Gauracandra

Think of what your mentality must be to actually club a seal. You pick up a bat, you sneak up behind this fat, waddling creature with big watery eyes, and then 'WHACK' the animal squeels, 'WHACK WHACK WHACK'. You see those cute watery eyes bludgeoned to death. Just look at this photo below. How could you even consider it? But this brings me to something fundamental. I've always found it very perplexing the reaction I get when I tell people I'm vegetarian. They are always horrified. Their reaction is so extreme at times that I've concluded that one a certain level they must feel I'm insulting them just by my existence. But if you pass the meat counter at a grocery store, just look at it physically. Forget the pain of the animal for a second. Just look at it visually. Its splotchy blood, pasty colors, veins popping out. It is visually gross. Yet no one seems to notice this. The more covered we become the less we can experience subtlety. Something so gross is seen as normal. Is it any wonder they don't care about clubbing a cute seal? The only reason there is some protest is because seals are cute. Unfortunately, many meat eaters who are against clubbing seals don't think anything wrong with killing cows. But atleast its a start. A side issue. One thing that fries me more than anything are pro-choice vegetarians. When I see "Save the Whale" bumper stickers next to a "Pro-Choice" bumper sticker, I almost slap my head in disbelief. Anyways, thats a side issue.

Thanks Avinash. My computer connection is slow so I couldn't see all the photos, but Bangalore looks very nice.

Ok, I got the following from one article. It lists the last 3 Popes and their Latin descriptive prophecy. Then it gives the Latin descriptive prophecy for the next Pope. If the next Pope is from the Benedictine Order... Pope No. 108: Paul VI (1968-78). "Flos Florum", which means "Flower of Flowers." Paul VI's coat of arms contained three fleurs-de-lis (Isis blossoms). Pope No. 109: John Paul I (1978). "De Medietate Lunae," which means "the Half Moon." John Paul I was born in the diocese of Belluno (beautiful moon) and was baptized Albino Luciani (white light). He became pope when there was a half moon (Aug. 26, 1978). He died the next month right after an eclipse of the moon. Pope No. 110: John Paul II (1978-2005). "De Labore Solis," which means "from the labor of the sun." John Paul II was born during an eclipse of the sun on May 8, 1920. He was buried during an eclipse of the sun. Pope No. 111: Unknown (19??-20??) "Gloria Olivae," which means "the glory of the Olive." Could it be that he will be from the Order of Saint Benedict, also known as the Olivetans? Could he be an African, a continent symbolized by the olive tree?

I read one place that "De Labore Solis" was translated as "from the labor of the sun". This article translates it as "Of the Solar Eclipse". Read, its pretty interesting. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/4/6/162641.shtml Prophecy on Pope Fulfilled by Eclipses? A 10th Century Irish bishop - St. Malachy - predicted every pope that would preside over the Catholic Church. Almost ten centuries ago, Malachy predicted this pope would be noted by an eclipse of the sun. In an eerie coincidence, John Paul II was the only known pope to be born on the day of a solar eclipse. But the prophetic link doesn't end there. Pope John Paul II will be buried this Friday during another solar eclipse. Astronomers say that on Friday, the day of the Pope's funeral, a partial solar eclipse will blot out most of the sun and darken a wide area of the world, from the South Pacific to the Western Hemisphere. Solar eclipses are not unusual. But what makes this coming Friday's eclipse notable is the fact that there was a near total eclipse of the sun seen across Europe on May 18, 1920, the very day that John Paul II was born in Poland. Adding fuel to the arcane speculation about these events is the prophecy of St. Malachy. Malachy was discovered to have left behind a prophetic list of all future popes beginning with Pope Celestine II, whose papacy began in 1143 A.D., up to and including the 112th. The list includes John Paul and just two more popes who will follow him. In his list of popes, he uses a single line in Latin identifying a characteristic of each pope. The description applied to the 110th pope on his list - John Paul II - is "De Labore Solis" (Of the Solar Eclipse), which seems to add great weight to the validity of St. Malachy’s chilling prophecy: that the next two popes chosen to succeed John Paul II will be the last popes. After the reign of the last pope, "Peter the Roman," St. Malachy wrote, Rome will be destroyed. As NewsMax.com reported April 3, Saint's Prophecy: Only Two Popes Remain, the 112th prophecy says, "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will reign Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman), who will feed his flock amid many tribulations; after which the seven-hilled city [Rome] will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people," an indication that the world will end.

This is odd. A few weeks back I read there would be a solar eclipse on April 8. This turns out to be the day that the Pope will be buried. I thought that was rather odd. What makes it more odd I have just read that the day the Pope was born it was a similar eclipse. He was born on an eclipse and buried on an eclipse. Maybe there is something to astrology.

I’ve met many devotees who openly declare their Varna as brahmana or ksatriya and yet if you look honestly they are neither. I’ve only met one truly strict brahmana (teaches for no pay, simply for the love of teaching). I’ve never met a single “ksatriya” who is in the occupation of protecting or governing society. Its easy to declare oneself in the upper tiers (its natural to think more highly of oneself) but what is ones actual occupation (what do we do not what we say). I certainly will consult this one true Brahmin I know, and if I ever meet a true ksatriya I’ll take his input as well. Until then I see no harm in brainstorming ideas.

Simply declaring oneself a Brahmana does not make one a brahmana. Shiva atleast is against giving tests. I'm not so much against the idea. It may not prove you are a brahmana but it proves you know atleast something. For instance, to be a lawyer you have to pass the bar exam. To be a doctor, you have to have certain credentials. To be a Notary Public you have to go through various courses etc.... Now if there were a standardized education system, which had tests say in Sanskrit, scripture, etc... as well as an ethics board to review the actions of an individual (to make sure they maintain the brahminical standards), then if one said "I'm a brahmana. I've been certified by the Brahminical Society. I've passed a test on Sanskrit, one on ethics, one on rhetoric etc...." Then atleast it has some objective measurement. Is it perfect? No. You can't measure the simplicity of a person, though we can often see those who aren't simple. An ethics board might be able to review any candidate who wants to be part of this society, with referrals etc.... Now back to the question of Varna, I'm convinced the vast majority of people are shudras - including myself. Unfortunately these terms have become tinged with casteism and negative stereotypes (like shudras are dirty, foul mouthed etc....). Based on my breakdown above I think I would have to be a shudra. I am not a priest nor a teacher - thus occupationally I am not a brahmin. I do not protect people nor work actively in government affairs - thus occupationally I am not a ksatriya. I do not own my own business nor do farming - thus I am not a Vaisya. So what does that leave me? I think the category of Shudra is a catchall for everyone else. Now here are my qualifications. I have an MBA in finance and work in a white collar job. You might think that makes me a Vaisya (business oriented). But here is the difference. I don't think having a white collar job makes you a Vaisya. I'm just a corporate cog. I work for a multinational that probably has over 100,000 employees around the world. But Hilaire Belloc would call me I'm a "wage slave". I don't make my income, I earn it by salary. A Vaisya is a business owner who employs others. He is not an employee who manages others. Thats how I see it atleast. If you are a white collar worker, you are just an employee of someone else. You serve your employer. Nor if I managed people would this make me a ksatriya. I would just be a slightly higher paid "wage slave" working for someone else. My conclusion is people often think of shudra as being low class. It really is just everyone else. If you aren't a teacher/priest, if you aren't a protector/social governor, if you aren't a business owner or farmer, then you are a shudra. This leaves the vast majority of all other occupations as shudra (even high paying ones like doctors). Its not a low class position, and we don't act low class, we just serve someone else. So how can we use this? We can establish trust funds to specifically train people in each field. Brahmins would study philosophy, Latin/Sanskrit, rhetoric etc... Ksatriyas would study martial arts, military strategy, government and diplomacy. Vaisyas would study agriculture and business ownership. Shudras would have vocational training.

The problem is there is no objective standard as to the quality of an individual. A test, while its not perfect, is trying to objectively measure something. If we are talking purely occupational, here is how I would break it down: Brahmana - teachers and priests. You either teach in a K-12, or in university or you are a full time pujari etc... Otherwise you aren't a brahmana. Ksatriya - military, police, fireman, or politician (city council, mayor, congressman, senator). If you aren't actively working protecting people or in government then you are not a Ksatriya. Vaisya - Dairy industry, or employer of X number of people. I say there must be a number of employees before you can be considered a "businessman", else you could just have a craft. And white collar jobs do not make you a businessman (you are working for someone else). Sudra - everyone else. This includes doctors, lawyers, architects, analyst, office manager, crafts people etc.... This is probably 80% of the population. Now, I'm not sure but what is the purpose of such identification? I've just identified them, these already exist, though not classed as such. How does a doctor standing up and saying "I'm a sudra" benefit society? He is serving someone else. How does a white collar analyst standing up and saying "I'm a sudra" benefit society? He is what he is, he is doing his job. Seems to me a bit artificial. The only benefit I see is if there were training schools (and tests) to train people in each of these fields. How to be a teacher. How to be a police officer. How to start a business and employ others. How to do various service occupations.

The first question we need to ask is what is it we mean by Varnashram? That is what is the goal we are trying to hit. I tend to view it as largely economic, though others will see it as social. The best you can do is have a general outline, and then let the organism grow in its myriad ways, and see what comes of it. A society can't be organized, it is a social organism and has to grow and mature. I do see it happening in Iskcon, its growing in all sorts of ways, some slowly, but here and there. Here is how I see it. Srila Prabhupada set up a great bridge between East and West. Today Indians can come to western countries all over the world and immediately tap into a network of temple communities. Westerners can also tap into this network and it is a great benefit. I know many devotees who work in the U.S. and then live in India. It gives them a flexibility that most Americans never will have. Thats a great strength. Partly this is because if you are a member of a large religion, there really isn't a network you tap into (its so large, that it is somewhat meaningless). So we might call this a sort of horizontal bridge - east<->west. The next step as I see it is a vertical bridge within various countries (America, Europe, India, South America etc...). Can we create a flexibility for our members to be able to move freely east and west (already pretty much established), as well as move freely from city life to country life (up and down, north and south). If we do this we have a full range of mobility and flexibility. To some degree this has already been established. Again, unlike most religions which are so big, Iskcon has the advantage of being small enough that there is in fact a general cultural consensus that we want farming communities etc.... Thats a good start (having the idea, even as an ideal). If we did establish strong rural communities it would be a major benefit for devotees to be able to move in between those worlds (city life & country life). The main obstacle I see is in the past Iskcon purchased land, and devotees moved out of the city. But this was basically a commune, and like communism, no one did anything. Alachua seems to have done some of it right. There is a large temple community, with private ownership of their land. The main problem with rural communities is the lack of jobs. Most devotees would want to live out in the country if they could get a decent and steady job. In this respect something like a Vaisnava Small Business Administration might be useful. Can we work towards creating home based businesses. I don't know what these necessarily will be, but in the U.S. there are millions of people who earn a living from home. I would think we could find a few thousand jobs that would be feasible. Let me give one example I've thought of. This is a possibility of leveraging city life and country life. Its not perfect but its a general idea. Suppose (its always easier to imagine I know) you had a set of devotees who had a real skill. For a simple example, lets say you have 4 devotees who were great at stained glass. You could in fact do all of your stained glass work in the garage of your home out in the country. But how do you sell it? Well, if you had a cooperative, you could have 4 devotees, each rotates one week per month to the city. There you have a permanent office/showcase and an apartment. During the week you take orders, and work on your projects. The projects are shared with the others living in the country who create the work. Each week one person rotates out and another rotates in. There are a couple of advantages here. First, you only have to live in the city one week per month. Commute wouldn't be that bad, after all every 3 weeks you might drive 8 hours. The second advantage is competitive. I'd be willing to bet with a skill like this, you could in fact have cheaper rates than competitors who don't have that network and all live in the city. All you have to do is earn enough to maintain a life in the country, they have to earn enough to maintain a life in the city. So I've been trying to brainstorm what sorts of jobs these are. What jobs could be done at home and at the same time with a devotee rural community would give a slight competitive edge.

Here is a very interesting article: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/03/22/un.water.day.ap/index.html Clean water is the quickest way to improve the health of impoverished nations. I saw an interesting program on 60 Minutes a few years ago, with the inventor Dean Kamen. He invented the Segway scooter. Anyways, he had another invention he was pursuing. Here is a quick CBS article on it: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/12/60II/main529070.shtml Essentially he was using an invention created in 1816 known as the Stirling Engine. It uses variations in heat patterns to create movement. Here is an article on how they work: http://travel.howstuffworks.com/stirling-engine.htm And here is a company that sells Stirling Engines: http://www.stirlingengine.com/ Dean Kamen realized he could create portable Stirling Engines. I'm not sure what the heat source was, if it was wood burned, or simply changes in air temperature during the day, but the Stirling Engine would drive an engine and pump to purify water. He demonstrated the engine, and said he wanted to create portable units that villages in Africa and other poor areas could use to create clean water to drink and bathe with. I think it sounds like a real workable solution. If he can patent it, and then give the technology away free, then poor countries can build it themselves at much cheaper rates (than if it was built in the U.S. and sold abroad).

Asafoetida Ferula assafoetida Fam: Umbelliferae Asafoetida gets its name from the Persian aza, for mastic or resin, and the Latin foetidus, for stinking. It is a gum that is from the sap of the roots and stem of the ferula species, a giant fennel that exudes a vile odour. Early records mention that Alexander the Great carried this “stink finger” west in 4 BC. It was used as a spice in ancient Rome, and although not native to India, it has been used in Indian medicine and cookery for ages. It was believed that asafoetida enhanced singers voices. In the days of the Mughal aristocracy, the court singers if Agra and Delhi would eat a spoonful of asafoetida with butter and practice on the banks of the river Yamuna. Spice Description Asafoetida is a hard resinous gum, grayish-white when fresh, darkening with age to yellow, red and eventually brown. It is sold in blocks or pieces as a gum and more frequently as a fine yellow powder, sometimes crystalline or granulated. Bouquet: a pungent smell of rotting onions or sulfur. The smell dissipates with cooking. Flavour: on its own, extremely unpleasant, like concentrated rotten garlic. When cooked, it adds an onion-like flavour. Hotness Scale: 0 Preparation and Storage It is vital to keep asafoetida in airtight containers as its sulfurous odour will effect other foods and spices. It is most commonly available as a powder or granules that can be added directly to the cooking pot. It is also sold in lumps that need to be crushed before using. This is a very powerful spice and even in its ground state lasts well over a year if stored properly, away from light and air... Culinary Uses Use in minute quantities, adding directly to cooking liquid, frying in oil, or steeping in water. Asafoetida is used mostly in Indian vegetarian cooking, in which the strong onion-garlic flavour enhances many dishes, especially those of Brahmin and Jain castes where onions and garlic are prohibited. It is used mostly in south and west India, though it does not grow there. It is used in many lentil dishes (often to prevent flatulence), vegetarian soups and pickles. It is also suited to many fish dishes and some pappadums are seasoned with asafoetida. Attributed Medicinal Properties Asafoetida is known as an antidote for flatulence and is also prescribed for respiratory conditions like asthma, bronchitis and whooping cough. Its vile smell has led to many unusual medical claims, mostly stemming from the belief that it’s foetid odour would act as a deterrent to germs. In several European countries a small piece of the resin would be tied on a string and hung around childrens necks to protect from disease. The shock of the sulfurous smell was once thought to calm hysteria and in the days of the American Wild West it was included in a mixture with other strong spices as a cure for alcoholism. Plant Description and Cultivation Asafoetida is grown chiefly in Iran and Afghanistan from where it is exported to the rest of the world. In India it is cultivated in Kashmir. It is a perennial fennel that grows wild to 3.6 metres (12 ft) high, in large natural forests where little else grows. It bears fine leaves and yellow flowers. The roots are thick and pulpy and also yield a similar resin to that of the stems. All parts of the plant have the distinctive fetid smell. In March and April, just before flowering, the stalks are cut close to the root. A milky liquid oozes out, which dries to form a resin. This is collected and a fresh cut is made. This procedure lasts for about three months from the first incision, by which time the plant has yielded up to two pounds of resin and the root has dried up. Other Names Asafetida, Assafetida, Assafoetida, Devil’s Dung, Devil’s Durt, Food of the Gods (Persian), Laser (Roman), Stinking Gum French: assa foetida, ferulr perisque German: Asafotida, Stinkender Asant Italian: assafetida Spanish: asafetida Afghan: kama-i-anguza Indian: hing, hingu, heeng Tamil: perunkaya

Here is an old thread addressing this issue: http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat/cat/hinduism/13628/111/collapsed/5/o/1

I've been told by devotees before not to eat chocolate or bread (made by nondevotees - it contains karma). But no devotee has told me to stop drinking commercial milk.... We've had this discussion on this forum before, and I don't want to rehash the arguments. But there does seem to be a lack of proportion when people go after chocolate (which harms no one) and let slide commercial milk (which certainly does cause harm). I'm a milk drinker and can acknowledge this (the harm caused by the milk industry). The view against chocolate is that it is a stimulant. As such it agitates the mind. However, how much chocolate might be a point to consider. Sugar can also be a stimulant that agitates the mind (and yet we eat halava, sweet rice, burfi etc...) Ever see a kid hopped up on too much sugar? It aint a pretty sight. Another example I remember on these forums was Indian pickles. They are hot and spicy. Thus they must be in the mode of passion. But are they? Sure if you eat tons of indian pickle that probably is in the mode of passion. But if you eat a little indian pickle, with rice and subji, how is it particularly different from just mild spicing. So eating a lot of chocolate is most likely bad because it will disturb your mind. But a small bit might be acceptable. Overall we are told to avoid it, so that is probably the best advice. But I wouldn't damn yourself to hell if you eat it here and there.

I don't have anything against it. However, I believe asafoetida is made from tree sap. Now this doesn't bother me. But I've been told there is some scriptural statement saying that in Kali Yuga the sins of the world reside in certain areas, one of which is in the sap of trees. What that means I don't know. So if you eat tree sap you are injesting sins. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, and I haven't seen the statement specificially, plus it makes eating pancakes a bit difficult. How can maple syrup be bad?

Avinash, I've put in my prayer for your friend. I truly hope he recovers. I would suggest if you can to get some tulasi neck beads and have them loosely around his neck, and if possible have a tape recording of someone chanting the mahamantra. Even on a subtle level this is entering his ears. Iskcon devotees do this routinely in such situations. They usually have a tape of Prabhupada's japa chanting. Just try to surround his bedside with devotional items, like deity pictures etc.... I hope this helps. I'm very sorry for your friend and wish you the best. Gauracandra

When we see a vice it is very easy to argue against it. But how can we argue against virtue? Isn't virtue always good? A virtue when taken out of proportion to other virtues can in fact create problems as bad as a vice. Today it appears all these virtues are going in all sorts of directions, rather than working conjointly towards a common goal. So we see in science the virtue of seeking knowledge. This is in fact very good. But if we seek knowledge at the expense of other virtues like mercy, then what does it get us? We end up with a science that is ONLY scientific. Science becomes trapped in the prison of one idea - that to know and manipulate the laws of nature is the goal, regardless of its ethical ramifications. Religion has many virtues like humility. It often tries to institute ethical guidelines through the development of tradition based on these virtues. Sometimes these traditions appear to or are interpreted as being at odds with science. The key is not either or, but rather balancing the virtues - to pursue science with humility. Never to relinquish our humanity for the sake of knowledge, while understanding that seeking knowledge is part of our humanity. Then we'll be normal and sane.

Should we hold off on technology until we are a perfectly holy people? Or should we pursue technology while still imperfect? There is a real danger. If we wait until the whole world is holy, we may never have any material progress. But if we pursue technology while we are still materialistic, it can bring about our doom. I'm sure when we invented nuclear weapons, which true was a race against Germany, we thought we could control them. Today we have to worry about North Korea and Iran getting them. Was it worth it to unleash the Nuclear Genie? Or how about genetic modification for curing diseases? Sounds good. But wait until the Eugenics societies start to form again, and they decide you aren't genetically worthy. We say "Oh no that will never happen." Really? It already has happened once before. So with Nuclear Fusion there are great possibilities. If we had unlimited clean energy we could, in the language of economics, "move the production possibilities curve." Basically it would free literally tens of trillions of dollars in the global economy. We could use that excess money to feed the poor, build school, hospitals, even "purchase" peace if need be. But we'd likely just go buy more Gap clothing, and buy more bobbles and gizmos.

Here is the Catholic view of suicide (atleast to my understanding). It sounds a bit strange until we think it through a bit. Basically, we are created beings - we have been given life, which is a great boon. Life is viewed as something fundamentally good, the world is good even if we have fallen. Now when you murder someone you take a single life, and this is a sin. However, suicide I believe is considered an even greater sin than murder. Sounds odd. But the idea is that when you kill yourself, you insult the whole of creation. You say that this whole world is dead to you. There is nothing worth living for. I kill myself I am saying that I have abandoned all hope. I think part of the Catholic teaching against suicide is one of mental health. I think society, especially atheistic society, and society that becomes more spiritually confused, naturally turns to suicide. They start to question everything, even whether life is worth anything. So a strict guard against suicide is set up because they know how the mind of man works - people unless given hope, unless they see life and the world as good, will fall into despair and kill themselves. Partly its theological and partly its mental health. A world without God is a world in which we can't give thanks for anything (who would we thank). A world where we are just machines to be turned off or on is a desperate world - and if this idea becomes prevalent then we create a culture of death. We must always have hope. We must fight against the mind - which naturally follows the most expedient path to relieve pain. But there is something worse than pain - its having no hope. Its the duty of each of us to be that hope when someone is in despair, to help them carry their cross until the end. If they are to die, let them die well - with someone with them until the end. Giving up hope is easy - its what we would all do if left to our own mind. Having hope, and giving hope, even in the most hopeless situations is extremely difficult. But if but a spark of hope remains it can be fanned into a flame. Its easy for me to say as I'm not in such a desperate situation, but thats the idea. Imagine in some horrible situations. Suppose you were a Jew in a Nazi concentration camp in 1945. You are starving and deprived. Millions of people around you have been gased and cremated. Why not give up hope and commit suicide. But then someone helps you to carry on just a little longer until the end, and then the Allies defeat Germany, and you are spared. You grow up, have children, generations continue forward. Who knows what the world will bring? But if we kill that spark, snuff out the light, we are assured that we won't bring good into the world. There is a movie out called Hotel Rwanda I think that is like this - one man saving others in a desperate situation. I haven't seen it yet but have heard its very good. Anyways, always "Keep hope alive".

I don't have any specific information about personal relationships with the mentioned individuals. He certainly was the head of the Nazi missile program. But then again virtually every single German was a member of the Nazi party. If you are aware of a specific atrocity he committed, outside of general warfare, please post a source. Here is what I found on one site: "Heinrich Himmler saw the military potential of Braun's research and took over control of the research station. Himmler became increasingly concerned about the motivation of Braun, considering him more interested in space travel than developing bombs. In March, 1944, Braun was arrested by the Gestapo and was only released when they became convinced that Braun was willing to use all his energies to develop this bomb that Himmler believed had the potential to win the war." And another site: "The SS and the Gestapo arrested von Braun for crimes against the state because he persisted in talking about building rockets which would go into orbit around the Earth and perhaps go to the Moon. His crime was indulging in frivolous dreams when he should have been concentrating on building bigger rocket bombs for the Nazi war machine. Dornberger convinced the SS and the Gestapo to release von Braun because without him there would be no V-2 and Hitler would have them all shot. On arriving back at Peenemunde, von Braun immediately assembled his planning staff and asked them to decide how and to whom they should surrender. Most of the scientists were frightened of the Russians, they felt the French would treat them like slaves, and the British did not have enough money to afford a rocket program. That left the Americans. After stealing a train with forged papers, von Braun led 500 people through war-torn Germany to surrender to the Americans. The SS were issued orders to kill the German engineers, who hid their notes in a mine shaft and evaded their own army while searching for the Americans. Finally, the team found an American private and surrendered to him. Realizing the importance of these engineers, the Americans immediately went to Peenemunde and Nordhausen and captured all of the remaining V-2's and V-2 parts, then destroyed both places with explosives. The Americans brought over 300 train car loads of spare V-2 parts to the United States. Much of von Braun's production team was captured by the Russians." I mean if you are told you and your family will be killed by Hitler what are you going to do? Again, every German was a Nazi. As far as I see his crimes were the same as the crimes as the German people being caught up in the wave of Hitler's world.

Here are some quotes from Von Braun: “For me, the idea of a creation is not conceivable without invoking the necessity of design. One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design and purpose behind it all. In the world around us, we can behold the obvious manifestations of an ordered structured plan or design. We can see the will of the species to live and propagate. And we are humbled by the powerful forces at work on a galactic scale, and the purposeful orderliness of nature that endows a tiny and ungainly seed with the ability to develop into a beautiful flower. The better we understand the intricacies of the universe and all it harbors, the more reason we have found to marvel at the inherent design upon which it is based. While the admission of a design for the universe ultimately raises the question of a Designer (a subject outside of science), the scientific method does not allow us to exclude data which lead to the conclusion that the universe, life and man are based on design. To be forced to believe only one conclusion—that everything in the universe happened by chance—would violate the very objectivity of science itself. Certainly there are those who argue that the universe evolved out of a random process, but what random process could produce the brain of a man or the system of the human eye?” “... admit that many of the miracles in the world around us are hard to understand, and they do not deny that the universe, as modern science sees it, is indeed a far more wondrous thing than the creation medieval man could perceive. But they still maintain that since science has provided us with so many answers, the day will soon arrive when we will be able to understand even the creation of the fundamental laws of nature with a Divine Intent. They challenge science to prove the existence of God. But, must we really light a candle to see the Sun?” “The more we learn about God’s creation the more I am impressed with the orderliness and unerring perfection of the natural laws that govern it. In this perfection, man — the scientist — catches a glimpse of the Creator and his design for nature. The man-to-God relationship is deepened in the devout scientist as his knowledge of the natural laws grows.” “I consider it one of the greatest tragedies of our times that this dangerous error is so widely believed... By not telling the children about nature’s mysteries, its infinite number of unexplained and unexplainable miracles, we deny them the most important dowry for their future life… By adorning our own scientific achievements we kill humility, the mother of any true scientific progress…” “There is no reason why God cannot retain the same position in our modern world that He held before the natural sciences began to pierce through the wall of dogma erected by the Church.” “I have discussed the aspect of a Designer at some length because it might be that the primary resistance to acknowledging the "Case for Design" as a viable scientific alternative to the current "Case for Chance" lies in the inconceivability, in some scientists’ minds, of a Designer. The inconceivability of some ultimate issue (which will always lie outside scientific resolution) should not be allowed to rule out any theory that explains the interrelationship of observed data and is useful for prediction. Many men who are intelligent and of good faith say they cannot visualize a Designer. Well, can a physicist visualize an electron? The electron is materially inconceivable and yet, it is so perfectly known through its effects that we use it to illuminate our cities, guide our airliners...and take the most accurate measurements. What strange rationale makes some physicists accept the inconceivable electron as real while refusing to accept the reality of a Designer on the ground that they cannot conceive Him? I am afraid that, although they really do not understand the electron either, they are ready to accept it because they managed to produce a rather clumsy mechanical model of it borrowed from rather limited experience in other fields...” “More scientists will get off their ivory towers and publicly say what I am saying here...with all the modern means at our disposal, with schools, churches, educational institutions, press, radio, and television, they should tell the world that religion and science are not incompatible; that, to the contrary; they belong together.” “We in NASA are often asked what the real reason was for the amazing string of successes we had with our Apollo flights to the Moon. I think the only honest answer we could give was that we tried to never overlook anything. It is in that same sense of scientific honesty that I endorse the presentation of alternative theories for the origin of the universe, life and man in the science classroom. It would he an error to overlook the possibility that the universe was planned rather than happening by chance.” “... the laws of creation and the divine intentions underlying the creation. Through science man attempts to understand the laws of creation; through religious activities he attempts to understand the intentions of the Creator. Each approach is a search for ultimate truth.” “Science in its drive to understand the creation, and religion in its drive to understand the Creator, have many common objectives. Nevertheless, there have been conflicts in the relationship between science and religion... Personally, I find this state of affairs unsatisfactory, for I wish to regard the Creator and His creation as an entity... [To von Braun] science and religion are like two windows in a house through which we look at the reality of the Creator and the laws manifested in His creation. As long as we see two different images through these two windows and cannot reconcile them, we must keep trying to obtain a more complete and better integrated total picture of the ultimate reality by properly tying together our scientific and religious concepts.” “We cannot live without ethical laws and some belief [that they are from God]... More than ever, our survival depends upon adherence to some basic ethical principles... It seems to me that two stimuli are necessary to make man endeavor to conform to the accepted ethical standards. One is the belief in a last judgment, where every one of us has to account for what we did with God’s precious gift of life on Earth. The other is the belief [that we]...can cherish the reward or suffer the penalty decreed in the Last judgment.” “While technology controls the forces of nature around us, ethics try to control the forces of nature within us... I think it is a fair assumption that the Ten Commandments are entirely adequate — without amendments — to cope with all the problems the technological revolution not only has brought up, but will bring up in the future. The real problem is not a lack of ethical legislation, but a lack in day-to-day guidance and control... When science freed itself from the bonds of religious dogma, thus opening the way for the technological revolution, the Church also lost much of its influence on the ethical conduct of man” “I certainly prayed a lot before and during the crucial Apollo flights, and I also prayed during the last days in Germany — when things collapsed all around me. Indeed, during those hours of decision, when we decided to surrender to the Americans, my anxiety was at the bursting point. I prayed then that our surrender would be accepted in good faith” “Manned space flight is an amazing achievement, but it has opened for mankind thus far only a tiny door for viewing the awesome reaches of space. An outlook through this peephole at the vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science”

I was watching a 'Memories' videotape with Caru Prabhu (temple president of Utah). He told a story where Werner Von Braun, the father of the U.S. space program openly declared his belief in God. Srila Prabhupada was very pleased to hear this. So I decided to look up some things on him. First here is a quick write-up of the man. Following that are some quotes by Von Braun (best known to me for his Von Braun wheel design for a space station). WERNHER VON BRAUN (1912-1977) One of the world’s top space scientists was a man by the name of Wernher von Braun. He attended the University of Berlin, and after his graduation began developing rockets for his native country of Germany. However, in 1945 he came to the United States, and ten years later in 1955, he became a U.S. citizen. Dr. von Braun was the leading force behind America’s own space program. He and his team helped invent and produce the four-stage Jupiter rocket that launched Explorer I, the first United States satellite. In another of his projects, the Saturn V rocket was constructed, eventually putting the first astronauts on the Moon. He directed America’s program of missile development for many years, and eventually became the Director of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). His office was in Huntsville, Alabama. During his lifetime, Dr. von Braun received many important honors and awards. But he always gave God credit for his achievements. He believed that the evidence for God’s existence could be found all around us in nature. He also believed in the concept of creation as taught in Genesis 1; he did not believe in evolution. He once said that science and religion work so well together that they should be considered as "sisters." The more he studied the heavens, the more evidence he saw of the Creator. Dr. von Braun was never ashamed of his faith in God. When he died in 1977, co-workers found in his files many letters he had written to other scientists (like the famous medical doctor, Albert Schweitzer), in which he tried to show them why they, too, should believe in God. He tried to share his faith in God with everyone around him. Today he is remembered as a "giant" in the scientific community, but he also is remembered as a "giant" for his belief in God. We should want to imitate him in this way.

I think Mormons are pious people. They preach 3 of the 4 regulative principles (no intoxication, no gambling, no illicit sex) though they do eat meat. Everything I've read of their philosophy though is very materialistic but in a pious way. By this I mean its very embodied. You are fundamentally your body. God is basically a person with a body with DNA. He is not all knowing, or all powerful, just more knowing and more powerful than you. The universe is here for us to manipulate and create. And this can be very positive - so I call it pious materialism. Its about building a nice home, a good family, climbing the spiritual corporate ladder. I don't see any devotion though. As for approaches, I've used two. The first is just to be real straight with them. Its best to do this first time out, rather than on the second visit. I told two before saying "Look. I'm a Hare Krishna. I respect you guys for living a pious life, but honestly I'm not going to convert." And that did it. The other approach I've used on Jehovah Witnesses. Basically I bring up another Christian denomination and praise them. You see all these Christian denominations really don't like each other. Its kind of weird but understandable. Each says they are the only way. So with Jehovah Witnesses I usually say "I really like Seventh Day Adventists. They are vegetarian and I'm vegetarian." Then I point to their picture of heaven, where the lion is sitting with the lamb and I say "Is that heaven?YesWas Eden like heaven?YesSo the lion wasn't eating the lamb?Correct. He ate the herbs of the land.So wasn't Adam & Eve vegetarian?" And then start preaching vegetarianism, how the Seventh Day Adventists have that part correct etc.... Usually they leave me alone pretty quick. So you can bring up other religions, vegetarianism, or even question their philosophy. For instance, ask if God is all knowing and all powerful. Ask if he is embodied. Even get straight to the point and ask if the goal of Mormonism is to become our own gods of our own planets an universes. I did this last one to a Mormon co-worker and just quickly said "Doesn't the Bible say "Thou shalt have no other gods before me?" The guy stammered around a bit, I didn't want to embarass him so I just dropped it.

Here is a listing of the farm subsidies in the U.S. Total for 2003 was approximately $17 billion, slightly more than NASA's budget. What concerns me is this. We are told that we need large scale farming because it is so efficient. But that is part of the problem. Because it is so efficient, they have run the profit margins down. So then they need the government to subsidize the farms. For instance, the U.S. purchases huge quantities of milk, and then destroys the milk to keep it off the market. This is done because if they didn't do this then the cost of milk would be so low that the large corporate farms couldn't stay in business. So we end up paying twice. First we pay more for milk, and then we pay taxes to keep the milk prices high. How many of these are small time farmer? Check out these names: Riceland Foods Inc. (half-billion dollars from 1995-2003 in subsidies), Producers Rice Mill Inc., Farmers Rice Coop, Cenex Harvest States Cooperative, Tyler Farms, Dnrc Trust Land Management, 1st National Bank Sioux Falls etc… Sounds very neighborly doesn't it? Why are we subsidizing 1st National Bank of Sioux Falls? Check the links, they are pretty interesting. Quote from the site: “Sixty percent of all farmers and ranchers do not collect government subsidy payments, according to USDA, mostly because the crops and livestock they produce do not qualify for subsidy programs (see state breakdown). Among subsidy recipients, large farms collect almost all the money. Nationwide, ten percent of the biggest (and often most profitable) subsidized crop producers collected 72 percent of all subsidies, averaging $34,424 in annual payments between 1995 and 2003. The bottom 80 percent of the recipients saw only $768 on average per year.” Top Recipients http://www.ewg.org/farm/top_recips.php?fips=00000&progcode=total 2003 Subsidies http://www.ewg.org/farm/region.php?fips=00000&progcode=total&yr=2003 “For the $131 billion spent on commodity and disaster subsidies between 1995 and 2003, taxpayers could have bought 25 percent or more of all the farms in 302 counties—land, barns, farmhouses and all.” http://www.ewg.org/farm/buythefarm.php

Some time back I was reading that in Vermont the average dairy farm has under 100 cows. This sounds like a manageable size for a small farm. However, many milk cooperatives were getting angry at one individual who just moved into the state, as I recall, and was setting up a mega-dairy farm with several thousand. This is what Distributism was against - the mass accumulation of wealth, driving the small owner out of business. The fundamental idea was that everyone had a right to earn a decent living. If lets say 50 cows can earn a family dairy $60,000 a year (just a made up number), why should some mega-dairy be created with 5000 cows, effectively giving one individual say $6 million per year. It would be better to have 100 family farms with 50 cows each, where each family could earn a decent living, and be their own boss. A mega dairy, like mega shopping malls, or mega-agribusiness, drives out independent entrepreneurs, so that one man may earn multiple livlihoods. Distributism is not socialism. It doesn't take from the wealthy and give to the poor, it doesn't have government run the companies. What it says is that there is a limit to how much a person can have, because if they consume more and more, it is only natural that the small person will lose out to the big corporation. One man will earn multiple livelihoods at the expense of independent businessmen. There are several changes this causes, a major one being a change in the culture. You go from a culture of small owners, who have pride in their small business, to being a culture of dependent workers who can't wait to get off of work so they don't have to take orders from their boss. Not everyone will be independent, but a determinant amount will be and that is enough to radically change the underlying culture.

The site owner looks to be an African American woman who's name is Tulasi Kilgore living in Helena, Montana. Perhaps she is a devotee, or into eastern spirituality. BTW, I think the last rabbit is some type of cinnamon halavah, maybe with walnuts or cashews /images/graemlins/smile.gif