Re: Which system is better. The KP or the 4 Step ?

Options
o

tw853
o o

Posted By:

Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:42 pm |

o o o

<< First < Prev Next > Last >>

dear sunil gondhalekar, > 1.there is no fixed rule to select Sookshma in 4 step theory the chain is completed in DBA only but to find more closer period sokshma is considered. > 2.confirming of cuspal sublord by RP is as per guidelines > given by KSK in his 3rd reader. It may have been noticed , that ruling planets depend, on place, time, date of studying the chart. There is very possibilities that these will change , when same chart is studies by number of astrologers at different places and time. Then how are you going overcome this plausible error in using ruling planets? You will be taught how to fix the time of an event without using ruling planets. -English translated 4 step lecture nptes page 2 the main essence of this theory is to judge the events without help of RP. i have never denied the efficacy of RP ,but my experiece says that RP will not support to everybody at everytime. 1.i dont take RP for selecting sooksma dasa but i advise to take RP in case if it is needed.RP are to be treated as "in case of emengency"level. Q 1: could you kindly clarify how the above can be reconciled?

3.the method of confirming cuspal sublord for relevant house was used by late Hasbe guruji and it was his practice which i have seen many times.He also was not changing the birth time. i have seen him to confirm cuspal sublord first and then only he gives prediction,but he never recast the horoscope.when i queried him about this then he told me that it is not necessary to recast horoscope because when we judge

the other matter of the same native then again we will confirm the related cuspal sublord. thats why i also dont recast the horoscope again. Q.2: would it not mean using the different TOBs for different matters for the 'same natal' chart?

4.retro theory doesnt work in horary is experienced by many astrologers.there are many examples for this.anyone can refer the articles on this subject in my Diwali-2009 magazine on page no.46 and 69. whereas this fits in transit which is also experienced by 4 step followers..the success rate is again a debatable issue and i dont want to enter in it. more importance is given for retrograde planet in horary by our KSK but my eperience is that we are not getting results out of this theory regarding this retrograde planets,i used to discuss this matter with our guruji,late jyotindra hasbe.he told me the theory is under observation i dont use this theory in my 4 step but this is used only when we check transit of DBA swami. i dont consider it (retrograde planet) in natal as well as horary but i consider retrograde planets effects in considering transit of DBA swami. the retrogression results are to be seen in transit planets and not in natal planets.

Q.3: it is better view that retrogression in horary is not yet conclusie. it is still in the process of collecting horary cases including from the old A & As. What I'm really wondering is what would be the rationale to apply the retrogression in considering transit of DBA swami, if you are not getting results out of this theory?

5. about uranus,neptune,pluto..now they are counted in the study of 4 step theory.in my previous edition(1996)it was not included but in recent edition the study is added.the cases are already given in magazine also. Q.4: have you found any rule for Pluto to give any kind of positive result? because up to now what has been fond is only negative results.

6.only primary houses offers the result as per 4 step theory guidelines.sw designer kept both the options free for research purpose. ONLY THE STRONG (OR PRINCIPLE) SIGNIFIERS ARE CAPABLE OF GIVING THE RESULTS. THE SECONDARY SIGNIFICATOR ARE LIKE MIRAGE. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT RULE OF THE 4 STEP METHOd. -English translated 4 step lecture notes, page 5 Q.5: could you imagine how it would be complicated in some charts by including the 'unnecessary' secondary significators, as shown below? Hardeep ji, 28-02-1958, 17-20 PM, Ramgarh, Near Ranchi, Bihar, 23N38, 85E31, New KPA 23-10-58, Mars Dasa Bal 0Y-7M-16D 1.4. FOUR STEP PRIMARY SIGNIFICATORS (by KPAstro 3.0, 3.1, 3.2) Empty houses: 1, 2, 6, 8, 11, 12 Planets with no planets in their stars (+): Mo, Me, Ju, Sa Planets in own stars (*): Ra, Ke Me conj 7 Ju conj 3 Ve conj 6 Ra conj 3 Ke conj 9 Su conj Me Ra conj Ju Mo is aspected by Ju Ke is aspected by Ju Me aspects 1 Ju aspects 7, 9, 11 Ve aspects 12 Ra aspects 9 Ke aspects 3 Planet Ke*: 9; Sgl Ma(5); Asp by Ju(3, 8, Asp Mo[10, 12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 3; Cnj 9 Starlord of Ke is Ke*: 9; Sgl Ma(5); Asp by Ju(3, 8, Asp Mo[10, 12], Asp 7, Asp

9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 3; Cnj 9 Sublord of Ke is Sa+: 4; 6 Starlord of Sa is Ke*: 9; Sgl Ma(5); Asp by Ju(3, 8, Asp Mo[10, 12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 3; Cnj 9 Planet Ve: Cnj 6 Starlord of Ve is Su: 7; 1; Cnj Me(7, 2-11, Asp 1, Cnj 7) Sublord of Ve is Ve: Cnj 6 Starlord of Ve is Su: 7; 1; Cnj Me(7, 2-11, Asp 1, Cnj 7) Planet Su: Starlord of Su is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Sublord of Su is Ve: Cnj 6 Starlord of Ve is Su: 7-1; Cnj Me(7- 2-11, Asp 1, Cnj 7) Planet Mo+: 10-12; Asp by Ju(3-8, Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3) Starlord of Mo is Ma: 5 Sublord of Mo is Su: Starlord of Su is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Planet Ma: Starlord of Ma is Ve: 5; Asp 12; Cnj 6 Sublord of Ma is Me+: 7-2-11; Cnj Su(7-1); Asp 1; Cnj 7 Starlord of Me is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Planet Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Starlord of Ra is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Sublord of Ra is Sa+: 4; 6 Starlord of Sa is Ke*: 9; Sgl Ma(5); Asp by Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 3; Cnj 9 Planet Ju+: 3-8; Asp Mo(10-12); Asp 7; Asp 9; Asp 11; Cnj 3 Starlord of Ju is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Sublord of Ju is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Starlord of Ra is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Planet Sa+: 4; 6 Starlord of Sa is Ke*: 9; Sgl Ma(5); Asp by Ju(3, 8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7,

Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 3; Cnj 9 Sublord of Sa is Ve: Cnj 6 Starlord of Ve is Su: 7-1; Cnj Me(7-2-11, Asp 1, Cnj 7) Planet Me+: 7-2-11; Cnj Su(7-1); Asp 1; Cnj 7 Starlord of Me is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 Sublord of Me is Me+: 7-2-11; Cnj Su(7-1); Asp 1; Cnj 7 Starlord of Me is Ra*: 3; Sgl Ve(5, Asp 12, Cnj 6); Cnj Ju(3-8, Asp Mo[10-12], Asp 7, Asp 9, Asp 11, Cnj 3); Asp 9; Cnj 3 A NOTE ON FOUR STEP THEORY.doc (in File section) A STUDY NOTE ON FOUR STEP THEORY (Appendix 1) Thanks and regards, TW

--- In k_p_system@yahoogroups.com, "sunilalaka" <sunilalaka@...> wrote: > > dear members, > > following are the clarifications about 4 step theory > > 1.there is no fixed rule to select Sookshma as it depends > on chart to chart and the time of judgement..but mostly > Sookshma is selected for max.houses or for the remaining > house reqd in chain. > > 2.confirming of cuspal sublord by RP is as per guidelines > given by KSK in his 3rd reader. > > 3.the method of confirming cuspal sublord for relevant > house was used by late Hasbe guruji and it was his > practice which i have seen many times.He also was not > changing the birth time. > > 4.retro theory doesnt work in horary is experienced by > many astrologers.there are many examples for this.anyone > can refer the articles on this subject in my Diwali-2009 > magazine on page no.46 and 69. > whereas this fits in transit which is also experienced > by 4 step followers..the success rate is again a debatable > issue and i dont want to enter in it.

> > 5.about uranus,neptune,pluto is research done by me since > last 7-8 years and found to give correct results.mr.shyam > from pune is realising this factor.he was put his query > in forum 2-3 months back.i have experincing the results > and published in my magazine and now followers are also > looking at these planets and realising the effects.pl.refer > article in diwali issue page no.33 and 57 and 55. > > 6.only primary houses offers the result as per 4 step theory > guidelines.sw designer kept both the options free for research > purpose. > > last and important, i have joined the group to share my experiece > and not for prooving my theory nor to promote the sale of my book. > thanks > -sunil gondhalekar > > --- In k_p_system@yahoogroups.com, "TW" <tw853@> wrote: >> > > Dear Friends, >> > > In the 4 step theory, as the RPs may not be always helpful or reliable, they are not used in timing of event like in KP, and so the selection of DBA signifying each of required houses is applied as the advancement from KP. Unfortunately it is found not working in many cases and the Sookshma is also to be considered. >> > > 1. What would be the guideline to select the Sookshma with compared to the choice of Antara? >> > > 2. If the RPs are not reliable, how would be dependable of checking and adjusting the concerned cuspal sub lord by using the RPs? >> > > 3. Is it reasonable not to change the TOB after changing the concerned cuspal sub lord? (only the rationale, please. Who said so to adjust and change another cuspal sub lord for another question is already known) >> > > 4. If the retrogression is not working in horary as well as natal, how would the transit check of dasa lords in the star or sub the planets in retrogression be working? >> > > 5. How it would be more correct prediction than KP by using Uranus, Neptune, Pluto in the idea of always conducive to adverse results, while the Western astrologers are trying for healing of adverse effects? >>

> > 6. Why the primary and secondary are shown in the messages, although only the primary significators are shown in the English translated 4 step lecture notes? Does it mean to take into consideration of secondary significators? (KPAstro 3.5 print-out shows only the primary significators, the only ones which are used to be used.) >> > > Thanks and regards, > > TW >> > > --- In k_p_system@yahoogroups.com, Amit Soman <amitbs2002@> wrote: >>> > > > Dear Mr. Bhaskar, >>> > > > If i sum up your mail i understand that,You need more clarity on 4 step rules. If this is right i would suggest that you write your specific requirements / doubts to Sunilji / Subhashji . My experience is that they reply 100%. >>> > > > Regards > > > Amit Soman >>> >>> >>> > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > To: k_p_system@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Tue, December 22, 2009 2:33:14 AM > > > Subject: [k_p_system] Re: Which system is better. The KP or the 4 Step ? >>> >>> > > > Dear Shri Subhash ji, >>> > > > Thank You Sir for your kind reply. >>> > > > //When you say that most of the rules (of 4 step) have already been used by Late Shri. Shahasane you must have presumably understood them. // >>> > > > I have understood those rules whatever Shri Sahasneji has explained in his books. Whatever is taught as "4 Step" now and presently, I am unable to understand fully, and the application part. >>> > > > //Therefore it is hard to believe that an astrologer of your caliber still find it confusing. Your allegation that these rules are already used by Mr. Shahasane ji seems to be baseless if you say you did not understand the rules at all. // >>>

> > > Thank You, but astrologer of calibre or not , theres no definition or scale of measures as such. > > > As explained above, the rules already used in Shri Sahasnejis books are understood due to the way its presented in a simple manner with proper illustrations. >>> > > > //It was ruled by moderator Mr. Punit Pandey ji that KP is what is described in KP Readers. Any new theories though derived from KP....such as Late Dr. Kar's Theory, K. Baskaran's theory etc are named differently to identify themselves from KP. 4 step theory is also one such theory. Can it be termed as KP just because you are not comfortable with naming it this way? // >>> > > > Shri Punit ji is right when he mentions that all new theories, improvisations and additions must be given a seperate name so as it is clearly understood by any new entrant to understand what is Original KP, and what is beyond KP. I have no issues here. But if its a new theory then please be genuine in saying that its Original and that no rules have been picked from any other source. If it is not new then please mention the source and also acknowledgment of the source, with due respect given to the source before we address ourself as the originator. Another matter is that before a theory is propounded, then please make it undersrandable to at least 70% of the members. In an earlier mail where reference was made by Shri Sunil ji, to Shri Sahasnejis books that he has not written everything but written articles from his Guru Hasbe jis magazines which Shri Sunil Gondhalekarji has admitted that Guruji has done the editing, then I do not understand wheres > > > the problem if Guruji Hasbe has himself done the editing ? Why must we point fingers at anyone ? And why were you silent at that mail ? At least for Rs. 300/- the students have got a millions Rupees worth of knowledge from his books containing hundreds of examples and simple style of explaining the rules. The photo of his Guruji has been put on his books, due respect has been given, his Gurujis reference is made in almost every second Chapter. Do You see this in Shri Suniljis book which I purchased from him for Rs.500- containg 40 pages of large Fonts (Xerox Pages) written in a hurried manner, and absolute confused depictions of the rules ? No reference to his Guruji, no respect , no acknowledgement, just nothing. > > > ( If the Pravchankaar depicting stories from the Ramayana to an audience,does not pay respect to the original VedVyas ji who is the Author of this epic, and acknowledge them, then how can he gain grace of His guru or the respect from the audience who is listening to his discourses ?) See I am not concerend with all this, nor am interested in Politics, nor care for who acknolwedges whom, but mentioning this just because fingers were pointed at Shri Sahasne ji . If I am not mistaken Shri Sunilji and Shri Shasneji have learnt KP from the same Guru Hasbeji. pointing one finger at others means pointing 3 at ourselves, is what made me write above. >>> > > > // It is your decision not to comment on 4 step any more, however any

constructive comments are always welcome. No system is complete in itself and there is always scope for improvement. Please do not deprive the group members to gain from your vast knowledge and experience. // >>> > > > Sir late Shri Sahasne ji, and Shri Gondhlekarji and those from their generations including late Shri Raichurji, Yogeshji, etc. are Giants of their areas. We have much to learn from them. Theres no question of anybody gaining from us, when they are present around with us. And we have still much left to learn from whatever they have presented to this generation. Now I will always give my comments if they are constructive and you may please answer them whenever they come - astrological doubts about 4 Step. And I assure you they will be constructive and asking for further learning , and not for derision or unnecessary criticism. >>> > > > I humbly submit again >>> > > > 1) We wish to learn the 4 Step, if its really useful. > > > 2) But the present formats available for learning 4 Step is not satisfactory. > > > 3) The rules are not demercated sufficiently understandable enough. > > > 4) If people like your goodself, Shri Tinwinji, Shri Gondhlekarji, Shri Yogeshji, Shri Punitji, etc. and whoever has understood the 4 Step properly are able to write exhaustive Chapters with illustrations at every Step, and also make it in a Book form or make it available on the Net for download, it will become very useful for those who have learnt KP and you will be doing a wonderful service to the present and coming generations without doubt. > > > 5) Even if the Book form costs Rs.1000- I am willing to pay for it. (this is to confirm that we are serious in wanting to study the same, but feel helpless with the current formats of presentations) . > > > 6) Commercialisation is okay because one needs money to even have a morning cup of Tea, but write books which serve the purpose, for which the reader buys them, and not to confuse them, so that they come back asking for further information. >>> > > > I am sorry and apologise if I have offended anyone connected to the 4 Step, and my full respects to Shri Gondhlekarji for presenting the 4 Step theory to us. He is a very knowledgable man, and I have nothing personal against him, so please ignore the wrong signals if any. I just wish that everyone must be given his due respect as regards to the 4 Step theory for wehatver has been their contributions. >>> > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > bhaskar. >>> >>> >>>

>>> >>> > > > --- In k_p_system@yahoogro ups.com, Subhash Ektare <subhash_ektare@ ...> wrote: >>>> > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji, >>>> > > > > When you say that most of the rules (of 4 step) have already been used by Late Shri. Shahasane you must have presumably understood them. Therefore it is hard to believe that an astrologer of your caliber still find it confusing. Your allegation that these rules are already used by Mr. Shahasane ji seems to be baseless if you say you did not understand the rules at all. >>>> > > > > It was ruled by moderator Mr. Punit Pandey ji that KP is what is described in KP Readers. Any new theories though derived from KP....such as Late Dr. Kar's Theory, K. Baskaran's theory etc are named differently to identify themselves from KP. 4 step theory is also one such theory. Can it be termed as KP just because you are not comfortable with naming it this way? It is your decision not to comment on 4 step any more, however any constructive comments are always welcome. No system is complete in itself and there is always scope for improvement. Please do not deprive the group members to gain from your vast knowledge and experience. >>>> > > > > Thanks and Regards, >>>> > > > > Subhash Ektare >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > From: Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > To: k_p_system@yahoogro ups.com > > > > Sent: Mon, December 21, 2009 2:56:43 AM > > > > Subject: [k_p_system] Re: Which system is better. The KP or the 4 Step ? >>>> >>>> > > > > Dear Subhash ji, > > > > // Then I fail to understand why the fact that"he used apparent presently Titled, 4 Step rules, very effectively in KP without making it confusing" may not be of common knowledge? // > > > > What is today known as 4 Step, most of the rules have already been used by Shri Sahasne in his books written many years ago, is what may not be common knowledge, is what I am tring to say Sir. Removing something from KP, then adding another set of confusing rules to it and naming it "4 Step" is not what I

am comfortable with. Shri Sahasne has made improvisations to KP in his books, mentioned the areas where he feels further research must be done, accepted his dissatisfactions in certain areas, but never claimed to be originator of any new theories. > > > > If You have understood the 4 Step well, then you may be fortunate. Any improvisations if makes some sense and is not confusing to a student - Beginner or Advanced level student, is always welcome. I did not even understand properly your translation in the Files Section where a 58 KB File on Fout Step theory Rules are, put up. There are about 10 Ruless mentioned which themselves contain many others within them. Understanding the English in any article is another matter, understanding the rules is a seperate matter, and application of them is again another junction. When to apply which rules is again confusing. This is my personal opinion as I mentioned before. > > > > About 4 Step I will refrain from commenting further. > > > > kind regards, > > > > Bhaskar. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > > > > --- In k_p_system@yahoogro ups.com, Subhash Ektare <subhash_ektare@ ...> wrote: >>>>> > > > > > Dear Members, >>>>> > > > > > As far as my knowledge goes, 4 step theory is based on KP principles only adding and /or improvising some rules. Further the method of working out signification of each planet is entirely different. To differentiate this aspect from KP (and not get confused as KP) it was suitably titled as "4 Step Theory". Therefore to understand 4 step, knowledge of KP as given in KSK's Readers is necessary. >>>>> > > > > > Secondly, in my personal opinion, I do not find 4 step theory confusing. There are very few rules which can be understood even by a beginner. In fact I am very comfortable with 4 step theory. >>>>> > > > > > Late Mr. Suresh shahasane has written many books on KP in Marathi and these were translated in Hindi and Gujrathi, I suppose. These books must be widely used by many KP astrologers. Then I fail to understand why the fact that"he used apparent presently Titled, 4 Step rules, very effectively in KP without making it confusing" may not be of common knowledge? But if this is a fact, then credit must go to him. Frankly speaking since I have not read his books I cannot comment on this. But there must be many members in this forum who have read his books, can throw some light on this. >>>>> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Subhash Ekatre >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > From: Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > To: k_p_system@yahoogro ups.com > > > > > Sent: Sun, December 20, 2009 6:26:09 AM > > > > > Subject: [k_p_system] Re: Which system is better. The KP or the 4 Step ? >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > Dear Punit ji, >>>>> > > > > > Thanks for spending time on my mail and giving straight honest replies > > > > > to the queries. >>>>> > > > > > I would like to mention now that my personal opinion is that the 4 Step > > > > > Theory may be too confusing at times with too many heavy weighted > > > > > rules which may not all be understood properly by a student, in complete. >>>>> > > > > > Another fact which may not be of common knowledge, > > > > > is that Late Shri Suresh Sahasneji in his books (which were > > > > > written many years ago) has used the apparent presently Titled, > > > > > 4 Step rules, very effectively in KP without making it confusing. > > > > > This may have now later come to be known as 4 Step with further > > > > > rules added to it , is another matter, but was actually KP in detail > > > > > and improvised. >>>>> > > > > > I would recommend students to learn Traditional KP through the usual > > > > > methods and also read the above books for grasping of further rules, > > > > > rather than going for 4 Step straightaway which I am sorry, personally I > > > > > am not comfortable with. >>>>> > > > > > (Let me also clear this, that I am in no way connected with selling of > > > > > above books, nor have any particular interest, except that these books > > > > > are really one of the finest, most simple to understand, and contains > > > > > all KP And improvised rules minus the confusions, so that one can > > > > > understand KP very easily rather than spending 10 years to understand > > > > > Readers or 4 Step).

>>>>> > > > > > warm regards, > > > > > Bhaskar. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > --- In k_p_system@yahoogro ups.com, Punit Pandey punitp@ wrote: >>>>>> > > > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji, >>>>>> > > > > > > We have seen some heated debate in this forum when we try to do comparison. > > > > > > This is a KP forum, so naturally the answer will be biased in favor of KP. > > > > > > Even then, let me take some of the questions and answer them unbiased and > > > > > > best of my capabilities. >>>>>> >>>>>> > > > > > > *1) Which system is better. The KP or the 4 Step ?* > > > > > > Comparison of any two systems is good. All systems do have pros and cons. > > > > > > With the time and research we will have to highlight those points. Also > > > > > > 4-step is a new system so it will take some time in terms of awareness > > > > > > before even we start comparing it. In my opinion, it is too early. >>>>>> > > > > > > *2) In case the latter, than should we discard the Traditional* > > > > > > *KP Method ?* > > > > > > As per my earlier answer, it is too early to compare the systems. Sunil ji > > > > > > himself participate in some of the quizzes etc. and any significant > > > > > > advantages of 4-step over KP has yet to be found. In my opinion, 4-step is > > > > > > still a system under development and highly dependent upon KP. I have seen > > > > > > 4-step astrologers mixing KP extensively. >>>>>> > > > > > > *3) Certain rules considered as 4 Step, are already there in* > > > > > > *the KP Traditional , albeit not in detailed manner, but* > > > > > > *references are thrown in here and there. So can* > > > > > > *we pick up those rules which can help us in KP * > > > > > > *traditional, or totally shift to the 4 Step ?* > > > > > > There are KP astrologer already using those methods. Some of the

methods are > > > > > > already part of modern KP. From 1966 edition to 1971 edition, we have seen > > > > > > shift towards using sub-lord (both planetary and cuspal) more often. The > > > > > > shift is continuing and the use of sub has increased over a period of time > > > > > > in KP. >>>>>> > > > > > > *4) If the 4 step Theory is better, than how could the old* > > > > > > *ptactioners of Traditional KP, give so much wonderful* > > > > > > *predictions, as mentioned in the readers and the other* > > > > > > *books from the Disciples ?* > > > > > > This is a tough question. Neither KP practitioners, nor 4-step or other > > > > > > practitioners are able to achieve the level we found in readers. More > > > > > > research and study is needed. >>>>>> > > > > > > *5) Since Shri KSk was always for further research and* > > > > > > *improvisations, we as students are ready to change,* > > > > > > *apply and amalgamate . Which rules from the 4 Step * > > > > > > *can be picked up and applied to the Traditional without * > > > > > > *disturbing its Structure completely ?* > > > > > > Positional strength and role of sub's star is already in use in KP. These > > > > > > are also used extensively in 4-step theory. If I remember Sunil > > > > > > ji correctly, most of them are borrowed from KP only. >>>>>> > > > > > > *6) What do you advise the new comers who enter KP.* > > > > > > *should they straight away move towards the 4 step or* > > > > > > *should they study both the KP and the 4 step and in* > > > > > > *that process confuse themselves ?* > > > > > > As the basics of 4-step is in KP, I recommend going through KP first. Other > > > > > > members can have different opinion. >>>>>> > > > > > > *7) I am given to understand that for certain Charts the* > > > > > > *asnwers are not available unless one applies the * > > > > > > *4 Step. In that case what is the percentage of such * > > > > > > *charts you would give, out of 100, where the Traditional* > > > > > > *KP does not seem to work ?* > > > > > > Truly speaking I am not in agreement with this saying. >>>>>> > > > > > > Most of the time it happens because we miss finer KP principles. The number

> > > > > > of such charts are not very high. Though we must remember that whichever > > > > > > system we use, there is some selections need to be made by astrologer, and > > > > > > there comes the difference. For example, in the quizzes we have seen that no > > > > > > two KP or 4-step astrologers came up with the same answer. >>>>>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, >>>>>> > > > > > > Punit Pandey >>>>>> >>>>>> > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > > > > > > > *Dear Learned Senior astrologers of the Group,* > > > > > > > ** > > > > > > > I was going through the Tutorials, and stumbled upon the > > > > > > > 4 Step theory rules. Of Course I was not unaware of > > > > > > > these. >>>>>>> > > > > > > > My Queries to you which hope would be answered honestly > > > > > > > and with convictions and fearlessly. >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 1) Which system is *better*. The KP or the 4 Step ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 2) In case the latter, than should we *discard* the Traditional > > > > > > > KP Method ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 3) Certain rules considered as 4 Step, are *already there* in > > > > > > > the KP Traditional , albeit not in detailed manner, but > > > > > > > references are thrown in here and there. So can > > > > > > > we pick up those rules which can help us in KP > > > > > > > traditional, or totally shift to the 4 Step ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 4) If the 4 step Theory is better, than how could the old > > > > > > > ptactioners of Traditional KP, give so much *wonderful* > > > > > > > *predictions, * as mentioned in the readers and the other > > > > > > > books from the Disciples ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 5) Since Shri KSk was always for further research and > > > > > > > improvisations, we as students are ready to change, > > > > > > > apply and amalgamate . Which rules from the 4 Step > > > > > > > can be picked up and *applied to the Traditional* without

> > > > > > > disturbing its Structure completely ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 6) What do you advise the new comers who enter KP. > > > > > > > should they straight away move towards the 4 step or > > > > > > > should they study both the KP and the 4 step and in > > > > > > > that process *confuse* themselves ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > 7) I am given to understand that for certain Charts the > > > > > > > asnwers are not available unless one applies the > > > > > > > 4 Step. In that case *what is the percentage* of such > > > > > > > charts you would give, out of 100, where the Traditional > > > > > > > KP does not seem to work ? >>>>>>> > > > > > > > As requested above, please answer the above > > > > > > > honesty and fearlessly. We do not have to necessarily > > > > > > > look good, but be *truthful* to ourselves and the > > > > > > > student community. >>>>>>> > > > > > > > Please do not advise that they are "not different systems" > > > > > > > or just an "improvisation" , because both cannot be applied together. >>>>>>> > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >