suchandra

Srila Sridhar Maharaja very deliberately, decisively and directly used ritvik terminology in regards to passing on his succession in his official and formal declaration of spiritual succession.

It was no accident.

It was no blip.

It was no slip.

It was no blunder.

 

It was a very deliberate and decisive pronouncement that I am sure he had years to ponder.

 

It's not up to you or me or anyone else to say that the ritvik concept is the death of ISKCON or the parampara.

That is just mental mushrooms popping-up in your head.

 

The wisdom and forethought of Sridhar Maharaja are far beyond your miniscule rational thinking process and decisive factor.

 

Your determination of the danger and destructive result of a ritvik system is just speculations and imagination.

 

One thing we don't have to speculate about or imagine in our minds is the final instructions of Sridhar Maharaja regarding his spiritual succession and his appointing Govinda Maharaja as ritvik.

 

This instruction of Sridhar Maharaja has more wisdom, power and beauty to it than all our imaginative thoughts about how bad it would be if we just followed the acharyas instead of trying to second-guess them.

 

If ritvik was the death of ISKCON and SCSMatha, Srila Prabhupada and Sridhar Maharaja would not have implemented such measures.

 

Claims of the death and destruction of ISKCON and SCSMatha if the instructions of the acharyas were actually followed is just our little minds refusing to accept that inconceivability is always an issue we have to deal with when approaching the infinite.

 

The infinite can't be caged-up or bottled-up with stereotypes.

But, our nature is to try to do that anyway.

I did not say that the ritviks are wrong and that Srila Sridhar Maharaja and Prabhupada did not order a ritivk system. Fact is that presently we have no ritvik systems in both Prabhupada's succession and Sridhar Swami's succession. What you say might be correct, but who listens? Nobody listens because it is not your job. It is Krishna's department only to correct glanir/deviation in His parampara system. Yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati bharata. Our business is to perform devotional service, bhakti-yoga. Why are you interefering what is Krishna's business? Therefore nothing happens since 30 years, because people want to interfere with their pea-brain what is actually a problem only Krishna can solve. And Krishna repeatedly reminds us that He takes care and helps the devotee, somehow we cant accept. No, I have to do this. Result: Havoc. If all the ritviks would have simply stayed within ISKCON, by now Krishna would have solved all the problems concerning "which diksa-system does work". Now things are getting more and more complicated because our human brains once again display shortcoming. Krishna knows better how to deal with troubles on the path of bhakti-yoga. Why people have no faith and reject when Krishna promises to lead His devotee on the path of perfection?

Yes the Parampara is always pure. We must discriminate between parampara real and apparent.

By now newcomers have learned that Krishna removes neophyte gurus with different methods of His handwriting which arent fully qualified to sit on the vyasasana and even if some havent learned from the past but become within their hearts, by reading Prabhupada's books, devotees of Krishna, Krishna will surely always protect such rare souls and ultimately show them the right path.

When we see gurus falling down one by one, even like epidemic fall down, this is Krishna's problem not ours. If Krishna considers these people to be removed from sitting on the vyasasana, whoever appointed them in the first place, then why is this my problem? What happened when the ritvik movement started to grow? The GBC did the opposite, appointed even more gurus. To speak of our responsibility for installing a safety system, this is another meddling into Krishna's department. Krishna is the only real safety system.

False gurus is a topic since the creation of the universe, Krishna is well aware of this problem and surely knows endless stories of pseudo gurus throughout creation and also has the best ways of treating this problem. Therefore He Himself created a parampara system which only He Himself controls. It is clearly His department only to sort out swindlers and to protect the devotees, not anybody else's.

What is going on at the Matha and what is the authorized instructions of Sridhar Maharaja don't appear to in compliance.

 

So, I know well the concept that Sridhar Maharaja gave in his final "declaration of spiritual succession" and I know well about the psycophants and Matha dwellers that stripped Govinda Maharaja of ritvik status and his "SEVAITE" acharya status to make him master of SCSMATH.

Misunderstood -- you're surely right, correct, but is it our business? Why are you stealing away Krishna's service of protecting His devotees? This is clearly only His departement to protect the devotees. Krishna is not dull stone - He's fully alive and whenever things are going wrong in His installed parampara system He will personally correct and help His devotees. Therefore the ritvik movement couldnt change anything but simply disunite the whole world, ritviks are simply taking a hand into Krishna's department. And because Krishna doesnt like it when people interfere into His department nothing could be accomplished. Proof: All the deviant gurus were clearly not removed by the ritvik movement but by Krishna Himself.

Well yes the problem is that global Vaishnavism is so disunited because people are to poke one's nose into matters which are soley Krishna's business - not ours.

Krishna repeats and repeats that He Himself immediately corrects whenever there're discrepancies in the parampara system and that His devotees should simply serve Him with full faith. That in this age of kali already too many fell down is sad but our business is to tolerate and simply perform devotional service. Krishna will do the needfull, He's always watching, why we should interefere into His department to keep the parampara system clean, pure and genuine? Krishna keeps the genetic code of plants functioning since millions of years, why we should be such disbelievers to think that He cant manage to keep His own parampara system clean and pure?

(1998-AD) (512 Gaura-abda) (102 Bhaktivedanta-abda)

 

My Dear Srila Prabhupada,

 

Please accept my respectful prostrated obeisance's and puspanjali offered again and again and again at Your Divine Lotus Feet. All glories to Your Divine Grace! I wanted to write this offering for your Vyasa-Puja books,but instead I am writing in the very day of your Vyasa Puja which in someways seems more appropriate.

 

 

Good point, we have to consider the paramapara system as Krishna's system - not ours. If there're discrepancies Krishna takes care - nobody else. It is His system, evam parampara praptam - "I have installed the parampara system - it is My system, not yours". Therefor it is Krishna's business to check who is sitting on the vyasanasana and do the needful, not ours. Why ours, Krishna will see to it. As soon some deviant sits on the vyasanana Krishna always did the needful. Why misbelief?

no doubt that your quotes are correct but please get updated about the present situation in Sridhar Swami's temple. To consider that this understanding is being changed is simply to hallucinate.

A Critical Essay Addressing the Ritvik Misconception in light of bona-fide siddhanta

by

Sripad Bhakti Bhavana Visnu Maharaja

http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/ashrama/links/ritvik-and-parampara-fs.html

Paper doesn't blush - also in Sridhar Swami's succession the opposite is true, not ritviks, but full-fledged disksa-gurus as successors, with the goal of incorporating Sridhar Swami's legacy into the present global networks.

 

If they hadn't lied to Sridhar Maharaja, then maybe today ISKCON would actually be a very vibrant and cohesive movement with a ritvik system of initiation?

 

Prabhupada somehow mentioned this already in the preface of Srimad-Bhagavatam:

"We must know the present need of human society. And what is that need? Human society is no longer bounded by geographical limits to particular countries or communities. Human society is broader than in the Middle Ages, and the world tendency is toward one state or one human society. The ideals of spiritual communism, according to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, are based more or less on the oneness of the entire human society, nay, of the entire energy of living beings. The need is felt by great thinkers to make this a successful ideology. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam will fill this need in human society. It begins, therefore, with the aphorism of Vedānta philosophy janmādy asya yataḥ [SB 1.1.1] to establish the ideal of a common cause."

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, Preface

 

LOL I love how people hate on the US.

Hillary will fix it - we have to be patient.

Hillary Clinton outlines health plan

Says plan would cut health spending by boosting preventive care

Hillary Clinton outlines health plan

By William L. Watts, MarketWatch

Last Update: 4:48 PM ET May 24, 2007

<label id="StoryContent_Content" class="StoryContent"></label>WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton on Thursday took aim at spiraling health care costs, outlining a seven-part plan that she said would cut national health spending by $120 billion a year by boosting preventive-medicine efforts, using souped-up information technology and other measures.

"Our present system is outdated, ineffective, and unsustainable. But we know we can spend far less and create an efficient, high-quality health care system for all Americans," the New York senator said in remarks prepared for delivery at George Washington University. "The key is to modernize our health care infrastructure and demand a better return on our investment."

Rising health-care costs are expected to be a top domestic-policy issue in the 2008 presidential election. Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois has said he would move to enact universal health coverage. Another Democrat, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, has said he's willing to boost taxes to pay for covering millions of uninsured.

Meanwhile, a growing chorus of corporations have joined in calls for universal health care - a major change from President Bill Clinton's first term, when Hillary Clinton took heavy political fire as the sweeping health-care proposal she helped design collapsed amid a corporate-led campaign that highlighted worries about government meddling.

The plan outlined by Clinton on Thursday calls for a national initiative aimed at reducing obesity, diabetes and cancer, requiring all insurers that participate in federal programs to cover a number of preventive procedures. It also would coordinate public spending across federal programs to maximize "high-priority prevention."

On the technology front, Clinton's plan calls for the creation of a "paperless" health information-technology system.

The 14-page plan also outlined proposals to improve outcomes of the chronically ill, who usually incur catastrophic expenses and are a key driver of rising health-care costs.

Clinton criticized health insurers for steering clear of Americans with expensive, pre-existing conditions, and called for ending insurance discrimination. Under the plan, a "guarantee-issue" system would allow anyone to join an insurance plan and would bar insurers from carving out benefits or charging higher rates to people with health problems.

Wider coverage would reduce administrative costs by forcing insurers to compete on lowering costs and improving quality, the Clinton outline said.

The plan also calls for some medical malpractice reforms, including a program that would provide liability protections for physicians who disclose medical errors to patients and offer to enter into negotiations for fair compensation.

William L. Watts is a reporter for MarketWatch.

Related Blog Posts & Articles

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="640"><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="top" width="50">

</td> <td width="585"> Those to whom Krsna wishes to reveal himself can see him; others cannot.

</td></tr></tbody></table>

When Krishna said, "give up all religions and just surrender unto Me", who did it? Nobody, therefore Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu appeared and said, just chant Hare Krishna. Again, who is chanting, almost nobody. We have to understand that we live in a world where people are not at all inclined to accept, even among Vaishnavas, some say, neophyte gurus are ok, reject ritvik.

Or as Prabhupada das Karapurnam explains it, ISKCON is not reformable.

 

If ISKCON were reformable there would be some merit in the disenfrachised becoming enthused about the possibility of fixing the BBT, re-establishing Gurukula, enacting DOM, etc. However, the 30+ year "actual" record shows that no amount of commentary, contention, conflict and speculative debate by the disenfranchised has brought about any measurable degree of reform. The same record shows that ISKCON has little capacity for internal reform. The conclusion can be drawn that reform has failed and ISKCON will continue to be what it has become under the guidance of the GBC.

When reform fails, what do the disenfranchised do? Should they continue to express their grievances to the world until the end of their lives, or, should they begin some kind of revolution to re-establish the "Neglected Teachings" in the form of a new organization? The famous "Unabomber" Theodore Kaczynski made some interesting points in his Industrial Society and Its Future, in Point 19 of his Manifesto.

He wrote:

Revolution is Easier than Reform

 

140. We hope we have convinced the reader that the system cannot be reformed in a such a way as to reconcile freedom with technology. The only way out is to dispense with the industrial-technological system altogether. This implies revolution, not necessarily an armed uprising, but certainly a radical and fundamental change in the nature of society.

 

 

141. People tend to assume that because a revolution involves a much greater change than reform does, it is more difficult to bring about than reform is. Actually, under certain circumstances revolution is much easier than reform. The reason is that a revolutionary movement can inspire an intensity of commitment that a reform movement cannot inspire. A reform movement merely offers to solve a particular social problem. A revolutionary movement offers to solve all problems at one stroke and create a whole new world; it provides the kind of ideal for which people will take great risks and make great sacrifices. For these reasons it would be much easier to overthrow the whole technological system than to put effective, permanent restraints on the development of application of any one segment of technology, such as genetic engineering, but under suitable conditions large numbers of people may devote themselves passionately to a revolution against the industrial-technological system. As we noted in paragraph 132, reformers seeking to limit certain aspects of technology would be working to avoid a negative outcome. But revolutionaries work to gain a powerful reward—fulfillment of their revolutionary vision—and therefore work harder and more persistently than reformers do.

 

 

142. Reform is always restrained by the fear of painful consequences if changes go too far. But once a revolutionary fever has taken hold of a society, people are willing to undergo unlimited hardships for the sake of their revolution. This was clearly shown in the French and Russian Revolutions. It may be that in such cases only a minority of the population is really committed to the revolution, but this minority is sufficiently large and active so that it becomes the dominant force in society. We will have more to say about revolution in paragraphs 180-205.

Srila Prabhupada also wrote a Manifesto outlining the foment of a spiritual revolution. In his 960 pages of "Varnashram Teachings" he elaborated on the creation of an alternative spiritual social system as the remedy for the current dysfunctional global system.

Perhaps it is time for the disenfranchised to take up the banner of cooperation in continuing the revolution begun in our lives by Srila Prabhupada? The first step would be to give up on ISKCON as un-reformable. The second step would be to establish a network of association to bring us back to the basic standards and set out the details of a Vaishnava Revolution. The third step would be to establish a network of Communities that could gradually expand under a common Constitution based on a Federation Model.

Anyone interested?

Prabhupada das Karapurnam

e-mail:prabhupad_dasATshaw.ca

 

 

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 5.5.18

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

Vṛndāvana, November 6, 1976

http://causelessmercy.com/t/t/761106SB.VRN.htm?i=1976

[...]Not that “I have got some pain here, I have some trouble or some…” These are not problems. This problem one should tolerate. Because destiny is there, one should āgamāpāyino nityā tāṁs titikṣasva bhārata. We should not be disturbed for all these things. It is material world. You will have sometimes mātrā sparśās tu śītoṣṇa-sukha-duḥkha-dāḥ. The whole world is like that.

There is sometimes distress, there is sometimes happiness. So to

mitigate the worldly distress or getting some happiness, one should

not go to guru. That is not the proper way.

The proper way is that you should know the problem of life, and Kṛṣṇa personally says, “This is the real problem of your life.” What is that? Janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi-duḥkha doṣānudarśanam. This is problems. But they do not know. All rascals. Kṛṣṇa says, na jāyate na mriyate vā kadācit.[...]

Isn't it amazing that us "filthy mlecchas" still have the audacity to preach Bhagavat Dharma and pontificate to the Vaishnavas and other assorted living entities?

 

I mean, if we really felt like "filthy mlecchas" would we really be pontificating and preaching to the Vaishnava community?

 

Enough of the false humility already!!

 

Me, I am Bhagavat Siddha, so therefore I have some authority to pontificate.

 

( a little humor my friends, just a little humor)

Srila Prabhupada comments the late widespread fashion to publish new Vaishnava literature:

There is one instance in Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s life. One gentleman, Vallabha Ācārya. He was very much devotee of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He wrote one comment on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Subodhinī-tīkā, it is called. That is recognized, nice tīkā, comment.

But he approached Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He was very great devotee of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. So he simply said that “Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Lord Caitanya, if You hear my comment on the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, You’ll find it is far better than Śrīdhara Svāmī’s.”

Śrīdhara Svāmī is the very old commentator.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately rejected: “Oh, you are claiming that you have written something better than Śrīdhara Svāmī?” He chastised him. Svāmī means another… He sarcastically remarked, the word svāmī, Śrīdhara Swami, svāmī, another svāmī means “husband.” So He said, svāmī jīva nahi mane besa bali guni:

“I think one who does not recognize svāmī, he’s a prostitute.” He immediately said.

“You do not recognize Śrīdhara Svāmī, then you are a prostitute.

How can I hear from a prostitute?” He refused. Only word, that “I have written better than Svāmī.” So this is the process of guru. You cannot disobey the previous ācārya or guru. No. You have to repeat the same thing. Not research. Sometimes rascals come, that “You are speaking the same thing. Why don’t you speak something new by research work?” We say that we have no intelligence, we cannot make any research. We are… Guru more mūrkha dekhi koriyā vicāra.

Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that “My Guru Mahārāja saw Me a great

fool number one.” So one who remains a great fool number one

before his guru, he is guru. And one who says that “I’m advanced so much that I can speak better than my guru,” then he’s rascal.

This is the process.

evam paramparā-prāptam

imam rājarsayo viduh

sa kāleneha mahatā

yogo nastah parantapa

[bg. 4.2]

Lecture: What is a Guru?

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

London, August 22, 1973

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="780"><tbody><tr><td valign="top" width="758"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="758"><tbody><tr><td class="ft11">Sanjaya's Mom talks about her kids

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td height="5">Mabel E Pais in New York</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></td><td width="10"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td width="10">

</td></tr></tbody></table></td><td bgcolor="#b7b7b7" width="1"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td width="1">

</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table> <!--Story Table Begins--><!-- if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf("MSIE")!=-1) { document.write ('<TABLE CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="0" BORDER="0" WIDTH="780" style="border-left:solid 1px #B7B7B7;border-right:solid 1px #B7B7B7;" ALIGN="CENTER">');} else { document.write ('<TABLE CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="0" BORDER="0" WIDTH="756" style="border-left:solid 1px #B7B7B7;border-right:solid 1px #B7B7B7;" ALIGN="CENTER">');} //-->

<table style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(183, 183, 183); border-right: 1px solid rgb(183, 183, 183);" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="756"><tbody><tr><td>

</td><td style="float: right;" valign="top">May 31, 2007 18:36 IST

<!-- wml_version_starts --> This story is very significant to the Indian community," says Jillian Rechi, or Jayaradhe as she was known in the Hare Krishna movement a decade ago.

The story is about her children Shyamali and Sanjaya Malakar who became famous overnight, thanks to the talent contest American Idol.

"Both Shyamali (Rosaria Malakar) and Sanjaya (Joseph Malakar) embraced their Indian cultural roots."

Recchi, who spent over two months recently with her 17-year-old son in Hollywood, was often joined by daughter Shyamali, and on one occasion her former husband Vasudeva Malakar, who left his construction business and chores at the Hare Krishna temple in Seattle, to be with his children.

Since her divorce nearly a decade ago, Recchi, who since remarried, raised the children mostly on her own. She says she has not been a member of the Hare Krishna congregation for many years but the Indian spirituality is deeply ingrained in her and her children.

"I consider the Hare Krishna way of life to be my spiritual foundation," said Recchi, who met her future husband Vasudeva while she was a devotee at the Seattle Hare Krishna Temple 21 years ago. "I do not live in the temple though."

"Vasudeva was a classical Indian singer-musician-teacher for many years in Seattle," she continued. "He taught harmonium and bhajans to students at home. There was always Indian music in our home. I was a musician and played the flute, though I didn't pursue it professionally. We sang in the car with the children."

After the divorce, Shyamali and Sanjaya moved to Hawaii with their mother and lived there from 1996 to 2000. Both were in Hawaii children's musical theatre.

"Shyamali was always a precocious, intelligent child," Recchi says of her first born, an aspiring model, singer and actress. She was eliminated from the American Idol contest early on.

"She read by the age of 3, and had an amazing memory. She would listen to a song once and remember it. Sanjaya, too, had a great talent for singing and music early on. As soon as he was talking, he was singing, dancing and running around. Of course, they are always around music."

When Sanjaya continued to make steady progress in the competition, despite a lot of negative criticism, Recchi closed down her home business for a few months. "I have always had my own business," she says.

"Currently, I am an independent distributor for in-home water purification filters and distillers. I also manage and maintain some rental properties. This gives me flexibility of hours to be with and do things with my kids. I wanted to prioritise that; I didn't want to put my kids in daycare. I wanted to be there for them while they were growing up."

The children were exposed not only to Indian but also to contemporary and older American music, by Fred Astaire, Frank Sinatra and Tony Bennett, their mother added.

"It was their choice to participate in the competition," she says. "I told Sanjaya he couldn't enter because he was too young. He was very sad; my family got involved and finally decided he could try."

"When Shyamali got booted out, she took it really well. It didn't discourage her; she still wants to continue and pursue a music and acting career."

"For Sanjaya, unfortunately, I wasn't there with him when he was voted out," she says, a trace of sadness in her voice. "I was with him for a solid two months, but I flew back to Los Angeles to be with him the day after he was eliminated.

Sanjaya had a feeling he would get voted out after he saw a tape of his performance later that night. He mentally prepared himself for elimination: of course, he didn't tell me that!"

She says her son has taken this as a learning experience. "This will, I think, launch him into a very successful career," she says. "He wants to be an entertainer, whatever that might encompass. He has a real passion for singing; he also loves to act, he has thought of modeling and wants to be a spokesperson for charitable work."

What is the best advice she has given Shyamali and Sanjaya?

"As a mother, I always felt my children would go on to do great things," she said. "I taught them that whatever platform they might end up on, they should use it positively."

"They are very compassionate. People can see that. I think that was really why Sanjaya had such a large fan base. He is a genuine person who is not egotistical, very compassionate, and very well grounded.

Even though they are very attractive people, I don't think they let that go to their heads because they realise it is a God-given gift. Any gift they have comes from God; they are just an instrument of that.

That helps them stay grounded and focussed on the bigger picture. I would say that is probably one of the biggest things I have tried to give them as far as life lessons go."

<!-- wml_version_ends --> <!--printer_version--> </td><td style="float: right;" valign="top"><table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="165"><tbody><tr><td class="f12" width="150">

Sanjaya Malakar

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="5"><tbody><tr><td height="5">

</td></tr></tbody></table></td><td width="15">

</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

Interesting report by Jonathan Cohn.

<!-- START OF CONTENT AREA --> <table class="header-welcomeanddate" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td>The Untold Story of America's Health Care Crisis

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- START OF CONTENT AREA --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr> <td class="story-title" width="100%">

</td> <td class="story-title" align="right" nowrap="nowrap" width="5%"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="story-box" colspan="2"><table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="story-information" width="100%">Tuesday, May 29 2007 @ 11:57 PM CDT

</td></tr> <tr> <td> By Jonathan Cohn

April 10, 2007 -- It was 4:43 on a clear November afternoon when the paramedics found Cynthia Kline, pale and short of breath, slumped against a bedpost in her double-decker Cambridge home.

Although Kline was in obvious pain, she seemed keenly aware of what was happening inside her 55-year-old body. One of her blood vessels had closed off, blocking the flow of blood to her heart. Minutes before, she had phoned 911, taken the nitroglycerin tablets prescribed for such an emergency, then waited for help to arrive -- an ordeal that stretched out an agonizing extra few seconds while the rescue workers, having found the front door locked, scampered in through an open second-story window. Now, while the paramedics worked busily over her, noting vital signs consistent with cardiac distress, Kline turned to one of them with an anxious plea: "Take me to Mount Auburn Hospital."

Kline, a teacher who worked with special-needs children, had no formal medical training. Yet her instinct about where to go was as sound as a seasoned cardiologist's. Nearby Mount Auburn Hospital, a private teaching facility affiliated with Harvard Medical School, had some of the city's finest doctors and nurses. More important, it had an intensive cardiac care unit that specialized in cases like hers. A few days earlier, staff at Mount Auburn had treated Kline's advanced coronary disease by inserting a balloon into her circulatory system and then expanding it, in order to open up a partially blocked blood vessel. A variant on the very same procedure, "cardiac catheterization," could be used in an emergency like this one, when the flow of blood through a vessel was almost completely cut off. Cardiac catheterization had saved literally thousands of lives across the country.

The procedure had the potential to save Kline's life, too, just as soon as she could get to the hospital and receive it. But getting there was precisely the problem. On the way to Kline's home, the ambulance driver had checked with a dispatcher about hospital availability. Mount Auburn was no-go: the emergency room there was overflowing, with no space to handle new patients. So as the paramedics wheeled Kline into the ambulance, one of them told her they would have to deny her request: "Ma'am, we're going to Cambridge Hospital instead." Kline accepted the news, and maybe for a moment she thought it would be for the best. Although Mount Auburn was less than two miles away, Cambridge Hospital was even closer -- just a short trip through the crooked, disjointed streets that surround Harvard Square. It was also a highly regarded medical facility in its own right, with a top-notch medical staff and a recently renovated emergency area fully capable of handling the majority of trauma cases that came its way. Had Kline's condition remained as it was, it probably could have handled her case, too. But just four blocks into the journey, Kline's condition suddenly deteriorated. The instruments tethered to her arm could no longer detect a blood pressure; her heart rate, seventy beats per minute just moments before, was down to thirty-eight. Kline, strapped into a stretcher, was conscious through all of this-and increasingly agitated. At her side one of the paramedics, a kind-looking thirty-year-old, tried to calm her, explaining that the hospital was just seconds away. But as the ambulance made a right turn around one final corner, bringing the tall redbrick facade of Cambridge Hospital into view, Kline began to cry out: "I'm going to die. I'm going to die."

It was 5:04 p.m., just twenty-nine minutes after Kline had first called 911 and about an hour into the heart attack, when the green-and-white ambulance pulled up to the emergency bay. Informed of the patient's newly worsened state, attendants hustled the gurney into the hospital as the medical team began administering intravenous medication to increase Kline's heart rate. For a while it looked like she might pull through. Her pulse went back up to forty-five beats per minute -- a far cry from normal but at least not "very low," as it had been in the back of the rig. Her breathing was more regular, too. Soon, however, a cardiology exam confirmed that Kline needed catheterization, something the staff at Cambridge Hospital could not do. A nurse began inquiring about available hospitals, but now it was two hours since the chest pains had first begun-and time, finally, was running out. At 6 p.m. Kline's heart stopped altogether. The doctors began performing the familiar ritual of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), pumping her chest and using electrified paddles to shock the heart back into a regular rhythm. It made no difference. At 7:03 p.m., the trauma team relented. Cynthia Kline was dead.

Fifty-five-year-old women, particularly those who have a family history of coronary disease, die from heart attacks all the time. So as a forensic matter, at least, Kline's death was unremarkable. But the technology that might have kept her alive existed-and it existed at a hospital that was less than five minutes away from her house. There was no guarantee that Mount Auburn's doctors could have saved Kline. Still, as one source familiar with the case told the Boston Globe, whose story on the matter sparked a state investigation, "Within an hour and a half they would have started to open her artery with a catheter. If you get the artery open there's a 50-50 chance." None of which would be so troubling if the overcrowding at Mount Auburn on that day in November 2000 were an isolated incident. It wasn't.

During a one-week period shortly after Kline's death, a survey of seventy-six Massachusetts hospitals found that sixty-seven of them had used emergency crowding procedures or had diverted ambulance traffic. Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), Boston's largest medical facility, was closing its emergency room to patients forty-five hours per week. On the day of Kline's heart attack, MGH was the next closest hospital with a cardiac catheterization unit just three miles away. But it wasn't taking new emergency patients that day, either. And even if Kline was the city's only known fatality from ambulance diversion, there was plenty of reason to think that the overcrowding epidemic was routinely jeopardizing the well-being of patients. In 2000, when the Massachusetts College of Emergency Physicians surveyed the directors of more than sixty emergency room (ER) facilities, four out of five said they'd diverted traffic at some point-and nearly 40 percent said overcrowding had led to "adverse outcomes."

Sometimes it was a matter of forcing ambulances to drive longer distances in order to find available hospital beds, or, as in Cynthia Kline's case, of shunting people to hospitals less able to provide advanced treatment. And sometimes it meant that patients who got to the right emergency rooms had to wait many hours before receiving treatment. In some cases, patients actually had to wait inside the ambulances.

One thing was certain, though. The crowding problem made little distinction among patients of varying status, wealth, or influence. Bob Maher was the chief executive officer of Worcester Medical Center in central Massachusetts when he had a heart attack in November 2000, during an airplane flight to Boston. Paramedics met him at the airport, but his connections weren't good enough to get him into MGH, which was, once again, on diversion. So the ambulance took him to another hospital several miles away. A woman named Nancy Ridley had her own troubles in the ER in May 2001. Suffering from a high fever and a hacking cough, she spent five hours waiting to be admitted for pneumonia at the Lahey Clinic in nearby Burlington. Ridley suffered no major health setbacks because of the wait, but the all too typical delay was the kind of problem she might have reported to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health -- if only she hadn't already been working there, as its assistant commissioner. Boston, in other words, had an emerging public health crisis on its hands. And it wasn't alone. In Atlanta, an ambulance crew carrying a patient in respiratory distress had to pull over and wait on the side of a highway for eighteen minutes because the nearest hospital was full and the paramedics were busy trying to find an alternative. Only when the patient went into full arrest-that is, he stopped breathing altogether-did the closest hospital find a way to take him. That patient lived, but others were not so fortunate. When the mother of a forty-year-old Cleveland man with liver failure called the local community hospital, staff there referred him to the MetroHealth Medical Center, which had more advanced lifesaving facilities. But when the ambulance arrived, MetroHealth was on diversion. The man ended up back at the community hospital, where, fifteen hours later, he died. In suburban Houston, when a twenty-one-year-old man was hit by a car, the local trauma centers turned him away because they had no room. He ended up on a helicopter ride to the next closest trauma hospital-in Austin, more than 150 miles away -- and died shortly after arrival...

The United States has not had a serious political discussion about health care reform since the early 1990s. But if the situation in our emergency rooms is indicative, then perhaps it is time for another one. Overcrowding in ERs, according to most experts, is actually a symptom of other systemic problems now plaguing medical care -- from the downsizing of less profitable hospital ser vices such as psychiatric wards, where emergency rooms must frequently send patients who need admission, to the swelling ranks of people without health insurance, whose untreated chronic conditions are more likely to become serious medical crises. To the casual observer, these trends might seem unrelated. But they are all consequences of the way Americans pay for their medical care -- and of how that system is now falling apart.

It's a system of public and private insurance programs, supplemented by private charity, that dates back to the late 1920s-the time, not coincidentally, when medical care first became so expensive that large numbers of Americans literally could not afford to get sick. And it's a system that has survived for as long as it has because, by the late twentieth century, it had financed a massive industry dedicated to medical care while putting its services within reach of the majority of Americans. As critics have repeatedly noted, these arrangements have never met everybody's needs; the poor, in particular, have frequently struggled to find medical care either through doctors or through safety-net hospitals. But the U.S. health care system has generally worked well enough -- or, more precisely, it has worked well for enough people -- to withstand efforts at redesigning it.

Probably never was this more conspicuous than in the early 1990s, when President Bill Clinton proposed his now infamous reform plan. Under Clinton's proposal, the government would have made certain everybody had insurance coverage and, along the way, refashioned the whole health care industry -- doing for Americans what the Canadian, Japanese, and western European governments have long done for their citizens. But Clinton's gambit failed. And while many critics would later blame its demise on either Clinton himself or the special interests that fought him, a more crucial impediment to reform may have been public ambivalence. Most Americans, after all, still had health insurance in the early 1990s and rather liked it the way it was. When they needed medical care, they got it. To these people, the possibility of losing insurance and the consequences that might follow just didn't seem real enough to warrant such a sweeping overhaul -- particularly if it would be at the hands of the government, an institution few people believed was capable of such a massive and complicated undertaking. "I've got pretty good health care and 80 percent of the country has pretty good health care," said one caller on a CNN show in August 1994, summing up a national mood that had turned decidedly against comprehensive reform. "Why are we doing the wholesale changes?" And yet if Americans truly believed they had rejected radical change with Clinton's health care plan, they were in for a surprise. The arrangements for financing medical care, from the private insurance workers got on the job to the public insurance programs that provided for retirees, were already faltering, because they could neither control nor keep up with the rising cost of medical care. The strain was building not just on emergency rooms, but also on charity clinics and public hospitals. Sooner or later, something was going to give.

'Sick' 2007 by Jonathan Cohn.

Jonathan Cohn is a senior editor at The New Republic, where he has written about national politics and its influence on American communities for the past decade. He is also a senior fellow at the think-tank Demos and a contributing editor at The American Prospect, where he served previously as the executive editor. Cohn, who has been a media fellow with the Kaiser Family Foundation, has written for the New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek, Mother Jones, Rolling Stone, and Slate. A graduate of Harvard University, he now lives in Ann Arbor, Michigan, with his wife and two children.

THis is an excerpt from Jonathan Cohn's latest book Sick: The Untold Story of America's Health Care Crisis -- and the People Who Pay the Price.

http://www.alternet.org

</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

In Boston in July of 1971 Srila Prabhupada initiated about 60 devotees. Karandhar Prabhu was with him. Maybe 10 of the devotees got names beginning with "D" and the other 50 all got names beginning with "S". Immediately intellegent devotees began to surmmise that the names were right out of a book and picked by Prabhupada's secretary. This information spread as a rumor, never confirmed, but everyone just accepted it, for it was quite obvious. The reason they accepted it was that it was clearly Prabhupada's idea. Generally it is said that the rtvik must receive almost the same respect as the guru. That must be be because although the rtvik is not on the same level of the guru, he must be at least just a little below or somewhat above the general devotees in his dedication and realization. In Karandhar's case this proved not to be true in the long run. But Prabhupada had to work with what he was given in respect to the Western devotees. Other Indian Gaudiya gurus that have many Western followers are now in the same boat. I received both of my initiations from Prabhupada by mail. In retrospect, I see it because of my level of sukrti. One devotee I know was also recommended by TPs for initiation by mail. He refused both times and ran to where Srila Prabhupada was, and has amazing stories of Srila Prabhupada, his initiation ceremony, and his association with Srila Prabhupada during those days. If I knew what I know now, I would have done as he did. Fortunately on other occaisions although I was just rank and file, I figured out that if I befriended the older devotees and leaders, I could find a way to get into Prabhupada's room and on walks and it worked. So there are different situations for those of different sukrtis and desires. If you don't have the sense to get the higher association then there is the present ISKCON institution with its "junior" gurus and there is the rtviks. Knowing what I know now, I just don't want to be so far away from pure devotees. Service in separation in there, but its dependent on the desire to be with one's gurudeva, otherwise such separation is without feeling.

Srila Prabhupada once told the story of someone in India taking sannyasa and the son of that man who was also present suddenly started to cry and that man who was about to take sannyasa also started to cry, they both, father and son embraced and together cried even more.

Prabhupada: "Then why he wanted to take sannyasa?"

Separation without feeling is very similiar, material attachment is still more important.

May 30, 1968 Allston, Mass

My Dear Umapati,

Please accept my blessings. A few days ago I received a nice letter from you in which you wrote nice things, and I was so glad that now you are making progress positively towards Krishna Consciousness.

It is understood that Aniruddha and yourself are sometimes not in agreement in subjects concerning Krishna Consciousness. Of course, disagreements may be there, but there should not be dissension. I shall be glad to hear from you what is the point of dissension, and if it isn't very serious, I think you should ask Aniruddha not to be affected by such flimsy disagreement.

I am very glad to learn that L.A. temple is improving day by day. Similarly, the temples in other places are also improving, especially Buffalo, Santa Fe, and Boston. I am starting for Montreal on the 3rd of June, 1968, and I shall be glad to hear from you at our Montreal address.

Thanking you.

Your ever well-wisher,

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td>Rankings

http://www.visionofhumanity.com/rankings/

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> This section lists the results of the analysis into each nation's peace. This is the prime table in the Global Peace Index section. The countries are ranked from most peaceful to least peaceful, highlighting their ranking as well as their score. You can click on a country to see the detail of its peace indicators and drivers.

• Overall ScoreOverall RankCountry
  
• 1.3571Norway
  
• 1.3632New Zealand
  
• 1.3773Denmark
  
• 1.3964Ireland
  
• 1.4135Japan
  
• 1.4476Finland
  
• 1.4787Sweden
  
• 1.4818Canada
  
• 1.4819Portugal
  
• 1.48310Austria
  
• 1.49311Belgium
  
• 1.52312Germany
  
• 1.52413Czech Republic
  
• 1.52614Switzerland
  
• 1.53915Slovenia
  
• 1.56816Chile
  
• 1.57117Slovakia
  
• 1.57518Hungary
  
• 1.61119Bhutan
  
• 1.62020Netherlands
  
• 1.63321Spain
  
• 1.64122Oman
  
• 1.65723Hong Kong
  
• 1.66124Uruguay
  
• 1.66425Australia
  
• 1.68226Romania
  
• 1.68327Poland
  
• 1.68428Estonia
  
• 1.69229Singapore
  
• 1.70230Qatar
  
• 1.70231Costa Rica
  
• 1.71932South Korea
  
• 1.72433Italy
  
• 1.72934France
  
• 1.72935Vietnam
  
• 1.73136Taiwan
  
• 1.74437Malaysia
  
• 1.74738United Arab Emirates
  
• 1.76239Tunisia
  
• 1.76540Ghana
  
• 1.76641Madagascar
  
• 1.78642Botswana
  
• 1.78843Lithuania
  
• 1.79144Greece
  
• 1.79845Panama
  
• 1.81846Kuwait
  
• 1.84847Latvia
  
• 1.89348Morocco
  
• 1.89849United Kingdom
  
• 1.90950Mozambique
  
• 1.91551Cyprus
  
• 1.92352Argentina
  
• 1.93053Zambia
  
• 1.93654Bulgaria
  
• 1.94655Paraguay
  
• 1.95256Gabon
  
• 1.96657Tanzania
  
• 1.96758Libya
  
• 1.96859Cuba
  
• 1.98060China
  
• 1.99561Kazakhstan
  
• 1.99562Bahrain
  
• 1.99763Jordan
  
• 2.00364Namibia
  
• 2.01765Senegal
  
• 2.02066Nicaragua
  
• 2.03067Croatia
  
• 2.03868Malawi
  
• 2.05269Bolivia
  
• 2.05670Peru
  
• 2.05971Equatorial Guinea
  
• 2.05972Moldova
  
• 2.06873Egypt
  
• 2.07174Dominican Republic
  
• 2.08975Bosnia and Hercegovina
  
• 2.09376Cameroon
  
• 2.10677Syria
  
• 2.11178Indonesia
  
• 2.12579Mexico
  
• 2.15080Ukraine
  
• 2.16481Jamaica
  
• 2.17082Macedonia
  
• 2.17383Brazil
  
• 2.18184Serbia
  
• 2.19785Cambodia
  
• 2.21986Bangladesh
  
• 2.21987Ecuador
  
• 2.22388Papua New Guinea
  
• 2.24489El Salvador
  
• 2.24690Saudi Arabia
  
• 2.25891Kenya
  
• 2.27292Turkey
  
• 2.28593Guatemala
  
• 2.28694Trinidad and Tobago
  
• 2.30995Yemen
  
• 2.31796United States of America
  
• 2.32197Iran
  
• 2.39098Honduras
  
• 2.39999South Africa
  
• 2.428100Philippines
  
• 2.448101Azerbaijan
  
• 2.453102Venezuela
  
• 2.479103Ethiopia
  
• 2.489104Uganda
  
• 2.491105Thailand
  
• 2.495106Zimbabwe
  
• 2.503107Algeria
  
• 2.524108Myanmar
  
• 2.530109India
  
• 2.542110Uzbekistan
  
• 2.575111Sri Lanka
  
• 2.587112Angola
  
• 2.638113Cote d' Ivoire
  
• 2.662114Lebanon
  
• 2.697115Pakistan
  
• 2.770116Colombia
  
• 2.898117Nigeria
  
• 2.903118Russia
  
• 3.033119Israel
  
• 3.182120Sudan
  
• 3.437121Iraq

Guruvani Prabhu,

Now I am the one jabbing at you? One should learn the art of that from you. I am just a simple grhasti working in order to maintain my family and trying to hold on fast to Lord Krsna's lotus feet and doing the best I can to follow Mahaprabhu's teachings. It is true that I do not know you, and I have been all along respectful of you, even whilst denouncing what I thought were undesirable traits that you have been displaying here. You may not consider yourself a representative of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, but your posts reflect a Gaudiya point of view, and they certainly convey the message to outsiders that the rest of us wannabe followers of Gauranga are all ignorant fanatics and fundamentalists. As a fellow who reveres this given spiritual path, I simply cannot tolerate this. Besides, all my messages written in reply to your posts have been thoroughly civil, with your own customary filth like ass, orifice etc being conspicuously absent.

And for the umpteenth time, labelling others as sahajiya or whatever, no matter from whom you may have heard so, is indicative of a complete lack of acquaintance with the fathomless beauty of traditional Gaudiya Vaisnavism as far as I am concerned. I really hope and pray that, someday, you get the divine association of an advanced babaji or sevaite acarya of one of the old mandirs of the Lord's dhama, so that you can get a real taste of what Mahaprabhu came to give to the world.

It was never my intention to try to change you. I know that that is not possible just from reading your posts. I am just a little unhappy to see somebody revel in argumentation and conflict rather than harmony and inclusivism. A Vaisnava, even a lowly kanistha like myself, at least tries to be a friend to all living entities. And it should be borne in mind that someone coming and posting a few sentences that I take exception to does not mean that I lose all sense of composure and jump in headlong with fangs and claws extended. The world in which we live has too many problems already, and the last thing we need is a couple of Krsna fundamentalists around.

In any event, I think I have said enough. If you want to have the final say, please be my guest.

Radhe Radhe

Well thanks Vikram Ramsundar - me and many people consider like you, but we have to learn the lesson and understand that US Vaishnavas usually consider themselves as being the chosen people - although they want to preach to others they hardly consider others even as human being. Thats also called global US Imperialsimus infiltrated into Vaishnavism and we better learn to obey - just like Lord Vishnu advised the devas:

this is an important understanding about Varnashram that sometimes is being missed with some devotees.

 

Srila Prabhupada says:

 

 

the whole matter of Varnashram is about:

 

 

 

Varnashram is for the masses, but they never flocked to take shelter of ISKCON.

 

ISKCON is for Vaishnavism.

It's not important to try and impose Varnashram on ISKCON.

For a Vaishnava there's nothing besides serving Lord Caitanya's Sankirtan Mission, otherwise can we call such a person who has no interest in spreading the Holy Name a Vaishnava? Or as Prabhupada puts it: A pure devotee's chief concern, therefore, is to raise the ignorant mass of people to the sense of Krishna consciousness. (SB 9/4/66)

This means a Vaishnava has no other separate focus than bringing people to the understanding of KC. If "the masses never flocked to take shelter of ISKCON", it should be clear that ISKCON might look like a Vaishnava movement but is being turned into something else.

"Any ideas in how to teach this thing to the mass of people?"

This is rather the question, "how can I serve Krishna?"

“To those who are constantly devoted and worship Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come to Me.” (BG 10.10)

A person in full Krsna consciousness acts by the dictation of Krsna. In the beginning of Krsna consciousness, dictation is received through the transparent medium of the spiritual master. When one is sufficiently trained and acts in submissive faith and love for Krsna under the direction of the bona fide spiritual master, the dovetailing process becomes more firm and accurate. This stage of devotional service by the devotee in Krsna consciousness is the most perfect stage of the yoga system.

At this stage, Krsna, or the Supersoul, dictates from within, while from without the devotee is helped by the spiritual master, who is the bona fide representative of Krsna. From within He helps the devotee as caitya, for He is seated within the heart of everyone. Understanding that God is seated within everyone’s heart is not, however, sufficient. One has to be acquainted with God from both within and without, and one must take dictation from within and without to act in Krsna consciousness. This is the highest perfectional stage of the human form of life and the topmost perfection of all yoga. (SB 3.15.45)

Below Prabhupada says,"that time for introducing varnashram was not right. Now you can do something", indicating that things depent upon desa- kala-patra - place, time and circumstance.

Satsvarupa: If in our society we say, “Srila Prabhupada wants some to be sudra...”

Prabhupada: No, no, no. I don't want. I want everyone to become Vaisnava. But because he's a sudra, it is not possible to bring him immediately to the platform of brahmana, or Vaisnava. Therefore falling down. Therefore the system must be present. But even if he remains a sudra, he's a Vaisnava.

Hari-Sauri: So we'd have to completely revise the whole system that we have now.

Prabhupada: No. Whatever we have, that is all right. But we see by experience that they're falling down. Why falling down? Because he was not fit for the position, therefore he has fallen. Better remain in his position and become perfect. Why artificially bring them? There is no need. Krsna says. Bring that Bhagavad-gita. Sve sve karmany abhirataù?

Hari-Sauri: sve sve karmany ab hirataù saàsiddhià labhate naraù sva-karma-nirataù siddhià yatha vindati tac chrnu By following his qualities of work, every man can become perfect. Now please hear from Me how this can be done.”

Prabhupada: Yes. He is sudra, clerk. As a sudra, he can get the perfection. Why he should artificially become a brahmana and sannyasi and fall down? This has to be checked.

Hari-Sauri: So in Mayapura here now we have that situation, that so many...

Prabhupada: Everywhere, wherever, Mayapura or anywhere. Question is that here it is clearly said, sve sve karmany abhirataù. Brahmana has his duty, ksatriya has his duty, vaisya has his duty, sudra has his duty. And if he performs his duty nicely, then he also becomes perfect. So why artificially he should be called a brahmana? Let them do, according to sastra, the work of sudra, or vaisya. He'll become perfect. Perfection is not checked. But why artificially he should be made a brahmana or he should be made a sannyasi and fall down and b ecome a ludicrous? That is the point. Better let him live in his position and become perfect. That's good. That looks very nice. And that is possible. That is possible. Lord Visnu can be worshiped if you perfectly follow the rules and regulation of four varnas and four asramas. Here it is also said, sve sve karmani. You work as a perfect brahmana or a perfect ksatriya, perfect sudra; you get perfection. The perfection is available in your natural life. Why should artificially you become unnatural and fall down and become ludicrous?

Hari-Sauri: At this time should we try to introduce it in our centers or not?

Prabhupada: Always we shall try. Human society will be always there. We have to serve them, para-upakara. We have to keep them in the right position.

Hari-Sauri: I just remember two or three years ago there was a thing... A pamphlet came out about introducing the varnasrama system in the society, but actually nothing came of it.

Prabhupada: Yes. That time was not right. Now you can do something. Every business is important. Brahmana business is important, ksatriya... Just like the body. Head is important; the arm is important; the belly is important. They must be kept in order. Just like I am in trouble because my belly is not working. Digesting power is not good. So in spite of brain, hand, and leg, I am diseased. If any part of the society remains diseased, the whole society will suffer. Therefore they must be maintained in correct order. You cannot say if there is some trouble in the leg, “Neglect the leg. Take care of the brain.” No. Brain will be taxed due to the pain in the leg. This is nature. Therefore everyone should be kept in order. Then things will go on. That is varnasrama.

Hari-Sauri: So at least if we successfully introduce the varnasrama system in our own society, then when all the demons finish themselves...

Prabhupada: At least... At least... At least they will see, “This is the ideal.” Ideal. We are giving the ideal. We are not going to be a sudra. But to show ... Just like you play in a drama. You are playing the part of a king. You are not a king.

Hari-Sauri: No.

Prabhupada: So similarly, just to give them idea, we have to play like that.

Hari-Sauri: Well, again, that's...

Prabhupada: Not necessarily that we are going to be sudra. So that is it. That is the thing. We are servant of Krsna. That's all. And as servant of Krsna, we have to execute the order of Krsna.

Satsvarupa: So we can ideally organize ourselves and then for the rest of the people all we can do is hope that they'll follow it.

Prabhupada: Yes. In order to serve the mass of people, to bring them to the ideal position, we should try to introduce this varnasrama, not that we are going to be candidates of varnasrama. It is not our business. But to teach them how the world will be in peaceful position we have to introduce.

http://www.salagram.net/varnashram-1.htm

When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ballpoint pens would not work in zero gravity. To combat the problem, NASA scientists spent a decade and $12 billion to develop a pen that writes in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, on almost any surface including glass and at temperatures ranging from below freezing to 300 Celsius.

The Russians used a pencil.

There is a fairly simple (but not cheap) solution to the African ME drought problem:

 

Pump huge volumes of sea water into empty desert i many separate locations thus creating large shallow bodies of water. Evaporating water from these reservoirs will cool the surrounding area and create lots of water vapor which will eventually lead to cloud formation and local rain. Incidentally, that would also help to alleviate the global warming problem (clouds cool the Earth).

TRANSLATION

In desert countries where there flowed the River Sarasvatī, Mahārāja Ambarīsa performed great sacrifices like the aśvamedha-yajña and thus satisfied the master of all yajñas, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such sacrifices were performed with great opulence and suitable paraphernalia and with contributions of daksinā to the brāhmanas, who were supervised by great personalities like Vasistha, Asita and Gautama, representing the king, the performer of the sacrifices.

PURPORT

When one performs ritualistic sacrifices as prescribed in the Vedas, one needs expert brāhmanas known as yājñika-brāhmanas. In Kali-yuga, however, there is a scarcity of such brāhmanas. Therefore in Kali-yuga the sacrifice recommended in śāstra is sańkīrtana-yajña (yajñaih sańkīrtana-prāyair yajanti hi sumedhasah [sB 11.5.32]). Instead of spending money unnecessarily on performing yajñas impossible to perform in this age of Kali because of the scarcity of yājñika-brāhmanas, one who is intelligent performs sańkīrtana-yajña. Without properly performed yajñas to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead, there will be scarcity of rain (yajñād bhavati parjanyah [bg. 3.14]). Therefore the performance of yajña is essential. Without yajña there will be a scarcity of rain, and because of this scarcity, no food grains will be produced, and there will be famines. It is the duty of the king, therefore, to perform different types of yajñas, such as the aśvamedha-yajña, to maintain the production of food grains. Annād bhavanti bhūtāni. Without food grains, both men and animals will starve. Therefore yajña is necessary for the state to perform because by yajña the people in general will be fed sumptuously. The brāhmanas and yājñika priests should be sufficiently paid for their expert service. This payment is called dakṣiṇā. Ambarīṣa Mahārāja, as the head of the state, performed all these yajñas through great personalities like Vasiṣṭha, Gautama and Asita. Personally, however, he was engaged in devotional service, as mentioned before (sa vai manah krsna-padāravindayoh). The king or head of state must see that things go on well under proper guidance, and he must be an ideal devotee, as exemplified by Mahārāja Ambarīsa. It is the duty of the king to see that food grains are produced even in desert countries, what to speak of elsewhere.

(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 9.4.22)

 

 

Upper Nile flows over 950 miles through the tableland of the Sudanese sandstone

He removes impediments to devotional service, and has more power than those mentioned. If you pray for rain because you wanna see green, no good. If you pray for rain because there is need for produce for their Lordships preparations, such prayers are devotional service.

 

Suryadeva has many problems of His own, our sun in in worse shape than Bhumis planet (even though if surya goes, we all go). Varuna is losing all His inhabitants and is quite sick due to the poisons. Indra is obviously a bit confused, none can help. But the scribe, Sri Ganesha, he doesnt make mistakes anymore, since he lost his head at one time because he didnt recognize his father, Lord Siva, because of his ashes and all.

 

Demigod worship has this very real flaw. Yudhisthira wanted to help his Uncle Dhritarastha, but Narada told him that one who is in the mouth of a serpant is of no help to anyone. These demigods are suffering the effects of kali yuga just as we are, so they cannot help. If Indra were to give rain to Florida, Kansas City would dry up. His (Indra's) volume control is all makied up anyway, all he could provide is a fast moving flood to further destroy what the drought didnt.

 

Varuna is good at making waves for surfers, though, if you just ask for a cleanup set once in a while. Be humble, he'll like ya.

 

mahaksadasa

Since nowadays hardly anyone chants Hare Krishna it would be surely a great experience if the global media would report, "Rain in Ethiopia due performing Sankirtan Yajna of chanting the Holy Names Hare Krishna and Rama". This could easily result in the whole world starting to chant.

"You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one" (John Lennon)

Don't know if this is fully correct:

1,250 B.C. the tribe of Israel are mentioned for the first time by name. This tribe lives in the Land of Egypt and is oppressed by the Pharaoh.

 

The Pharaoh Echnaton (1351–1334 B.C.) recognizes the potential about the Tree of Life. Instead of traditional polytheism, Echnaton introduces a monotheistic cult surrounding Aton, the One God.

Moses whose existence was possibly modeled on Pharoah Echnaton leads his people into the Promised Land and teaches the One Creator of the World although there was still the worship of many gods: the Canaanite gods of Baal, Moloch, Aschera.

What would mean that biblical monotheism originates in Egypt culture of Pharaoh Echnaton?