shiva

You are avoiding the point. You said belief in God cannot be validated by experience. That is the point I disagree with. In fact there is nowhere in any vedic teaching which agrees with you. You can come up with all sorts of speculative arguments but you cannot come with anything else. Also saying "faith validates God" makes no sense. People constantly lose faith in God. They may have faith at the beginning and then take to a religious process with conviction and dedication but later lose faith in either the religion or God altogether. I know from online conversations that many devotees who were long time members of either ISKCON or other gaudiya parivars eventually lost faith not only in gaudiya vaishnavism but God altogether. Faith did not validate god for them nor for countless other people who lost faith. Only God validates the exsitence of God. If it is your karma to have faith in God and follow a religion only to later lose faith in God then that will happen by God's arrangement, if it is your karma to experience God without prior education in this life then God will arrange it. God is in control of how and when people develop faith or lose it.

That is another point entirely. What you said is: That statement is what I object to. It is simply a concoction. You are saying that the "truth of God" cannot be "validated" through experience. That is a complete concoction. If not please show where this is taught. I know from experience that it is utterly false.

guruvani your point seems to be that one first has to have faith and then develop that faith through spiritual practice before God will give you any experience. Where do you find this philosophy written in any sastra? I believe that is nothing but your own concoction. God is free to reveal himself to whomever he likes whenever he likes in whatever he likes. It is described that according to the level of spiritual attainment one has made in this life that in the next life he will pick up where he left off. If one is advanced in spiritual understanding but did not become qualified for liberation upon his next birth he may be given direct revelation of God without any prior study or spiritual practice in order to quickly bring him to the level where he left off. It is up to God. No one has the authority to say that God will only reveal himself to people under certain circumstances.

Yes the materialist scientists tell us that mystical experience of God is nothing but hallucinations. If God reveals his existence to you that is not a hallucination. Imagining yourself to be something you are not is.

I have to respectfully disagree with guruvani when he wrote: Of course God can validate faith by giving someone an experience. The sastra is full of storiess where people have experiences of God revealed to them. The path of bhakti promises that Krishna will appear to you at an advanced stage. And also As for me personally I was raised an atheist and did noy believe in god nor did I ever read any religious philosophy nor even hear any religious discourse before I gained faith in God. My faith in God came from some experiences I had where God revealed to me his control over everything and in a mystical fashion communicated with me. At that point I was transformed from an ignorant atheist to someone who knows God exists literally overnight. Then I had more mystical experiences when I began chanting and going to the local ISKCON temple for sunday feast kirtans where god revealed to me that he was in fact Krishna. This all happened within the span of a month. Since that time 30 years ago I have had countless experiences of God, every day in fact.

My neighbors kids had some acne and they asked me if I knew of any herbs to help, my first thought was echinacea might work so I told them to try some extract in non gelatin caps, after a few days their acne started to clear up, a bit longer it was gone. They take it regularly, not every day and they haven't had acne since.

He begins that section with this: "Now I will establish the dating of the smrti sastras according to the opinion of modern scholars" He makes this point over and over. He writes that Krsna Samhita is not for neophytes because they may not understand his purpose and may lose faith. Also he writes that it is not written for uttama adhikaris, although he says that uttama adhikaris can use the Krsna Samhita as an aid. He writes that his intent in Krsna Samhita is in giving aid to the faith of madhyama adhikaris who lose faith in sastra due to the influence of modern scholarship and modern thinking. Modern establishment "science" strives under the delusion of methodological and metaphysical naturalism and therefore a priori denies the possiblity of any and all metaphysical events as plausible. Therefore any historical literature which incorporates metaphysical events is treated as made up mythology. What Bhaktivinoda is doing is showing that the "mythology" of the vedic histories can be shown to be plausible history. Rejecting them wholesale on the basis of the prejudices of the modern scientific establishment (which is commited to a certain mundane worldview) is not the only alternative to accepting them literally.

Whether the numbers of people involved in the battle is accurate or not is irrelevant. Sometimes atisayokti or hyberbolic poetic license is used in sastra in order to make a point of one type or another. Mahaprabhu has said: krsna-tulya bhagavata -- vibhu, sarvasraya prati-sloke prati-aksare nana artha kaya Srimad-Bhagavatam is as great as Krsna, the Supreme Lord and shelter of everything. In each and every verse of Srimad-Bhagavatam and in each and every syllable, there are various meanings. Besides these facts another point to remember is that the vedic custom is cremation for the dead. If there was 10,000 or 10,000,000 dead at Kuruksetra they would have been cremated and the weapons etc would have been carted off. A big problem for finding ancient historical evidence in India is the fact that most archeological digs conducted throughout the world are done in areas which have been abandoned. How can you know the true archeological history of a place if that place was never abandoned? For example if Delhi has been a city for 10,000 years how will you dig up the city to find out what was going on 10,000 years ago? Even if you could dig up the city what are the chances that you could find much? When places are not abandoned they leave little in the way of archeological evidence because items are used until they are broken and then they are used for something else e.g wood objects are used for fuel, metal objects will be melted down and recast, etc. Almost all modern archeology is based upon discovering the ruins of abandoned places. In a place like India where civilization has gone on without interruption it makes archeology very difficult. The saraswata-harrapan ruins showcase this point. They are abandoned cities. Yet they leave very little besides ruins of buildings because anything of value was carted off when the people left or when people came to loot after the abandonment. There is a theory that since hardly any weapons were found that they were a non violent people. But that shows the level of intelligence of those archeologists. The people adbandoning those cities would not leave their valuables behind, you wouldn't expect to find anything of value because why would they leave anything of value? Therefore hardly any weapons were found. So modern archeology is oftentimes led by very foolish people with a view to propagandize a certain view of world history and cultures, their opinions should be taken with a grain of salt.

You still don't seem to understand what Bhaktivinoda is saying. "Another country" means outside of Brahmavarta (the land between the sarasvati and drsadvati), not outside of "India". He is basing this on what is written in the Mahabharata where it says that the brahmanas originally came from a place near Devi's tirtha near Kashmir. He gives no support to any type of aryan invasion theory. As for your support of "science" in these areas or in the so called science of evolution, well, your opinion is interesting but maybe you should try to read a bit closer before making your claim of scientific objectivity. Besides the lack of any scientific proof for an aryan invasion (which was dreamed up by colonialist christians for the purpose of propaganda) there is also a lack of any scientific proof for evolution regardless of the claims made by propagandists. So if someone was to really rely on science and want his opinion to have any merit he or she should first become educated in the relevant science rather then parroting discredited propaganda masquerading as science. As for the various histories written by Bhaktivinoda in the Krsna Samhita you should note that he writes that he is giving the "modern scholars" version of Puranic history, he does not state that he agrees with it. For example he says things like: Clearly the purpose of the book is to show that even if the itihasas are not literally true, that they still offer a real plausible history, that they can be shown to be not simply an invented mythology with no basis in any real historical events. Early on in the book he writes that it is common for people to reject the religion propounded by the itihasas because they find some part which seems unbelievable to them and then end up losing faith in the entire religion. So his purpose in the book is to aid those people who cannot accept literally the stories and histories of the itihasas (puranas, mahabharata, ramayana etc) by giving a "modern scientific" account of the itihasas to show that they are not simply invented mythology even by modern standards of historical and anthropological methodologies. He then many times adds that he accepts the version of history written in the itihasas as they are written in them.

Well...no. He wrote: He is saying they came from Devi's tirtha near Kashmir according to the Mahabharata. Remember, an aryan in the vedic sense is someone who follows the vedic religion. What the Mahabharata is saying is that the original brahmanas, or the original vedic rishis came from there. It's not meant in the sense of an aryan invasion theory, rather it is saying that the first brahmana or brahmanas who taught vedic knowledge came from somewhere in the Himalayan range near Kashmir.

Srimad Bhagavatam 4.24.73 te vayam noditah sarve praja-sarge prajesvarah anena dhvasta-tamasah sisrikshmo vividhah prajah When all the Prajapatis were ordered to create by Lord Brahma, we chanted these prayers in praise of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and became completely free from all ignorance. Thus we were able to create different types of living entities. PURPORT In this verse we can understand that the various types of living entities were created simultaneously at the very beginning of the creation. The nonsensical Darwinian theory of evolution is not applicable here. It is not that intelligent human beings did not exist millions of years ago. On the contrary, it is understood that the most intelligent creature, Lord Brahma, was first created. Then Lord Brahma created other saintly sages like Marici, Bhrigu, Atreya, Vasishtha and Lord Siva. They in their turn created different types of bodies according to karma. In Srimad-Bhagavatam Lord Kapiladeva told His mother that the living entity gets a particular type of body in accordance with his work and that this body is decided upon by higher authorities. The higher authorities, as appointed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are Lord Brahma and all other Prajapatis and Manus. Thus from the beginning of creation it can be seen that the first creature is the most intelligent. It is not that so-called modern intelligence has developed by the gradual process of evolution. As stated in Brahma-vaivarta Purana, there is a gradual evolutionary process, but it is not the body that is evolving. All the bodily forms are already there. It is the spiritual entity, or spiritual spark within the body, that is being promoted by the laws of nature under the supervision of superior authority. We can understand from this verse that from the very beginning of creation different varieties of living entities were existing. It is not that some of them have become extinct. Everything is there; it is due to our lack of knowledge that we cannot see things in their proper perspective. In this verse the word dhvasta-tamasah is very important, for without being free of ignorance one cannot control the creation of different types of living entities. As stated in Srimad-Bhagavatam (3.31.1), daiva-netrena -- bodies are awarded under the supervision of superior powers. How can these superior powers control the evolutionary process of the living entity if they are not free from all imperfection? The followers of the Vedic instructions cannot accept the Darwinian theory of evolution, for it is marred by imperfect knowledge. http://vedic-varnashrama-blog.blogspot.com/

When Prabhupada says evolve he doesn't mean it in the sense of evolution of species. some quotes http://vedic-varnashrama-blog.blogspot.com/

Purport Srimad Bhagavatam 3.15.31 "If one’s desire is not fulfilled, the younger brother, anger, follows. Here we can mark that even great saintly persons like the Kumāras were also angry, but they were not angry for their personal interests. They were angry because they were forbidden to enter the palace to see the Personality of Godhead. Therefore the theory that in the perfectional stage one should not have anger is not supported in this verse. Anger will continue even in the liberated stage. These four mendicant brothers, the Kumāras, were considered liberated persons, but still they were angry because they were restricted in their service to the Lord. The difference between the anger of an ordinary person and that of a liberated person is that an ordinary person becomes angry because his sense desires are not being fulfilled, whereas a liberated person like the Kumāras becomes angry when restricted in the discharge of duties for serving the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Purport Bhagavad Gita As It Is 16.1-3 "Akrodha means to check anger. Even if there is provocation one should be tolerant, for once one becomes angry his whole body becomes polluted. Anger is a product of the modes of passion and lust, so one who is transcendentally situated should check himself from anger." Bhagavad Gita 16.4 "Arrogance, pride, anger, conceit, harshness and ignorance--these qualities belong to those of demoniac nature, O son of Prtha." Bhagavad Gita 16.4 "There are three gates leading to this hell--lust, anger and greed. Every sane man should give these up, for they lead to the degradation of the soul." There are 2 types of anger, anger inspired by devotional sentiment and mundane anger inspired by ignorance, pride, lust or greed. A knowledgeable devotee would never be angry in any circumstance for any reason if Krishna didn't want to inspire transcendental anger in that devotee for the furthurence of devotional sentiment. This is because the knowledgeable devotee understands that Krishna is controlling the actions of everyone. Sri Krishna states in the Bhagavad Gita The devotee in full knowledge of the transcendental science sees that everyone is acting out their karma under the control of the Lord, therefore they cannot be angry at anyone because they see that everyone is being forced to act the way they do. Srimad Bhagavatam 11.10.11 tasmaj jijnasayatmanam atma-stham kevalam param sangamya nirased etad vastu-buddhim yatha-kramam Therefore, by the cultivation of knowledge one should approach the Supreme Personality of Godhead situated within oneself. By understanding the Lord's pure, transcendental existence, one should gradually give up the false vision of the material world as independent reality. Still liberated souls do become angry. But their anger is caused by the Supreme Lord for the purpose of devotional sentiments, it is yogamaya, not mahamaya, which is behind the anger. A devotee in full knowledge cannot be angry if his perfect vision is not clouded over because perfect vision means that you see everyone serving the will of the Lord, seeing the Lord as the controller and everyone else as the controlled, the uttama adhikari stage of bhakti. Therefore by the action of the Lord's yogamaya potency the fully knowledgable devotee can be temporarily covered over by forgetfullness due to the lord's desire to create a devotional sentiment. Lord Chaitanya showed the nature of this transcendental anger when he got angry at Jagai and Madhai. That anger was not real anger, it was a devotional sentiment. The pastimes of Jagai and Madhai were planned out by the Lord long before they occured, therefore how can the Lord be angry with the actions of people when he has purposefully caused those offensive actions to take place in order to perform a pastime? That is why Lord Nityananda did not become angry when he was attacked, as the representative of Guru Tattva he was showing the status of the fully knowledgeable devotee by not being angry. Similarly for the knowledgeable devotee it is impossible for him to be really angry because he sees the Lord as the cause of all causes, therefore that knowledge is temporarily covered over by the Lord when he wants the devotee to display devotional sentiments of anger. This type of anger should not be confused with mundane anger which is the result of lust, greed or pride being thwarted.

Madhavananda prabhu first you claim that a devotee may share his experience with others if those people he wishes to share with are suitably qualified. Then you translate a verse from Jiva Goswami that says: "Then, the secrets of one's own that are obtained with practice and in attaining perfection – with the grace of Sri Guru and Sri Bhagavan – are never to be disclosed to anyone." You also wrote: "Revealing heart's matters before the faithless is wholly improper. If this warning is not paid heed to, we gradually lose the impact of the experience, and additionally risk becoming subject to pride and a host of other vice arising from an inflated sense of self-importance and the possible admiration of others." Is that from some sastra or tika? Once attaining the highest level the bhakta is always in direct mystic union with the Lord, that is never lost regardless of what the bhakta says to anyone. That person is not bound to any rules. Jiva Goswami writes in Bhakti Sandarbha: From Nectar of Devotion From Srila Prabhupada CC Madhya lila.8.221 Also many past acaryas have written about their mystic experiences in books for all too read, not just a select few. e.g. In an addendum appended to the Govinda Bhashya, after it was published, Sri Baladeva has written: vidyarupam bhushanam ye pradaya khatim nitye teno yo mamudarah Sri govinda-svapna-nirdishtha bhashye radhabandhurangah sa jiyat. "May Sri Govinda be all glorious. By his mercy, he revealed this commentary to me in a dream. The commentary revealed by him is especially appreciated by the highly learned, and as a result of this I have been given the name Vidyabhushana, but it is Sri Govinda who deserves all credit. May that Sri Govinda who is the most dear life and soul of Sri Radhika, be all-victorious." The advice from the various past acaryas about not revealing the "secrets" gained from bhajan or dreams or experience is clearly only meant for devotees who are not on the highest level. The devotee on the highest level can reveal whatever Krishna wants revealed from that devotee to anyone and in any way Krishna so chooses. There is no shortage of stories from past acaryas revealing all sorts of transcendental experiences to the community at large in their writings.

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has told us: And Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura has told us BSST was not rejecting the literal, rather he was telling us that sticking to the literal words of the scriptures will not enable a person to understand the esoteric meaning of the scriptures. The process for understanding the esoteric intent of the scriptures is to hear from the self realized spiritual masters who have direct access to the esoteric meaning of the scripture due to their having direct access to the source of the scriptures. BSST wrote: This is from Katha Upanishad 1.2.23 nayam atma pravacanena labhyo na medhaya na bahuna srutena yam evaisha vrinute tena labhyas tasyaisha atma vivrinute tanum svam One cannot understand the supreme soul by studying the Vedas or by hearing many scriptures or by ones mental energy. The Lord reveals himself to the person who accepts the Lord as his master. That person alone attains the Lord. This is from Srimad Bhagavatam 10.14.29 athapi te deva-padambuja-dvaya- prasada leshanugrihita eva hi janati tattvam bhagavan mahimna na canya eko'pi ciram vicinvan My Lord, if one is favored by even a slight trace of the mercy of Your lotus feet, he can understand the greatness of Your personality. But those who speculate to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead are unable to know You, even though they continue to study the Vedas for many years. The astonishing pastimes of the Lord described in the scriptures may not be believable to all people due to the incredible nature of some of those pastimes. Those pastimes may have taken place exactly as described or there may have been some hyperbole here and there for poetic reasons or they may be some allegorical teaching in some places for various reasons. Either way the pastimes of the Lord can in fact be manifested exactly as they are are written about if the Lord desires. The Lord can do anything. This includes the slaying of giant magical creatures, or the lifting of a hill, or any of the things done by Krishna as described in the sastra. Did Krishna do everything as described? He can do them. There is also the esoteric intent of the Bhagavat which is not available in the literal words of the Bhagavat. From "The Bhagavat: It's Philosophy, It's Ethics, It's Theology" by Srila Bhakti Vinode Thakura

Madhava in your list of uses for the term sahajiya in the gauidya math you include this one: "In general, expressing doctrinal disagreement with the Gauḏīya Maṭha policy." And then with a footnote you explain that furthur with this: "The premise is that "sahajiyas disagree with our philosophy" and the conclusion is, "he disagrees, therefore he must be a sahajiya". This is, of course, an obvious logical fallacy." That definition would seem to me to be too broad. Every single religious tradition in the world outside of the gaudiya math (Saraswat tradition) disagrees with "gaudiya math policy". Yet people from the gaudiya math usually only consider a sahajiya in the pejorative sense to be a person who in some fashion or another is utilizing a vaisnava paradigm or vaisnava deities in their religious beliefs and practices. Sri Vaisnavas and Tattvavadis or Advaitins or Jews or Muslims all disagree with "gaudiya math policies" yet they are not refered to as sahajiyas by members of the gaudiya math. I also think that the main meaning of sahajiya when used by members of the gaudiya math is not mentioned by you. From my experience the main meaning is: someone who thinks himself to be more advanced in spiritual attainment then he actually is and who then may engage in any number or variety of activities which are based on and acted out as fraudulent imitations of the real thing.

Guest: Bob Beck is not a medical doctor. The only people who agree with his garlic theories are people who sell his stuff. (bio feedback equipment etc) From The Complete Garlic Handbook by Peter Josling "Garlic is the only antibiotic that can actually kill infecting bacteria and at the same time protect the body from the poisons that are causing the infection. It is known that the most sensitive bacterium to garlic is the deadly Bacillus anthracis which produces the poison anthrax. Even the forefather of antibiotic medicine Louis Pasteur acknowledged garlic to be as effective as penicillin and late studies showed similar activity to a more modern antibiotic, chloramphenicol. Even the blood of garlic eaters can kill bacteria and it is also reported that the vapour from freshly cut garlic can kill bacteria at a distance of 20 cms!! Another once common, and apparently returning disease, tuberculosis was treated with garlic very successfully as the invading organism Mycobacterium tuberculosis is sensitive to several of the sulphur components found in garlic." CHICAGO (UPI) - Microbiology researchers said Wednesday the active ingredient in garlic combats two of the nastiest antibiotic resistant microbes faced by doctors and patients. The ingredient, a substance know as allicin, has been found effective in killing off methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus -- a microbe that has been especially troubling in skin and soft tissue wounds -- and in inhibiting growth of vancomycin-resistant enterococci, an intestinal bacteria that causes considerable illness and deaths in hospital settings. "Allicin simply blows enormous holes through MRSA,' said Ronald Cutler, senior lecturer in microbiology at the University of East London, England. He has formulated allicin into skin products such as creams and soaps and has achieved success in destroying the microbes in laboratory tests. He said he also tested the cream on healthy volunteers -- including himself -- and "we have found absolutely no adverse reactions." Cutler, and his commercial venture Allicin International Ltd., are beginning human testing with the allicin cream on patients with stubborn skin infections caused by MRSA. "What happens in a test tube may not occur when it is used in humans," cautioned Dr. Jaya Prakash, chairperson of the department of pathology, microbiology and public health at National University of Health Sciences, Lombard, Ill. Prakash is experimenting with allicin in thwarting VRE. "We have shown that we can inhibit the growth of these bacteria with allicin. Some of the isolates are more stubborn than others," she said, but at 150 micrograms of allicin the bacteria cannot proliferate. She said humans can ingest about 25 grams a day of garlic without ill effects, and that much garlic contains about 15 milligrams of allicin -- about 100 times more than what she used to control VRE. Methicillin and vancomycin both are powerful antibiotics that for many years were considered among the last medical defenses against vicious microbes such as S. aureus. In recent years, however, both S. aureus and enterococci have developed mutations that allow the bugs to escape the killing power of these antibiotics. Both organisms are multi-drug resistant. The studies were presented at the annual Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, a meeting sponsored by the American Society of Microbiology in Chicago. In Prakash's study, allicin was tested against two normal strains of Enterococci fecalis and 24 vancomycin-resistant strains of E. fecalis. The allicin concentrations stopped growth of the microbes within four hours. Cutler said concentrations of allicin at levels of 32 parts per million in a liquid or cream formulation were sufficient to inhibit MRSA. The cream he tested on himself contained 500 parts per million of allicin. Prakash said that before calling the substance "Allicin Wonderdrug" a lot of clinical testing still must be accomplished. -------------------------- "Herb-watchers are particularly excited by what the research has to say about garlic's antibiotic potential. One reason for this is that some pathogenic bacteria are becoming resistant to widely used prescription antibiotics, which are either naturally occurring or synthetically derived. Their strength was that they were developed to attack specific kinds of harmful bacteria. But some bacteria have developed their own ways of resisting attack, so the quest for more naturally occurring, less specifically targeted antibiotics has ensued. Garlic is emerging as a clear alternative to prescription antibiotics. Research outlines its potential to create an inhospitable environment to a wide range of microorganisms, including at least eight types of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and some fungi, such as Candida, the microbe that causes yeast infections, according to information provided by the nonprofit Herb Research Foundation in Boulder, Colorado. Specifically, garlic extract surpassed penicillin, ampicillin, doxycycline, streptomycin, and cephalexin in fighting eight of nine strains of Staphylococcus, Escherichia, and Proteus, according to the foundation. Moreover, like the herb echinacea, garlic may possess the ability to enhance immune function, making the body more resistant to infection, some research shows." by Carmia Borek, Ph.D. Enhanced immune functions The immune system consists of many types of cells and protective substances that fight infections, the common cold and help battle life threatening diseases, such as cancer. A strong immune system can defend against bacteria, viruses and fungal diseases. When immunity is severely damaged, as in the case of AIDS, the body cannot fight off invading infectious organisms. Immunity can be compromised by many factors, by a poor diet, stress, environmental pollution, disease and aging. Fortunately, science has identified dietary substances that help stimulate the immune system, and garlic is among them. Human studies confirm immune stimulation by garlic. Subjects receiving aged garlic extract at 1800 mg a day for three weeks showed a 155.5% increase in natural killer immune cell activity that kills invaders and cancer cells. Other subjects receiving large amounts of fresh garlic of 35g a day, equivalent to 10 cloves, showed an increase of 139.9%. In six weeks, patients with AIDS receiving aged garlic extract showed an enhancement of natural killer cells from a seriously low level to a normal level. In another human study, subjects were given garlic powder for three months. Blood samples tested for white cell activity, showed an increased capacity of the immune cells to engulf the E. coli bacteria. Garlic and garlic preparations increase the activity of immune cells, including macrophages, that kill infectious invaders. Recent studies show that garlic powdered extract contains substances that kill Heliobacter pylori, a virulent organism that grows in the stomach and is thought to be associated with stomach ulcers and stomach cancer. Since 122 patients out of 145 people infected with H. pylori showed resistance to antibiotic treatment, treatment with garlic supplementation may be an essential approach. Anti-cancer effects Normal cells become malignant through stages, in a complex process that takes many years, thus enhancing cancer risk with age. Mutations in DNA by free radicals or by binding of chemical carcinogens trigger a loss in growth regulation, causing cells to replicate in an uncontrolled way and result in a cancer. The anti-cancer effects of garlic have been recognized since ancient times, mostly in the form of therapeutic effects. New scientific methods enable us to confirm that garlic helps prevent cancer and stop cancer cell growth. Epidemiological studies The anti-cancer effects of garlic-rich diets have been shown in over 12 epidemiological studies in China, Italy and the United States. Diets high in garlic lowered the risk of stomach and colon cancer. Among the earliest documented evidence were studies in China that showed a marked decrease in stomach cancer in residents of the Gangshang province whose daily consumption was 20 grams or more. Cancer rate was thirteen times lower compared to people in another province who consumed 1gram a day. Studies in Italy showed a 50% reduction in stomach cancer in people who's daily diet was high in vegetables and contained large amounts of garlic. The protective effects of garlic against colon cancer were shown in a striking finding in the Iowa Womens' study, in which 41.837 women, aged 55-69, ate one or more servings of garlic a week, over five years. Garlic eaters showed a 35% lower risk of colon cancer, compared with women on diets that did not include garlic. Experimental studies The antioxidant effects that prevent DNA damage and cancer-causing mutations are essential to the cancer preventive effects of garlic and its components. In addition, aged garlic extract, and lipid soluble organo-sulfur compounds that are also found in garlic powder, prevent the binding of DNA and chemical carcinogens. They also increase the disposal of the carcinogens in animals, ridding the body of the cancer causing agents. Other animal studies show that aged garlic extract protects against early and late stages of cancer development in the colon, mammary glands, skin, stomach and esophagus. Among the compounds in the garlic extract showing prevention of tumor promotion is allixin, a flavonoid that also prevents the formation of prostaglandins, hormone-like substances that are active in enhancing inflammation, platelet aggregation and tumor growth. Cancer therapy In ancient times, garlic was used to treat cancer of the uterus. Experimental studies with human cells in culture support garlic action in blocking tumor growth. Work at Sloan Kettering Memorial Medical Center showed that the water soluble S-allyl cysteine and S-allyl mercaptocysteine, which are high in aged garlic extract, stop the growth of human prostate cancer and breast cancer cells in culture. Other recent studies at Pennsylvania State University showed that the oil soluble diallyl sulfide prevented the growth of human colon cancer cells. These studies offer hope for adjuvant therapy with garlic compounds. Preventing heart and liver toxicity in cancer therapy Cardiotoxicity and liver toxicity caused by anti-cancer agents that produce free radicals is a concern in cancer therapy. Doxorubicin, which is used in treating breast cancer, ovarian carcinoma and other tumors, damages the heart muscle and leads to heart failure. Methotrexate and 5-fluorouracilused, which are used in treating a variety of cancers, produce liver toxicity. Aged garlic extract and the organosulfur compounds polysulfides protect mice and heart cells in vitro from Doxorubicin toxicity and liver cells against the toxic effects of methotraxate and 5-fluorouracil. These protective effects of the garlic supplement may have applications in the clinic, reducing the risk of toxicity in patients receiving anti-cancer treatment. Anti-aging, cognitive function enhancement and life extension The history of garlic tells us of its uses to promote well being. Recent studies on mice show that garlic may have important effects on brain function and in increasing life span. The research showed that aged garlic extract and its key sulfur compound, S-allyl cysteine, enhanced learning ability in mice that are genetically prone to early aging. Nerve cells exposed to these compounds showed an unusual ability to grow and branch, which may be associated with the enhanced memory function by the garlic compounds. Aged garlic extract prevented degeneration in the frontal lobe of the brain, improved memory retention and extended the life span of the animals. Conclusions Garlic contains a wide range of substances, including antioxidants, which are enhanced by aging garlic extract and act together to help prevent atherosclerosis, heart disease, stroke, cancer and aging, as well as boost immunity and help increase memory and life span. Garlic and garlic supplements as well as garlic components, notably stable organo-sulfur compounds, have been shown to influence cancer by several mechanisms. It prevents mutations and the binding of carcinogens to DNA, increases the destruction of carcinogens by producing enzymes that do the job, prevents later stages in cancer, enhances immunity and stops the growth for some human cancer cells. Garlic antioxidants are highest in the aged garlic supplement compared to fresh garlic and other commercial preparations. The antioxidants protect against toxic effects of free radicals from radiation, including sunlight, environmental pollutants and some anti-cancer drugs, and help fight cancer, heart disease, loss of memory and aging. ----------- Don't use manufactured products like extracts, pills, etc. Allicin (the antibiotic formed in garlic) is very unstable and once it is formed by the garlic juices combining it deteriorates due to oxidation within 4 hours and loses its potency. All products selling extracts etc. are scams unless they freeze dry the garlic at extremely low temps, surveys of these products have shown almost none have potency, use only raw unheated garlic. I haven't had a cold or a flu or an infection or virus of any kind last longer then 12 hours since I started taking garlic some 15 years ago. Whenever I feel something coming on i.e the beginning of a cold (congestion) or a flu (the flu comes on slowly, if you start to feel a bit sick then take garlic) or an infection (starts with mild pain) I take 5 large cloves of garlic twice in 12 hours and I am cured immediately. Garlic kills pretty much all viruses.

The advanced devotee does not engage in bhakti related activity (sravanam, kirtanam etc) because he seeks to become free from samsara, rather he engages in bhakti activity out of affection. When one has attained affection for god, real emotional feeling of love, then that is a sign of an advanced soul. Regardless of how much sadhana you have done this affection will be there at some stage. A neophyte might have affection for god and he humble and magnanimous, whereas a long time bhakta expert in shastra and rituals may have little or no real emotional affection or love for god and be domineering and selfish. Externally it is easy to act as an advanced knowledgable bhakta, but it is the internal qualities of a person which qualifies or disqualifies them from intimacy with Radha Krishna. It's not like Krishna seeks to keep the devotee out of the spiritual world, rather the spiritual world is very easy to gain entrance for those who desire to be there. It is all about desire really. If you desire to enjoy life as the dominator, if you wish to lord it over others, then you will take birth in the mateiral world regardless of your external bhakti activity. If you desire to simply give affection and love and do not desire to lord it over others, then for the bhakta the next life is easily assured to be with Radha Krishna.

Beans do not have to be soaked in order to cook them to remove poison, soaking makes them cook faster and more evenly. Although if you eat certain beans which are not cooked you will feel like you have been poisoned i.e stomach and bowel pain leading to vomiting and diarrhea. Sprouting certain beans will also cause that e.g kidney beans. Safe beans to eat raw and sprouted are mung beans (bean sprouts commonly sold in stores) and soy beans. I don't know so much about other safe bean sprouts, but I have eaten lentil sprouts without problems.

I wouldn't automatically blame muslims. Manipur is a complex place with some 20-30 rebel groups involved in violence and insurgency. Most are Christian some are also violent Meitei nationalists who seek to rid Manipur of what they perceive as foreign culture, which includes Vaisnavism, and Iskcon. While there is a chance muslims are involved, in Manipur the most active violent groups are not muslim.

The first time the word hindu appears in any written language is in the Avesta (ancient zoroastrian scripture). It is commonly accepted by Indologists that the word Hindu has it's origin in sindhu from the Persians use of that word as hindu. The ancient Persian language was very similar to sanskrit, kinda like the difference between portuguese and spanish. Anyways in that language they would use "h" instead of "s" often times. Therefore they called sindhu; hindu, just like they called asura; ahura in old persian. From Wikipedia From Sita Ram Goel in "HinduTemples: What Happened to Them? Part 2" http://www.bharatvani.org/books/htemples1/index.htm http://www.bharatvani.org/books/htemples2/index.htm "There is, therefore, no running away from the fact that the word “Hindu” occurs for the first time in the Avesta of the ancient Iranians who used this word for designating this country as well as its people. They did not have to coin this word out of thin air. It was simply their way of pronouncing the word “Sindhu”, the name of the mighty river which has always been a major landmark for travellers to this country from the north and the west. To start with, the word seems to have been used for provinces and the people in the vicinity of the Sindhu. But in due course, it was extended to cover all parts of this country and all its people. The word also spread to countries to the north and west of Iran. The ancient Greeks were quite familiar with the words “Indus” and “Indoi” - their way of pronouncing “Sindhu” and “Sindhîs”. The ancient Arabs, Turks (Šakas, KuSãNas, etc.), Mongolian (HûNas, Kirãtas, etc.) and the Chinese were also familiar with the word, sometimes in their own variations on it such as “Shin-tu”. It may thus be said that the word “Hindu” had acquired a national connotation, since the days of the Avesta, although in the eyes of only the foreigners. At the same time, it may be noted that the word was oblivious of the fact that “Hindus” were organized in numerous castes, and d to many religious sects. There is also evidence that at some stage in their history the ancient Iranians started using the word “Hindu” in more than a purely descriptive sense. The word seems to have acquired for them a derogatory meaning as well. Scholars are not quite certain, nor in complete agreement, about the nature of differences that developed between the Vedics of this country and the Avestans of Iran. The two people had had much in common, and for a long time, in the realm of language, religion, rituals, and ethical norms. It is surmised that the rift appeared with the rise of Zarathustra (Zoroaster) as a religious reformer in the region round Bãhlîka (Balkh), and became bitter by the time the Archaeminid Dynasty rose to power in Iran. Zorastrianism became the state religion of Iran, and the Iranians started looking down upon the Hindus as worshippers of “dev” (Skt. deva), their word for demon. They were using the word “Ahura” (Skt. Asura) for their own Deity."

"Hindu" is not a religion as a previous guest mentioned. Hinduism is a word that denotes a category of religions all of which share certain beliefs i.e samsara, karma, mantras, authority of vedas etc. Popularly among many Indians the concept of Hindu has more of a cultural and ethnic inference then a religious one. To be a Hindu to many Indians means being an Indian non muslim more then anything else. So is Iskcon Hindu? Srila Prabhupada sometimes would preach no. But there was a purpose to that. Indologists would claim that Iskcon is Hindu, most Indians would claim Iskcon is Hindu, and often times people in Iskcon claim Iskcon is Hindu as well. In a sense Iskcon is Hindu because Hindu is an umbrella term which covers all faiths which accept the vedas as divine revelation. Srila Prabhupada didn't want Iskcon to be seen as presenting "Hinduism" in the non Hindu world. In India it is alright to claim to be Hindu because most people understand that Hinduism is not a specific religious belief system but an umbrella term or a category of religions. In the west when Srila Prabhupada preached, the masses of people had very little to no knowledge of Indian or Hindu religions. In most people's minds Hindus were polytheists (or monists i.e impersonalists, mayavadis) who believe in the caste system. That was the extent of most people's idea of what Hinduism was all about. Since gaudiya vaisnavism (Iskcon) does not teach polytheism, nor monism, and rejects the caste system, Srila Prabhupada decided that it was wise to claim in the west that Iskcon is not Hinduism. In reality Hinduism is a word invented by the British. When they came in contact with India they used a Persian word for Indians, which was hindu (derived from sindhu: river, India near Persia was called Hindustan: The land of rivers). The British lumped the various vedic related religious sects of India into a single word; Hinduism. To scholars Iskcon is Hindu because it is a vaisnava sect which bases it's beliefs and practices on the sruti and smriti (vedic literature and associated literature). Iskcon is a branch of a mainstream Hindu religious sect to Indologists and students of religion and to most Indians. But for preaching purposes outside of India Srila Prabhupada didn't want Iskcon to be seen as Hindu because most people had a misconception about Hinduism. Today that has changed somewhat, so often times you will see devotees preach that Iskcon is a traditional mainstream Hindu religion.

Vaikuntha is where everyone knows God is God and is fully self realized. Since I don't know who you are and what your level of knowledge is on the Bhagavat I took it for granted that you are a gaudiya vaisnava and therefore should know that Vaikuntha and Goloka are different. That is what we are taught as beginners. It is not some great philosophical struggle. It is simple and quite clear. If you make it difficult to know who you are and what level of exposure you have had to gaudiya siddhanta then what can you expect? I gave the answer that I would give to a gaudiya vaisnava. They should know that Vaikuntha and Goloka are different and that in Vaikuntha everyone relates with Lord Narayana in knowledge of the majesty and power of the Lord. Make yourself easier to understand where you are coming from and then you will get the reciprocation you desire. It is a lack of respect to those who consistently use a single name on a forum to respond to us and ask questions if you do not do the same. The simple and easy method to make conversations easy on a forum is to use a single name, How difficult is it to do that? How can I take people very seriously if they don't make a few seconds effort to either get an account or at the least to sign a consistent name? How do I know you are not the person who made false and defamatory comments about me earlier in this thread and who just seeks to be antagonistic for hateful reasons? Give some respect if you want respect. Ultimately if you accept the verdict of the Bhagavatam and the previous acaryas on the nature of reality then what is the problem? There is no philosophical way to expound on this issue. We are simply told what is what and you either have faith or you don't. If you want a philosophical exposition about what the sastra says about "full of knowledge" when it comes to Goloka, then you will be unsatisfied. This is not a philosophical quandry. We are told what life is like in Goloka and in Vaikuntha for the jivas, we have no way to prove that philosophically, you either have faith in the words of the Bhagavats or you don't. What more can you ask of me about something that cannot be proven philosophically? It's not like debating the nature of the soul and our relationship with the material world. Not everything that we are taught from the vedic sastra is provable, much is based on faith. Just like I can't philosophically prove that Krishna is Swayam Bhagavan to another person, no one can. We simply accept what the sastra says until we have that knowledge revealed to us directly. You said you wanted to "dispel doubt". Doubt about what? You said "If I had doubts, I wouldn't be discussing his teachings on this forum." You say you have no doubts then the very next line you say are looking to overcome doubts? How am I to know what you mean by that if you don't make yourself clear? You shouldn't expect vaisnavas to be at your beck and call to answer what you want in the way you want it, especially if you don't make an effort to better enunciate your position first. Krishna gives you entrance into divine knowledge depending on your level of sincerity and humility. I am not the controller of what you read here, Krishna controls how you are treated and what you experience at all times. Srimad Bhagavatam 11.13.24 manasa vacasa drishtya grihyate 'nyair apindriyaih aham eva na matto 'nyad iti budhyadhvam anjasa Within this world, whatever is perceived by the mind, speech, eyes or other senses is Me alone and nothing besides Me. All of you please understand this by a straightforward analysis of the facts.

I never said it was, that is your own projection in a silly attempt to denigrate me and to try to seem superior to me as well as all knowing and self realized. This is my last interaction with you. Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 8.221 purport

Hmmm. What is your point? If you simply want to argue for arguments sake I have better things to do. Obviously you know that it is in the Jaiva Dharma what you ask, yet you seem to want to play some kind of silly game of pretense and prosecution, Is that proper vaisnava behavior? I will not respond until you act without dishonesty and without the seeking to diminish my reputation as your mind game of choice of the moment. If you can behave then I will interact with you, otherwise not. p.s. Bhaktivinoda does not say that "Goloka is actually based off of the Gokula prototype" and neither did I.