> anurodh1@r..., sampark_anurodh@i...

>

>

>

>

>

> Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now