Gauracandra

Read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius: http://classics.mit.edu/Antoninus/meditations.html Very good advice for the administrative class.

I too have heard this rumor, that the Pope keeps his own veal farm, as it is his favorite dish.

But if you want a good family movie about faeries, try Fairie Tale: A True Story. Its a good, classy production. Another good movie, not about faeries, but about selkies (a type of mermaid) check out "The Secret of Roan Inish". This is a VERY good movie. I'd recommend it to anyone, young or old.

Miramax is run by the the brothers Weinstein who are absolutely brilliant marketeers. Their strategy has always been to make small "indie" films. Then they try to generate buzz to skyrocket the opening weekends for these films. If the pump is primed it gets more and more people in. This is a fake controversy just to get headlines and publicity. Corporate manipulation of the masses by Moore and the Weinsteins /images/graemlins/smile.gif

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901 Moore admits Disney 'ban' was a stunt By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles 07 May 2004 Less than 24 hours after accusing the Walt Disney Company of pulling the plug on his latest documentary in a blatant attempt at political censorship, the rabble-rousing film-maker Michael Moore has admitted he knew a year ago that Disney had no intention of distributing it. The admission, during an interview with CNN, undermined Moore's claim that Disney was trying to sabotage the US release of Fahrenheit 911 just days before its world premiere at the Cannes film festival. Instead, it lent credence to a growing suspicion that Moore was manufacturing a controversy to help publicise the film, a full-bore attack on the Bush administration and its handling of national security since the attacks of 11 September 2001. In an indignant letter to his supporters, Moore said he had learnt only on Monday that Disney had put the kibosh on distributing the film, which has been financed by the semi-independent Disney subsidiary Miramax. But in the CNN interview he said: "Almost a year ago, after we'd started making the film, the chairman of Disney, Michael Eisner, told my agent he was upset Miramax had made the film and he will not distribute it." Nobody in Hollywood doubts Fahrenheit 911 will find a US distributor. His last documentary, Bowling for Columbine , made for $3m (£1.7m), pulled in $22m at the US box office. But Moore's publicity stunt, if that is what is, appears to be working. A front-page news piece in The New York Times was followed yesterday by an editorial denouncing Disney for censorship and denial of Moore's right to free expression. Moore told CNN that Disney had "signed a contract to distribute this [film]" but got cold feet. But Disney executives insists there was never any contract. And a source close to Miramax said that the only deal there was for financing, not for distribution.

In this lecture Srila Siddhaswarupananda discussions the most important question: “How can I get off this wheel of birth and death.” We received a very sincere letter from Jim one of our viewers. He writes “I know this world is full of unhappiness and that it is not my real home. I want to get off this wheel of birth and death but no one can tell me how.” This is relevant to everyone. This is the most important question you can ask. You are in this predicament. No one likes to remember their suffering. Its like the drunk lying on the bathroom floor throwing up swearing he’ll never do this again. Memory is very short when it comes to pain. So this is a very important question. There can be no better question. Most people don’t know they are miserable. There is nothing wrong with being happy. But you can never be happy until you know your eternal position. I’m not supposed to be run by the clock. I’m eternal, so why do I have a watch on? The time element is behind it all. At most you have 100 years to live. So you are trying to get as much done in this time. Its just not natural. This material dimension has a little happiness but mostly misery. So I’ll give you the most authoritative answer from the most authoritative source on how to get out of this predicament. The Supreme Lord clearly states “Engage your mind always in thinking of Me, become My devotee, offer obeisances to Me and worship Me. Being completely absorbed in Me, surely you will come to Me.” Bhagavad Gita 9:34 Whatever state of consciousness you quit your body in, that will be your destination. If you are thinking of God then you will go to Him. You conquer the wheel of birth and death by being completely immersed in the Supreme Lord. This is the solution. The reason you reincarnate is that you still are immersed in material desires. Do you understand this? Audience Member: What if a person is tired of this world and commits suicide. Will he have to reincarnate? Srila Siddhaswarupananda: A lot of people may think they can solve the problem by dying. But you have to understand the science of reincarnation. You must know that you are not the body. But this doesn’t mean that if you kill your body you will be free. Because you are also not your subtle body. You have another layer of covering, a subtle body, with material frustrations. The reason you want to commit suicide is due to frustration. The pain of a broken love affair or perhaps physical handicaps. The person still desires to enjoy the world but he is not happy. It doesn’t mean he doesn’t still have desires. The people committing suicide are not spiritually motivated. They still have this core in their heart. They usually are crying for help and are trying to let people know to help them find the solution to their problem. So they are pulled between their frustrations and their desires to enjoy. They do but they don’t. They still want to enjoy this world. Audience Member: If a person commits suicide what sort of body do they get? Srila Siddhaswarupananda: If you destroy this body you have committed a sinful act. You leave but you don’t go to the spiritual dimension. Rather you have for the time your body was meant to live, you remain a ghost. A ghost is a person but without flesh and blood. He is covered by his mental body with hopes and angers. Ghosts still desire to taste but they don’t have a tongue and they can’t get one. Then after being a ghost through the agencies of material nature you then take on another material body. Audience Member: Earlier you mentioned that to stop reincarnating we must think of God. How can this be done when my mind is all over the place? Srila Siddhaswarupananda: Why does your mind go all over the place? I don’t want you to think you should be inactive. What I mean is you must be immersed in God. Be attached to Him. It is to be spontaneous. At the time of death naturally you will be thinking about what you are most attached to. You have to develop a real attachment to God. First, understand that God is a person. You must love God not this world. Love for God means you go to God. Naturally the mind goes to what the mind is attached to. It is not something artificial. You have to develop an actual affection for God. Attachment for this world is so strong. Nothing can neutralize it except a higher taste of love for God. There is an actual process that will enable you to develop love for God. This process is called Bhakti-yoga where you cultivate your natural love for God.

1. Something Went Wrong in Jet Crash, Expert Says 2. Police Begin Campaign to Run Down Jaywalkers 3. Iraqi Head Seeks Arms 4. Teacher Strikes Idle Kids 5. Miners Refuse to Work after Death 6. Juvenile Court to Try Shooting Defendant 7. War Dims Hope for Peace 8. If Strike Isn't Settled Quickly, It May Last Awhile 9. Cold Wave Linked to Temperatures 10. Enfield (London) Couple Slain; Police Suspect Homicide 11. Red Tape Holds Up New Bridges 12. Man Struck By Lightning Faces Battery Charge 13. New Study of Obesity Looks for Larger Test Group 14. Astronaut Takes Blame for Gas in Spacecraft 15. Kids Make Nutritious Snacks 16. Chef Throws His Heart into Helping Feed Needy 17. Hospitals are Sued by 7 Foot Doctors 18. Typhoon Rips Through Cemetery; Hundreds Dead!

This weeks Srila Siddhaswarupananda television program answers the question “What’s First: Material or Spiritual Needs”. The other day in the first lecture some student activists came. Any of you here tonight? We asked for questions on paper and one was the old Marxist argument – “People can’t take up spiritual life until they are satisfied materially.” So first satisfy material desires. The economist E.F. Schumacher wrote a book called “Small is beautiful” wherein he shows that there is no such thing as material satisfaction. Where is that nation that says “We now have enough?” Does America think it has enough? Do the millionaires in Manila think they have enough? They are never satisfied. Not one person will say they are materially satisfied. Rather they are afraid of losing what they have and crave even more. I am an anti-material particle. I need spiritual food. When I do not know this and try to satisfy my spiritual craving through matter, this endless material consumption will not satisfy me. The economist Schumacher says this will simply cause great problems when we try to satisfy the infinite craving in a finite dimension. If it was possible one person would desire to consume the whole world. That’s what some of the worlds billionaires are trying to do. So Schumacher challenges the Marxists by saying “No one is ever satisfied.” Not only is it wrong to think we will be satisfied, but this very idea itself causes us to put off spiritual realization to some vague time in the future. Your proposal leads to chaos. It is this very concept that has lead the world to the brink of disaster. Man against man. Nation against nation. Our craving when added to matter is like fuel on a fire. You cannot have a satisfied world without a spiritual life. Without spiritual satisfaction it will simply become corrupt. Some of the most corrupt places on the planet are communist countries. Why so many alcoholics? Why do they pay $100 for a pair of Western jeans? “Maybe these jeans will satisfy me.” It is like a “holy” item from America. They have convinced Catholic priests of this line of thinking. They have accepted this argument that first the public must be materially satisfied. But this argument is due to a misidentification with the body. Many of our students are young people who were materially very well off. But they became dope addicts. They had no purpose for existence. So this argument is only accepted by the ignorant. But we don’t believe the communists even believe this argument. For them it is simply an argument for the moment. Why? Because it is in direct opposition to their other statement that “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” You can’t have it both ways. They are not consistent. They are simply maneuvering for political power. This one letter says “You speak a lot. You chant a lot. But when will you take ACTION.” What action? You want to go shoot someone? If I’m going to shoot all the bad people where do I start? Another letter says “Don’t you agree first we must get rid of all of the exploiters?” Yes. But who is not an exploiter? If you show me an example of a communist society where the leaders are not exploiters then I’ll listen. People in power all over the world are exploiting. But those atheist leaders of the communist party are so satisfied that they won’t assist their family members? This is not the method to come to a satisfied society. If a person is not satisfied then they will try to lord it over others in the world. Communists trying to have a utopia is simply the dream of foolish fanatics. Many so-called religious people think they too will have heaven on earth. The attempt to bring such a society into being by killing off all the bad guys will not work. I was raised in a family of socialists. From the age of 3 through my time in college I studied their teachings. But the dreams and the application are so completely different. Our advice is not to have your head in the sky. Look at the Soviet Union. Look at Poland. Look at Afghanistan. So many young people want to create a better society. But to put atheists in charge will be a nightmare. Cambodia’s leaders now say “Maybe we were a little extreme.” Too bad for the millions of people you killed. Start looking at reality instead of your dreams.

Another

Another

Another

Another

Another

Another

Another one

An Indian friend sent me these /images/graemlins/smile.gif enjoy /images/graemlins/smile.gif

This is last week’s Srila Siddhaswarupananda television program. I took the notes, but was too busy to type up a summary until now. Its basically a Q&A session on a lecture. Audience member: There is a very nice quote in one of your books that says “Can anyone deny that the soul of the caterpillar transmigrates into the body of the butterfly?” Are you saying that the caterpillar has a soul? Srila Siddhaswarupananda: There are certain symptoms of a life particle. Has anyone here taken biology? When life is in matter it has metabolism, reproduction, complex chemistry. You will find this in a caterpillar, you will find this in a dog, in plants. However, this microphone will not grow. It has no response. It doesn’t reproduce unfortunately. Every spirit soul is a child of God. In the Bible there is a statement that the Supreme Father has taken care of all the birds. Has given clothes to the lily in the field. So don’t worry about what you will eat or wear. God is the cause of all causes. When we say the living being is transmigrating from one body to the next, we are saying the same self that was in the caterpillar is now in the butterfly. You were once in a baby body. That has been left behind long ago. There is another way to understand the soul and that is in the ability to know God. The distinguishing characteristic that separates man from animal is this ability to inquire into the nature of the self. Animals eat, sleep, mate and defend. But as humans we have a fifth characteristic to enquire. Some will say that we have souls but that animals don’t have a soul. Every animal will take on the form of a human being. I have a greater facility as a human and so I must not waste this precious form of life. If externally you look human, but you only engage in the activities of animals (not inquiring into the nature of the self) then you are essentially an animal, and will take such a form in your next life. The human form of life is so precious because we can use it to know God. Augustine says that there is a dog soul, a cat soul, but that they are eternally dog and cat souls. We say this is unfair for God to have children that can never know Him. Those who deny transmigration are saying that God is unfair. Audience member: What is the law of cause and effect? Is it related to karma? Srila Siddhaswarupananda: Karma means that for every action there will be a reaction. Everything one does will come back. “As you sow, so shall you reap.” Karma means action. The reason one must reincarnate is because of good and bad karma. One person is born beautiful and rich. Another is born poor and ugly. If you believe in God then it would appear He is unfair. People who deny reincarnation don’t have an answer as to why we are born into different situations. Every individual is reaping the fruits he has previously planted. Even before he is conceived the activities prior to conception has determined the nature of his future. You are responsible. I am responsible. Its not God’s fault. So many people have become atheist because they don’t understand this. Our activities now will determine our future. Destiny is in our own hands. I can do now what I want – good or bad. However, even good karma isn’t good for the transcendentalist. Because then you must take birth again to reap the benefits of one’s good works. Even in material heavenly planets, like Hawaii is a sort of heavenly planet, but still there is birth, disease, old age, and finally death. So how do I live without acting? The answer is in the Sri Isopanishad. The first mantra reads: “Everything animate or inanimate that is within the universe is controlled and owned by the Lord. One should therefore accept only those things necessary for himself, which are set aside as his quota, and one should not accept other things, knowing well to whom they belong.” Everything belongs to God. If you act on this fact, then mantra 2 says: “One may aspire to live for hundreds of years if he continuously goes on working in that way, for that sort of work will not bind him to the law of karma. There is no alternative to this way for man.” Work in devotional service, actions done in the service of God, are neither good nor bad. There is no reaction. The person is working for God’s will. Engaging one’s life activities does not create good or bad karma. Chanting God’s names, reading scripture. These are neither good nor bad. They are devotional activities. If a person’s whole life is dedicated to God, then everything he does is centered on God. Then there is no more karmic reaction.

"The Passion" movie got me to thinking about the metaphorical aspect of the story of Jesus. This is not to say it isn't literally true, but that it also has a metaphorical component. The Via Dolorosa, the path of sorrows, is the path Jesus takes to his crucifixion. It is in a sense the path of life and all the suffering we endure in this life. In this sense, Jesus represents mankind (as in being referred to as "the Son of Man", simultaneously being called "the Son of God"). I don't have the exact verse, but I seem to recall he says [paraphrasing] "When I was thirsty you did not give me drink. When I did hunger you did not feed me. Not everyone who says 'I believe, I believe' shall enter the Kingdom of God. But whatever you do do the least of my children you do to me." In the film everyone looks bad. Peter denies him. Judas betrays him. The Sanhedrin convicts him. Pilate sentences him. The Romans torture him. No one comes off looking good. And yet he takes all that abuse without ever raising up against it. He is mocked for 'embracing his cross'. The cross represents the burden we have in life. We can either embrace it and carry it to the end or we can be crushed beneath it. Along that path of sorrows, we meet many people who may treat us poorly. But there are also people who pick us up. Who give us something to drink, or wipe our face, or help us carry our burden. The key is to stick to true principles until the end and never give up. Because if you live by true principles, then even if you are destroyed you are glorious. Even your persecutors in the end will see they couldn't break you (the flesh is weak but the spirit is strong). Anyways, its just something I was thinking about (I saw it for a second time today). We each have an obligation to pick one another up, and help share the burden of this life.

This film is probably the most pacifist film I've ever seen. From the very beginning Jesus tells Peter "Drop your sword. He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword." A soldier who has his ear cut off trying to arrest Jesus, instead has it healed. He is taken, without any attempt to escape. He is beaten and never protests. This is all in the first 5 minutes. Then he is brought before the puppet court. He is spat on, accused, but never defends himself. At all times in the film it is made perfectly clear that he is allowing this to be done. In fact, he says "No man can take my life. Only I can give it willingly and only I can take it back again." The film is from beginning to end, about the cruelty man inflicts upon his fellow man. And how, by not resisting, and taking the suffering, instead praying for those who persecute you, you will be divine. This film over and over and over again makes this point. I don't see how anyone can watch this film and come out not moved to try to follow a similar example.

I wish I had reference to Vedic sources on usury. I don't. However, below I've copied the traditional Catholic view on usury. And traditionally it was considered a sin. ECONOMICAL Is usury a sin? Usury is the charging of interest for the use of money, as if it had some productive power of its own. Saint Thomas Aquinas asks himself this questions in the Summa Theologica (IIa IIae Q.78, A.1) and answers categorically in the affirmative. His reason is that money is not something which remains after it is used (e.g., a house, the use of which is charged for when it is rented out), but which is consumed as it is used (e.g., food, the use of which is not charged for, but just its sale value). These are his exact words: "He commits an injustice who sells wine or wheat and who asks for double payment, i.e., one, the return of the thing in equal measure, the other the price of the use, which is called usury.... Now money, according to the Philosopher [i.e., Aristotle], was invented chiefly for the purpose of exchange; and consequently the chief and principal purpose of money is its consumption or alienation whereby it is sunk in exchange. Hence it is by its very nature unlawful to take payment for the use of money lent, which payment is known as usury: and just as a man is bound to restore other ill-gotten goods, so is he obliged to restore the money which he has taken in usury." There can be no doubt that usury is what is driving modern capitalistic society along its destructive path of materialism, and that it is responsible for world-wide depressions and wars. If, however, usury is always a grave sin, this does not mean that there cannot be legitimate interest, provided that it is not charged for the value of the money itself, for it is a pure means of exchange and has no producing power on its own, as does man's labor, or real property. Fr. Walter Farrell, O.P. sums this up quite well in A Companion to the Summa, Vol. III p.239: "Wherever usury is found it is wrong; and its evil is manifest. It is absurdly simple to understand that to charge a man twice for the same thing is always unjust; yet that is precisely what usury does, it sells the same thing twice. The trick is possible only when the thing sold or loaned is consumed in its very first use, things like wine or sandwiches, or money. When we demand, over and above the return of the original sum of money loaned, an added amount for the use of the money, our act is the same as selling a man a glass of wine and then charging him for the privilege of drinking it. If we keep this simple statement of usury in mind, it will not be difficult to understand the absolutely necessary distinction between usury and legitimate interest. The latter is charged not for the mere use of the money as in usury, but on some extrinsic title." Extrinsic titles for legitimate interest could include such things as the risk of losing one's money altogether, the positive damage caused to the creditor by such outside factors as inflation, or the human productivity which becomes possible if money is invested to purchase stock in a business enterprise, thus producing dividends. The early Fathers of the Church protested against usury in the strongest terms and numerous ecclesiastical decrees in the 12th and 13th centuries enforced its prohibition under pain of of excommunication and denial of Catholic burial. There has been, however, a relaxation of the Church's law on the subject, since the development of Protestantism made it socially acceptable, and laissez-faire Capitalism in the 19th century made it an inescapable reality of daily life. This relaxation of Church law is expressed in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 1543: "If a commodity which is consumed by its first use be lent on the stipulation that it becomes the property of the borrower, who is bound to return to the lender not the thing itself, but its equivalent only, the lender may not receive any payment by reason of the loan itself. In the giving or lending of such a commodity, however, it is not in itself unlawful to make an arrangement for the recovery of interest at the rate allowed by the civil law, unless that rate is clearly excessive..." Fr. E. Cahill, S.J. in The Framework of a Christian State [available from Angelus Press], p.49, comments on and explains this change in the Church's law: "One may without enquiry or solicitude as to the existence or not of extrinsic titles (such as accidental loss caused by the loan, the risk of not being repaid, etc.) receive interest at the rate laid down by the civil law, provided that rate be not clearly excessive. The reason for this change or apparent change in the Church's attitude towards usury is that in modern times, owing to the capitalistic organization of economic life, money has practically become a form of capital, and the Church follows her traditional policy in regulating her attitude towards it. As usual she temporarily adjusts her discipline as far as possible to the needs of the age, even when these needs are the result of a state of things of which she does not approve, and allows the faithful to act in accordance with social customs sanctioned by existing civil law, provided these customs are not manifestly immoral or unjust." Such would not be the case, however, in a society which recognized and embraced the Social Kingship of Christ.

There are plenty of Yoghurts that use fruit pectin instead of Gelatin. But you do have to read the ingredients to make sure.

A few years ago a survey was published that found that over 50% of Americans believed that the wife of Noah was Joan of Arc /images/graemlins/smile.gif Absolutely true, I'm not making this up /images/graemlins/smile.gif

My advice is that unless you are real fixed up and can properly worship the deities, it would be best not to have them. I think once you go down that road, its not like you can just decide to stop worshiping them etc.... So better to be cautious before getting too involved. A simple picture is probably the best.

I've heard of Daoism (which I think is Taoism). Is Tao some sort of force like Chi?

What beautiful deities. Thanks for the pics.