ancient_paztriot

Guest: …needing a bicycle part, just to see how… I mean I've known people who've gotten a bicycle, they take it apart. It's the first thing they do? Relative right? You know like most people would do. They sit down and take the thing apart. And now they understand how it works and they put it back together and then they do something to it. ??? Hridy: I would say if that were put in perspective, that impulse or that proclivity, if it were in a perspective, I think it would be harmless and even helpful. I'm sure even in the most God conscious society there's people who love to see how things work and they probably… and there's nothing wrong with that if they uh… there's nothing bad about that. It's one aspect of intelligence. Guest: Hm hmm. Hridy: I think what's happened is that… I would say historically – making a venture into historical analysis – on the one hand you had a religious system which I think philosophically was very weak. And on the other hand you had the greatest outburst of uh technology and so on that… at least within our history we I've never seen anything like it. All of a sudden so many spectacular inventions and so on and so forth and… And so I think what happened is naturally… Well it's obvious what happened. Guest: The vacuum got filled. Hridy: Yes. That science came up so quickly with so many spectacular discoveries that uh… that they enjoy a uh a prestige which it seems would have to corrupt any body of human beings who weren't rue saints. Guest: Interesting point on the corruption. There was a public television show recently on the uh bioengineering, genetic-engineering um… and it turns out that in contrast to almost every other scientific field, this is one in which as soon as they start dabbling with this, big chemical companies realize that there would be lots of money involved. And they actually made deals with the scientists to come in as part of a corporation as a combine or a uh whatever… And it's really… it's the first time I know of in what I call legitimate science where at the point the discoveries were just being made, the scientists got involved in uh access to the patents. And now they have this arrangement by which the companies which support the research – and that includes often some of the scientists who are doing it – have direct access to their first dibbs on any patent or anything that can be patentable and they share the proceeds. And I think that's the ultimate in… in the way of bad ethics in science. Because then there's no way ever to really separate out doing what you're doing because you enjoy it and you think it's exciting and you think it's new knowledge from doing what you're doing because there's a million bucks in it for you. Um and then ???. Once you mix them, you can't ever really take them apart. Hridy: Hm hmmm. Guest: It's no longer a uh… then the scientists then loose their credibility as whatever their suppose to be; objective observers. Hridy: This interest is the search for knowledge think. Guest: Yes. Hridy: It's interesting in the uh… in the Vedic culture and also in the ancient Greek culture, the uh… the scholars or the thinkers, the scientists, the philosophers, were never salaried. In fact one of the… There was an outrage against the sophists in ancient Greece because they were uh being paid for their teaching. And that actually caused an outrage among the true philosophers. That it was very… it was a corruption. And certainly in the Vedic sense uh there's one very strong verse in the Bhagavatam where uh the great sage Sukadeva uh he warns his fellow sages and saints that uh don't go and flatter the wealthy people. Don't flatter the government, don't flatter the wealthy businessman. Better you go out in the forest and live austerely uh because you'll spoil your saintly life… or your philosophical life. So it is a fact that uh nowadays because of the way the world is you know we can't really go off in the forest. It's all private property anyway. So there's… Guest: ??? Hridy: So certainly… I mean I can understand this is very difficult, what can you do? That's the way the world is. But it is a fact that the lack of an in… truly independent body of thinkers. It's almost like it just… it's almost like if they approach… as you said if I approach a typical scientists or scholar and start saying spiritual, as you said, that response which will ensue well, I don't want to talk about that. So you wonder how much of that is related to the fact that all the… he's tied into a system where he's fighting for his prestige and his reputation and his money and his this and his that. Side 2 …which has nothing to do with what he's fighting for in life. And uh so I think the lack of as both of you actually pointed out, the lack of a truly independent, a truly free thinking group of men, let's say the best men, the most intelligent men who are actually free to really think what is really the truth and to consider it very freely without any fear. Fear let's say… other than the fear of… that they may be reproached by other intelligent free thinking persons, not the fear of being reproached by businessmen and government bureaucrats and so on and so forth. So that's something which is… what you pointed out we don't have in our society. There is not… there may be free thinking people, but they're insignificant. They have no position, they have no… they have no importance whatsoever, socially… they have no access to public opinion, they're not in the median. Guest: They end up being taxi drivers… Hridy: Yeah. Guest: … or live in New York or that long shoreman. Several years back… Hridy: Oh Era? What was his name? Guest: This you know… you know… views you know… became a philosopher through local nook. And they truly are free thinkers and have no obligations. Um, now these are not necessarily the best thought. Hridy: Yes. That's true. In India… Again getting back to that… that in India there is no dichotomy between philosophy and religion. So in India all the great… In India the same word means saint or sage. In other words, it… even in Spanish or Portuguese for example if you say a person is educated,???, it means he's well behaved, he's a gentleman. He's uh educated, ???. It means he's well behaved, he's a gentleman, he's very… Isn't it? In Spanish or Portuguese if someone is rude or course or just behaves badly, they call him ???, badly educated. So… and of course Socrates said virtue is knowledge. In other words it's… it's knowledge that makes one a good person, it's a higher understanding. So I guess one thing we're pointing out it's… I think it's very dangerous this radical separation which is a new one in our modern society between knowledge and saintliness, knowledge and virtue. It's a distinction which would have been practically incomprehensible to ancient people, whether in the West or the East. They wouldn't have even understood it. It seemed like the same thing to have knowledge, to be good, to be saintly, to be intelligent. That issue cannot be entirely separated from the issue of what knowledge is the real knowledge. In other words the knowledge which somehow leads to widespread destruction, both of the human spirit as well as all of our buildings and everything else which may happen. So somehow… In other words, even though it may be true, there must be some sense in which it's not the best knowledge that human beings can acquire. It gets back to choice. There are many things you can study and that interest in understanding things better, how do things really work and so on and so forth. Of course we're… we want to know. But um it's very dangerous unless… without a… In other words let me say if we were spiritual people, if America were more of a spiritual country or other countries and we had firm roots in spiritual understanding, perhaps we would have more of that freedom to explore the universe even in a mechanistic way and it would be alot of fun. And we could find out lots of interesting things and… Even in our movement for example, there are some members of our movement who love that kind of thing you know. I mean they love nothing more than to take apart a bicycle and see how it works or read a book on science. They love it because that's there… you know there are different kinds of people in the world. But… but there's no safeguard. And of course… as the point you keep making is … it's a valid one… is application is one thing and just knowing something because we want to know is a different thing, that things can be misapplied. But um that is the danger I think or the problem nowadays that. Guest: Yeah, and in fact this may be a distinction that's no longer really tenable. I mean that's the point that you're making. Hridy: Yes. Things are out of balance I think. There's no… If there were a spiritual center, all these things could be utilized spiritually. Just like we have this microphone here which we're using or I fly on airplanes, I have a watch. I'm not denying the advantages and the benefits of what… of technology and so on. And I've taken advantage of science in many ways. I do daily. Everyday I take advantage of science. And I also – like any other person – I enjoy hearing you know what really makes a leaf turn green or what really makes the sky blue or… it's fun to know those things. But uh of course there's also… we have an ultimate explanation beyond that, but I think any reasonable person takes pleasure in knowing these things and wonders about them himself. If the spiritual science can be understood by thinking people… and it is a spiritual science rather than just uh a dogma or uh belief. Spiritual science in this sense. And this on a level you can understand very much and appreciate… that when people let's say chant Hare Krsna, when people do what we say they should do, it modifies their behavior in a very positive way. For example the fact that people can come to this institution and follow the austere principles and be happy about it, feel very satisfied… I mean of course that's almost like uh… that should tell a psychologist that something is happening in the consciousness of that person. Something is happening. If you can get control over yourself in a positive way, become a good person, become a self-controlled person and develop that type of purity that um… Even I think on a material level you can understs… you'd have to say that something is taking place. Something is happening. Guest: Yeah I think that is something uh psychologist are not… would be able to respond to and understand. But it still comes off as Gee, you know, that's interesting. Uh you're right. But I could never do that or well you know I've… It's like there's other things. I mean you… you know? Taking different life-style patterns do have an affect on people and change the behaviors. And I've seen people give up uh bad habits for a long period of time and certainly I don't know exactly what happens. Sometimes it's uh, it's a religious change. Sometimes it's… I don't know what it is. Hridy: Right. Guest: There's no question that there are real changes in behaviors that come from people changing the way they think about what they're doing or what they think is important.

I have seen many devotees succumb to the enjoying propensity of spiritual bliss. They think they can enjoy because it's spiritual …forgetting they should have equanimity of mind. I have seen many bewildered faces after the fall of spiritual bliss… crash and burn stuff. The doer and the witness. A very deep subject. armisae108, you said… "… if the devotee decides to give up, then the knowledge is lost." Interesting point. But what about that no loss or dimunition verse in the Gita?

The fallen devotee still has 'knowledge' he previously gained. Nothing is lost in the sense that he still remembers. His experience is not negated by a fall. The merit is also there. The fall is indicative of neglegience to Krsna, that's all. You no longer have His intimate association and it's many perks …like PEACE. The devotee is certainly lacking in 'wisdom' if he no longer has that dynamic connection. Relationships have to be maintained. Get careless or neglectful and… It is not easy to please Krsna in this sense… because He demands it all! Wisdom is what is needed… that meshing of intelligence and desire. That ability to act in Krsna consciousness is just that… Krnsa consciousness. The process is the goal. Isn't it ironic that you have to SEE EVERYTHING AS KRSNA first before you can properly serve Him? It is a process of killing yourself (the material identity). So we think we are preserving ourselves by resisting …because we think too much of ourselves - even though we are scared and alone. (The world is growing darker every day). We try to walk, but stumble and fall. We may even spend more time on our rumps as we try to walk. But through determination and persistence we will succeed if that's what we want.

"First, it's aparadha and yes, there is forgiveness -- from Sri Radha herself." Radha is probably the most sensitive devotee… She is the queen of devotion. To assume she is going to forgive 'your' offenses to other devotees because you are or will become exceptionally pure and qualified yourself… is very STUPID. You should learn first what is religion before you preach it.

Can't find the thread I was going to post this to… Hridayananda… So we should try to follow Christ in the sense of… Like Christ said, if one looks with lust then he sins in his heart. Is that right? So in the modern society, ever effort is made using the latest state of the art - psychological - techniques, communication to provoke lust in us. Isn't it? … Just to sell stupid products …things that will even kill us: cigarrettes, whiskey … all these nonsense things. So it's a very uncivilized state of affairs. It's a litttle barbaric.

Hi Theist, your post was convienent to reply to. I'ts just a general post. We can't really help each other in a meaningful existential sense. If we somehow or other help others on an absolute level, that is also by divine grace. Now you can take your pick …seeing what's available. But those choices reveal your motives. One quibbles over what's available as if his consumer sense has to be pacified, but what is it they want?

Hridayananda… This question always comes up. If I was a God, why would I leave God? But you see this challenge or this doubt is based on a false premise. It is based on a premise that no one ever knowingly does anything or no one ever consciously does anything that is not good for them. But we can see that every day. For example a great discovery was made several years ago. The discovery was cigarettes cause cancer. When people heard that, they got so nervous they started smoking more. You see? If people are always nice little boys and girls and do what’s best for them, then of course as soon as they found out cigarettes cause cancer everyone would have stopped. It’s been found that despite all propaganda, there is a factual disease called Aids which chiefly afflicts male homosexuals. They try to say no, it’s just… I even saw an article in the Fiji newspaper the other day that said some doctor from America somewhere foolishly saying Well, actually don’t think it’s just a disease for male homosexuals. This virus does not discriminate between male and female. Then it said the proof was that seven percent of the victims are female and only 93 percent are male. So it’s obvious that this is a disease which especially attacks male homosexuals. And yet people cannot stop. Knowing that there’s a very reasonable chance that they’re going to kill themselves. So why do people do that? It’s a cheating propensity. I can defy the laws of nature. I can get away with it. Just like in those Bengali songs, ???, knowing it and hearing it. Everyone knows that criminals are punished and they suffer. Yet there are always new criminals. There are always new criminals. Or the example may be given of a child. You may tell a child Don’t do this. But the child does it. Then when you punish the child, then he stops. So although we were originally Krsna Conscious, we have to learn this lesson. We have free will. We have to learn this lesson. You have to voluntarily love God, otherwise there’s no love. How can you love someone involuntarily? So we have to learn this lesson that we cannot enjoy this world. We cannot enjoy this world. But we are stubborn… I once saw an amazing thing on television. I was a young boy in Los Angeles. A man was from smoking and gotten lung cancer so bad that they cut away his throat box… voice box was cut away so he couldn’t speak. And they cut a hole in his neck and by burping and learning how to shape the sound of the burp he spoke. You know they do that. So this man was so crazy he was putting cigarettes in that little hole and smoking. The truth is stranger than fiction. So where did that come from? We have free will. So actually we are like little Gods although we are not the supreme god. There is a Supreme God who is absolute. But because we are sons of God or children of God, we are like little gods. Just like if you are Mr. Patel, your child is also a Patel. So it’s something like that. Because we are part of God we are also divine. We are little spiritual sparks. So what is the essence of God’s divinity that he is absolute free, that He’s omnipotent, omniscient, He can do anything. So because we are part of God, children of God, in minute quantity, we have that divine power of freedom. We have that freedom. Without freedom all of our activities would be meaningless. Isn’t it? If we had no freedom. Then the life would have no meaning. So because we are part of God, because we have that freedom, we can choose God or we can choose illusion. And once having chosen illusion, how can we blame God? Let’s say you purchase a car and you drive it into a brick wall and you’re being sued. Then you can blame the auto manufacturer. Well if he hadn’t made this car capable of driving into brick walls, I could never have done that. Or if someone opens a store and then you go and steal, then you blame the store owner. But if he hadn’t opened the store I never would’ve become a thief. That’s an interesting argument. You see? The store owner’s responsible. He opened the store and therefore he made it possible for me to become a thief. So it’s his fault. Had there been no store there could be no thief. So this is something like the argument if God hadn’t given me free will, I couldn’t have become a fool. You se? Because the freedom is there. But you’re responsible. Freedom means you’re responsible. You chose to come here thinking you could enjoy without God, you could become like God. Now we have to go back. The proof is… People may give the argument Well I’m not responsible because God created the world in such a way that I came here. So you tell them alright, now go back to God. Well I’m busy. You see they say, I never would have chosen to leave God. Alright then come back now. Well, I’m busy. Isn’t it? In one second they say I never would have chosen to leave God. But when you say alright, now you’re back, now stay. I’m sorry, I’m very busy. You see they’re hypocrites, rascals. Of course we chose to leave God and we choose it again everyday. So the day has to come when we no longer choose to forget God. Then we change our life.

Religion Brings Greater Happiness Pursuit of Happiness Means Less Stuff, More Purpose By Jeanie Lerche Davis WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Charlotte Grayson, MD on Thursday, December 11, 2003 Dec. 11, 2003 -- We want just one thing for Christmas: more stuff. Give us a digital camera, a Burberry coat, and a Prada bag -- please. But wait: If pursuit of happiness is really your goal, forget all that. Only spirituality and a sense of purpose bring bliss, says one British researcher. "It's a timely message, since we do get swamped by our materialistic culture at Christmas," lead researcher Stephen Joseph, PhD, a psychologist with the University of Warwick in England, tells WebMD. "Christmas just amplifies our materialism." Joseph's study seeks a recipe for happiness, looking beyond religious faith, which other studies have shown is one ingredient. He looks at self-actualization and purpose in life, too. His study appears in this month's issue of the journal Mental Health, Religion & Culture. Meaning = Happiness In it, Joseph publishes information gleaned from 101 undergraduate students between ages 18 and 49. Each completed surveys that measured their attitudes toward Christianity, whether they felt a purpose in life, and if they had made strides toward that goal. The surveys also asked their general feelings about life: "I feel dissatisfied with my life. I feel happy. I feel cheerless. I feel pleased with the way I am. I feel life is enjoyable. I feel life is meaningless." Those scoring high in religious beliefs -- who went to church regularly, had a strong religious faith, and prayed often -- also scored high in happiness and purpose in life. "We're not saying that all religious people are happier than non-religious people," Joseph tells WebMD. "It's just that, on average, religious people tend to be happier because they have a greater sense of purpose in life." Actually, a spiritual path outside of organized religion works in the pursuit of happiness, too. "Religion is only one path to sense of purpose," he says. Pursuit of happiness should shorten our "give me" list, he says. "Material success, wealth, possessions -- those are detrimental to happiness. More important is valuing our relationships, fostering a sense of community. Religion serves as a vehicle in pointing people in that direction." People who are not religious but want to celebrate the holidays should focus on connecting with family or with friends they consider to be family, says James H. Bray, PhD, associate professor of family and community medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. "That can be very positive -- you can take time to do nice things for other people, enjoy their company and the support that you give each other," he tells WebMD. "Also, volunteer work can be a good way to get beyond yourself," Bray says. "Ring the bell for the Salvation Army. I have friends who buy 10 or 20 frozen turkeys, then spend an afternoon driving around in poor neighborhoods and giving them out. Also, I've noticed that a lot of holiday parties encourage bringing toys [to give to charity]. That's a great way to be part of the celebration."

So when have some cookies for everyone… and if you're interested in seeing the literature, we have… Guest: Ok um… After this sort of existence, when if we're free, we're just souls and we're living… uh not serving, living, but an existence which is… Hridy: Yeah, living an existence. Guest: …devotion to Krsna. Is there love between the individual souls… Hridy: Yes. Guest: … or is the entire existence so… Hridy: Yes. Yes there's love. Love is ultimately the reality of the situation. There's simply love between ourselves and God and amoung our… between ourselves Yes, pure love. Everyone is competing to serve the other. People want to help each other… serve each other. Yes, it's a very nice situation.

China Wants U.S. to Leave Hong Kong Alone By TED ANTHONY BEIJING (AP) - Stung by U.S. calls for more democracy in Hong Kong, China has demanded that the American government ``stop interfering'' in the territory's internal affairs, the official news agency said Sunday. Kong Quan, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, was quoted by the Xinhua News Agency as responding to a U.S. State Department spokesman's comment on Hong Kong's political development. ``Hong Kong affairs (are) an internal issue of China, and the Chinese government firmly opposes any foreign government interference in the affairs of Hong Kong in any form,'' Xinhua said, paraphrasing Kong. It quoted Kong as saying that ``Hong Kong's political structure must develop in a gradual and orderly manner.'' Last week, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher expressed the United States' ``strong support for democracy through electoral reform and universal suffrage in Hong Kong,'' saying that would stimulate the territory's economic development. ``Our belief is in democracy,'' Boucher said at a briefing in Washington. ``The Hong Kong people and the Hong Kong government need to start addressing this issue.'' He said the United States wanted to make sure that the people of Hong Kong ``get their choice to design their system that's appropriate for them.'' He added: ``We care a lot about the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong.'' Pro-democracy protests, some of them quite large, have taken place in Hong Kong since July 1, when 500,000 people marched on the streets against a Beijing-backed national security bill. Activists accuse the territory's Beijing-appointed leader, Tung Chee-hwa, of undermining efforts at self-government. The refrain is a familiar one for both countries. The U.S. government has long called for more democracy in China, both on the mainland and more recently in Hong Kong. China often insists that such comments are an interference in its domestic policies. Hong Kong, a former British colony, reverted to Chinese rule in 1997. It is now a special administrative region governed under a doctrine known as ``one country, two systems,'' under which the Chinese government has allowed it to operate semi-independently. The China-U.S. relationship - politically, at least - has been reasonably stable for more than two years, though the economic relationship between the two has grown tense over a U.S. trade deficit and calls from the Bush administration that Beijing float its currency.

If you knew the beginnings of, let's say, your original fall… Would you then want to know everything inbetween? Does it really matter? Uh, counting the steps backwards?

Same problem with empiricial science… this tracing cause and effect back endlessly. You can do that if you want, but it's not really gonna bring us to truth. At some point, Socrates says, "You have to stop and make a stand" and say I accept this as self-evident truth. It is the universal principles and laws we need to understand and co-operate with. Those are the same for everybody. Those we can assertain through the eyes of scripture or the pure devotee. That is the platform for common understanding and standards. " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. " - Founding Fathers of America… Declaration of Independence

No doubt, there is a very good reason not to deal with it. Knowledge of other lives is a problem I guess. Maybe we're not to know our original fall for similar reasons. (My editing is not working. I can make a spelling change twice and it still not reflect.)

The article suggest we can never leave Krsna's-lila simply because that's all there is. It's not necessarily saying we have physical spiritual bodies elsewhere we are not aware of. But I'm not discounting the possibility. It's certainly possible. I tend to think somewhat along those lines myself. Our experience of dreams certainly confirms this notion. "… but when you are coming down from Brahmasayujya or when you are coming down from Krsna lila, that remains a mystery. But at the present moment we are in Maya's clutches, so at present our only hope is to become Krsna conscious and go back to Home, back to Godhead." So it remains a mystery. I guess that pretty much sums things up. Maybe Prabhupada didn't want us to know so much about this. That would be consistent with the scriptures silence on these points too.

I remember Prabhupada saying some souls never fall; some are eternally perfect. Supposedly, they never make the mistake(s) we made. I also heard that once the entity has returned to the spiritual world, uh we can remember our material sojourn to help us decide next time we consider misusing our free will.

What a great way to spend our money on the corporate interests all in the name of National Interests. Accountability? The trick is to convince people they need it. That's all. Convince them it makes alot more sense this way that all that moeny wasted on education and other bothersome things like that. Oh, the Lotto's paying for education? ......................................................... Bush Plans Science Base on the Moon By MARCIA DUNN CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - President Bush is planning a permanent science base for astronauts on the moon and, in what would be an even greater leap for mankind, human voyages to Mars, according to senior administration officials. The president wants to aggressively reinvigorate the space program, still reeling from the Columbia tragedy nearly one year ago, said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity. White House press secretary Scott McClellan confirmed that Bush would deliver a speech Wednesday describing his vision of the long-term direction of the space program, but he did not reveal what Bush would say. ``The president is strongly committed to the exploration of space,'' McClellan said Friday. A major question is how to pay for an expensive space initiative while the nation is struggling with record budget deficits and the high costs of the war against terrorism. McClellan said that the White House budget office was involved in the administration's space review, and that Bush will ``put forth a responsible budget that meets our highest priorities while working to hold the line of spending elsewhere in the budget.'' A Nobel-winning physicist who investigated the shuttle accident is among those who would rather see more affordable robots - rather than astronauts - exploring the lunar and martian surfaces. He points to NASA's Spirit rover newly arrived at Mars. ``The cost of a manned enclave on the moon, I think, is going to make the space station look cheap. That's the only good thing about it,'' said Stanford University's Douglas Osheroff. In any event, ``I think we're still 30 years from going to Mars and if there's any reason to do that, I don't know,'' Osheroff said. Bush does not intend to propose sending Americans to Mars anytime soon, but instead envisions preparing for a Mars expedition more than a decade from now, one administration official said. NASA's chief spokesman, Glenn Mahone, would not divulge any details Friday. ``We're not going to pre-empt the president,'' he said. ``But we're excited about the news of the announcement next week and what it means for the future direction of NASA.'' He said the announcement will be made in Washington. The White House has been looking for a new revitalizing role for NASA for months, with Vice President Dick Cheney leading the interagency task force since summer. The speculation over a major space initiative began heating up in early December. Rep. Ralph Hall, R-Texas, a member of the House Science Committee, welcomed the news that Bush would be making an announcement about space. Hall said he has long been trying to get the president more interested in space exploration. The president never went to Johnson Space Center in Houston while serving as Texas governor; in fact, last February's memorial service for the seven Columbia astronauts was his first visit. Bush's fresh interest in space happens to coincide with an election year. A new bold space initiative, it is thought, could excite Americans. ``I had the feeling the last 2 1/2 years people would rather make a trip to the grocery store than a trip to the moon because of the economy,'' Hall said. ``As things are turning around, we need to stay in touch with space'' and the science spinoffs it provides. It was the Columbia accident that helped force a discussion of where NASA should venture beyond the three remaining space shuttles and the international space station. The panel that investigated the disaster called for a clearly defined long-term mission - a national vision for space that has been missing for three decades. Astronauts last walked on the moon in 1972; in all, 12 men trod the lunar surface over a 3 1/2-year period. This time, the president favors a permanent station, administration officials said. Bush's father, on the 20th anniversary of the first manned moon landing, made a similar call for lunar colonies and a Mars expedition. But the plan was prohibitively expensive - an estimated $400 billion to $500 billion - and went nowhere. No one knows what the new venture might cost or how NASA would pay for it. House Science Committee spokeswoman Heidi Tringe said lawmakers on the panel had yet to be briefed on the specifics. Earlier this week, Bush put in a congratulatory call to officials in charge of NASA's latest Mars rover. He called the Spirit rover's successful landing a ``reconfirmation of the American spirit of exploration.'' Another rover is due to arrive at the red planet in two weeks. Many space buffs see the moon as a necessary place to test the equipment and techniques that would be needed by astronauts on Mars. It's closer, just three days away versus six months away for the red planet. Visionaries say observatories could be built on the moon and mining camps could gather helium-3 for conversion into fuel for use back on Earth. Others, however, contend that astronauts should make a beeline to Mars. Still others, including John Glenn, the first American to orbit the Earth, believes the nation should complete and fully maximize the international space station before dashing anywhere else. Associated Press writer Scott Lindlaw contributed to this story from Washington. www.nasa.gov

Mr. Prabhu has been feeling a nusiance around here lately. I learn more from you guys than you know. If I have the answers, they are not my own. We can agree on things because we all more or less have the same knowledge.

"If we are perfect....then that means there's no possibility of choosing to be non-perfect. Perfect by definition would rule this out, right?" No, perfection lies in harmony and coperation. That MUST be based on free will. Otherwise, there's no ______. "God is not so cheap, you say? But on the other hand why make it so difficult that very, very few people even begin the work? Again, why does God need to make is so difficult?" The difficulty is in us not accepting the facts. To surrender to a higher personal power is totally rational. We just are obsessed with our own egocentrism. We can all experience this. There is no argument on this point. We have come here to imitate Krsna, to be the CENTER… Now see what I can do! God has infinite tolerance for us. We are a thorn in His eye. PRABHUPADA IS THE PROOF for most of us (I presume to say) that the knowledge and process works. He accomplished the impossible. He lived the impossible. PRABHUPADA was so fortunate to have been raised as he was. He had the sense to understand the instructions of a pure devotee. Alot of us miss out on such signs due to our western upbringing. (I'm not suggesting a similar fortune would make us all Prabhupadas… thinking of varnashrama dharma.) "Why does God NEED us to love and serve Him?" Why do you need to talk or associate with anyone? Is God less personal than you?

Thanks Govindarma. That thought had escaped me cosidering this… … "one never returns again to the material world." I need some help. There is duality here. But there is a higher answer. What is it?

Hridayananda… Hearing Dervasa's words, young Priitaa was struck with wonder. With childlike curiosity she began wondered how the mantra worked. To see for herself, the innocent girl, justly famous for her chastity decided to call the beautiful sun god. Within moments she saw the dazzling, resplindent day-maker - maintainer of the world - coming toward her. She stayed in amazement to see this wonderful sight. The sun-god came close upon her for conjugal contact. She froze with fear, unable to think or act in his overwhelming prescence. Seeing before him the frightened young princess who's mature body was perfectly shaped… the kindly sun-god blessed her that she would again become a virgin after their contact. Before she could do anything, the mighty god filled with light begot a child within her womb. Soon thereafter, Priita gave birth to an unordinary son, born with brilliant armour attached to his body and radiant with the beauty of his heavenly father. The child was destined to be a great warrior, a master of the military science. Along with his ingrown armour, this child was born with glowing earings with illumined his face. On day he would be famous and feared throughout the world as Karna. Young Priitaa didn't know what to do. She felt all the natural love of a mother for her child, yet she was still but a young girl and could not bear to face her parents and other relatives. Indeed, she loved her father Kunti-bhoja so much that people called her Kunti. Although the sun-god had kept his word and restored her virginity, she could not even dream of facing her family as an unwed mother… even if the father of her child was a cosmic ruler. Fear took hold of her and in utter panic, she carefully placed her young child born with extraordinary armour and earrings in the water of the river that flowed through the opulent capital city of King Kunti-bhoga.

JNdas, Hare Krsna. I appreciate many of your scholarly comments. I've certainly learned alot from you. Many thanks! Uh, you brought up a point about circumstance. Do you mean the living entity will NEVER CHOOSE TO RETURN to the material world? Or do you mean KRSNA SOMEHOW RESOLVES THE CHOICE of living entitites free will so that there is no longer an option? (I was under the impression that love or any relationship is dynamic. And you can always change your position accordiing to your choices.)

Yeah, I've wondered the same myself. Can't logically assertain why, except that I was envious - a very general acceptance. You have to be able to 'choose' to give freely. You have to be able to 'choose something else' besides your 'natural obligation' I guess. WE MADE THE WRONG CHOICE! In any case, even if we can't asserted the details… we still have hope for something better. We have so much AWESOME information which deals with REALITY so much better than anything else. HARE KRSNA! As far as the editing… the board does not always reflect what I EDIT AND POST … I swear it! …Stick a needle in my eye… !

Govindaram, your guess is probably better than mine.

Hey, there's scientific theory, right? Yeah, "Vaikiuntha" includes the whole spiritual world. Maybe some of us will spiritually advance while we're here. Amazing concept. Uh?

Hridyananda… What do you give to the Deity that has everything? So Krsna says there's nothing I don't have. There's nothing I'm trying for, still I work. So Aristotle couldn't figure this out. So why does Krsna say (Sanskrit)? Why is Krsna still working even though He has nothing to achieve? What is He working for? He syas that I don't want anything. So why is He working? He's working… He says (Sanskrit) … because if I didn't work, I would mislead other people, and out of compassion for them… out of compassion for the fallen souls I'm acting. In other words, selfishness has it's antomym or it's antithesis. The antithesis of selfishness is pure love. Now we may not understand this because in this world we use 'love' to describe something which is a type of affection with a healthy dose of selfishness …Lots of heaping tablespoons of selfishness mixed in. When we say in this world, "Oh I love that!" … people may …just like a woman may go to the store, "Oh, I love dress!" (I don't know if people where dresses anymore. Well, whatever they wear.) "I love those clothes!" Or a man may say, "Oh I love that rifle… or I love that woman." In this way, people love everything nowadays, isn't it? To give someone a nice … anything … "Oh, I love it!" So in this world the word love is kind of being stripped or drained of it's meaning because it's used in so many superficial and trivial ways, in situations where what we really mean is, "I want to exploit that thing." So love just means that it pleases my senses. In other words, love really… the term is an active verb… what is it called? … a verb that takes objects? … a transitive? It's a 'verb'. We say I love someone or I love something. In other words, I want to give to that thing. If you love your country you want to give everything to your countyry - even your life. If you love another person you want to give everything… give your whole self to that person. But now the word love is used exactly in the apathetical sense. When I say I love something I mean it gives me something. It does something for me. Isn't it? "Oh, I love this food." In other words this food does something for me, it's giving me something." So it's interesting to see how the language has become reversed and inverted. A verb which… actually means giving and not taking. So therefore, we love things… but when we say we love something it's mixed with so many selfish desires that we don't really see love as the antithesis of selfishness. Love is just one aspect of selfish pursuit.