talasiga

Originally posted by Gauracandra:

This has always puzzled me. I think the jewish people are probably the most targeted group religiously. I can't figure it out. The only thing I can think of is that they tend to be a very tight knit community. As such they work together, pool their resources and build up their own communities. This is perhaps intimidating to less organized groups, who feel dominated by the Jewish unity. But you really can't blame them for that, actually its quite admirable. Any thoughts?

THOUGHT 1:-

You are easily puzzled.

Originally posted by jndas:

According to Srila Prabhupada, the world "Arya" refers to those who followed the Vedic teachings. By comparing them against Dravidians you are comparing apples and oranges. Dravidians who followed the Vedic culture were also Aryans.

Yes.

And this usage of "Arya[n]" is

consistent with the Sanskritic usage

which, again, is not a racial based usage.

the use of the term "Aryan"

on this thread appears to revolve

around a 19th century usage of it to denote

a racial or genetic grouping and such usage culminated

in the unfortunate turn the term had under Nazism.

The modern usage of the term is to denote

those <u>languages of Indo-European origin</u>

ie. from Sanskrit, Ancient Persian,

Ancient Greek, Latin, Old German etc

Please see a good dictionary.

See also a MODERN anthropology text book

of your choosing.

Originally posted by suryaz:

No there is no "India" as such pre 1947. There was the land mass but it was not technically call “India” although it was in short often referred to as India. What we call India today, that was part of a bunch of British colonies on the Indian or Asian - sub-continent for a while. Before that it was a landmass of separate Hindu kingdoms until the Muslims came

 

A bit like the land mass of Europe ?

A land mass with a mass of peoples and traditions no doubt ?

Ever heard of "European Culture",

"European History" etc ?

When did Europe become <u>A</u> country ?

Does it have to be a country to exist ?

Huh ?

You just don't get it, do you ?

Ah well .....

BTW, you didn't mention the <u>Portuguese</u>

and

the <u>French</u> colonies in India.

Probably, too much of a big picture issue.

Originally posted by jndas:

Jai Hind!

 

 

Hind: a female deer

Yes !

All glories to the Golden Hind

of Dear India !

See how she ranges across Her land

Crossing pathetic man-made borders drawn

in the sand .....

Originally posted by suryaz:

What is “India” today is not what people pre-1947 may have referred to in short as 'India'.

 

Post the Act of 1858 (which saw the British Crown assumed direct charge of government in the Indian sub-continent, up until -1947 was, what is to day called Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka (some other islands also) plus “India”. The above were a collection of British colonies referred to as the Asian sub-continent aks the Indian sub-continent.

What is called India today pre British rule was a collection of separate Hindu kingdoms in the south and the northern part of what we today call India, plus Bangladesh and Pakistan were under Muslim rule from the beginning of the 13th century.

 

We can apply the same order of

hair splitting distinction

to

France

Germany

Poland

Russia

Italy

China

etc etc

No decent historian would

disagree that there is a contiguity of national identity in terms of history

and culture with all these countries

regardless of their

changing borders, different administrations,

disunity

and so on

at various points in time.

History, is by definition, a "big picture"

discipline.

The details will afford greater meaning for you

when you can see the big picture.

Try:

"A History of India"

Herman Kulke & Dietmar Rothermund

ISBN 0-415-04799-4

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 11-19-2001).]

Originally posted by jndas:

This is a good example of how pride blocks one's spiritual path.

 

........His pride does not allow him to accept defeat, much like he would refuse to accept he was wrong on countless other occassions. (Example: that "the Bhavishya Purana is not a mahapurana", that "the scriptures speak about New World vegetables like tomatoes and condemn those who eat them", "potatos are eternally pure even if covered in beef", etc.)

Your win and defeat paradigm tends to contradict

your own espoused worthy approach which you

set out

in the "Audarya Fellowship" thread at:-

http://www.indiadivine.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000336.html

Also, your citings from other threads to denounce Satyaraja, are potentially misleading

as they are taken out of context,

and particularly as you have not provided the readers with

appropriate HTML references so they can see for themselves.

Satyaraja's contributions on this thread,

however disagreeable his point of view,

have been generous in their chivalrous

and stimulating manner.

Often it is not PRIDE but intellectual HUMILITY

that prompts some to have the courage

to take such views for the sake of developmental discussions

without regard to the unjustified personal unpopularity

that such views might bring them.

The important thing is that the discussions

remain relevant

factually, philosophically or poetically)

good spirited, and free from rude coarse language

and untrue slanderous comments.

Such challenges from Satyaraja should be seen

as opportunities for his antagonists

to polish their discursive skills

as devotional service.

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 11-19-2001).]

Originally posted by suryaz:

Herein Bhaktivinoda states:

1. The Aryans first entered India from the North West and subjugated the indigenous tribes around 4463 B.C. ..." (Shukavac).

 

 

Now, what do we have here ?

Bhaktivinoda Acharya said this way before 1947

but according to Suryaz India didn't exist

before 1947 .....

forget PBS

try QED !

Originally posted by Bhaktavasya:

"That which is the cause of bondage, applied theraputically, can be the cause of liberation."

 

OKAY !

You tie my left hand an I'll tie your right !

Tarun

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 01-07-2002).]

Howz abouts some of his poems, Jijaji ?

Please ?

Originally posted by ggohil:

If I were to discuss this topic with my grandmother, she would have been very quick to point out that she did not need science to tell her the benefits of breast feeding.

 

 

And some do not need scripture to promote

their love of God.

Originally posted by JRdd:

I don't beleive that cow's milk is good for babies. Also, breast milk is very thin (and sweet like it has been sugared), whereas cow's milk is fatty.

Ageed.

I remember suckling at my mother's breast.

I also remember being sick with asthma when I was using a bottle.

Recently my aged mother told me that, at 6 months, I was put on cow's milk (because of some ill health she was experiencing) and I developed asthma. Have been allergic to dairy since then (yoghourt included.

In those days, in Fiji, fresh milk still warm from Mother Cow, was delivered by the dairyman himself in billy cans. It was very rich cream milk, unpasteurised and our family would boil it first thing for "hygiene" considerations.

According to Henry Bieler, "Food is Your Best Medicine", boiling of milk (even pasteurising) destroys the superior quality of the raw milk proteins and renders them somewhat harmful.

My two children who are now fully grown

were breast fed for at least 18 months

and have not "inherited" any of their parent's physiological weaknesses.

Also, no starch foods (particularly grains, pasta and other flour based foods) during

this period except gentle vegetable starches such as potato.

And definitely NO SALT !!

Originally posted by atma:

I don't know if any of you ever noticed the old ladies in India that can't stand straight, they are completely bended. This happens because they have many children and breast-feed for long time and they don't get enough nutrition themselves. They don't have any calcium left in their bones.

Excess mineral salt intake (common in India)

depletes calcium.

As does excessively high meat intake.....

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 11-19-2001).]

Originally posted by leyh:

talasiga:

The translation of the Narada Bhakti Sutras that I cited ..................

was completed by The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust Narada-bhakti-sutra Translation and Editorial Board which consists of Satsvarupa dasa Goswami (Commentator and Editor in Chief),Gopiparanadhana dasa Adhikari (Translator and Sanskrit Editor) and Dravida dasa Brahmacari (English Editor).

Which translation are you using and how does it translate Sutra 74?

Mine is translated as,

"<u>Vain</u> discussion should not be undertaken ..." (my underlining)

from "Bhaktis[oo]tras of N[aa]rada"

translated by Nandalal Sinha

ISBN 81-215-0827-4

(Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers P/L)

Originally posted by leyh:

Audarya:

In the Narada Bhakti Sutras,Narada Muni instructs that:"One should not indulge in argumentative debate." (Sutra 74)

 

Dear Leyh

Friend of you know who

On the sliding sleigh:

Where did you get this translation ?

I am interested in the source of your info.

My translation says something a little, but significantly, different.

Thank You.

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Talasigaji:

The Ferry of Devotion

Parts the River from shore to shore

Yet see how the waters are still undivided !

 

Satyaraj:

 

Would that Ferry parts swans and ducks?

 

 

Just come to the decks and see !

Swans to the starboard, swans to the portside

And ducks to the starboard, ducks to the portside !

.

.

.

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 11-15-2001).]

The Ferry of Devotion

Parts the River from shore to shore

Yet see how the waters are still undivided !

.

.

.

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

Originally posted by gHari:

How much can you part with?

 

Originally posted by talasiga:

Can you part with Separation ?

 

Originally posted by Satyaraj:

Isn’t Separation itself part of the Absolute? Just like Death?

Poor gHari

Asks one question

Gets three in return !

Originally posted by gHari:

How much can you part with?

Can you part with Separation ?

Originally posted by gHari:

<blockquote>

tato duhsangam utsrjya

satsu sajjeta buddhiman

santa evasya chindanti

mano-vyasangam uktibhih

(Srimad-Bhagavatam, 11.26.26)

</blockquote>

 

"The wise avoid the wicked and seek the holy. One who is holy, offering holy advice, cuts asunder the desires that create obstructions in one's spiritual life."

 

</blockquote>

 

 

Those who know Him

Know not where to avoid Him.

Those who know wickedness

Will flee it everywhere.

Those who are wise

know this.

.

.

.

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

Originally posted by jijaji:

Within you Without you

 

we were talking...

about the space between us all..

 

jijaji

 

Can you imagine jelebi-s

without the concentric spaces ?

They'd just be saffron lumps .

Who would stuff their faces then

When sweetness no longer corrals

the little voids in our life ?

.

.

.

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

Originally posted by suryaz:

As if boils could come from eating mangos in the summer ???????????

 

 

As a seasonal fruitarian for over 30 years with some considerable experiences in healing

and mitigation of the effects of serious illnesses

with the application of dietary healing and other natural

complementary systems, I would be inclined to view

any such effects from the eating of mangoes as a cleansing

crisis triggered by the healing potency of the fruit.

The systematic application of a natural cleansing regime

would be likely to cleanse such a body to an extent

that the mango would no longer trigger such a cleansing crisis.

When I was a child in tropical Fiji Islands

we had several

mango trees in our urban backyard which bore munificiently.

Also my mother's relatives would bring us bags of mangoes

from their farm. Naturally we gorged ourselves with the fruits.

None of us got boils.

However it was noticeable that children who usually ate little fruit

and whose diets were heavily dependent on rice and other starchy foods, excessively salty accompaniments

and oily foods tended to get tropical ulcers more consistently than others.

In summer when I am eating mostly fruits

I often enjoy raw bitter melon vitamised (blenderised) with tomato, origano, mint and lemon juice. Another simple but delicious way is to steam slices in water and douse with lemon juice before serving - no frying, no salt.

For people who aren't into some strict natural dietary regime

I would suggest this as a guideline (and not a rule):

1. don't mix raw juicy fruits (Satvic) with cooked foods (Tamasic).

2. eat such fruits on an empty stomach especially breakfast at least 30 minutes after your morning glass of water.

3. can be eaten with some raw nuts and/or good live yoghourt/laban etc if one can tolerate dairy. Never with anything starchy albeit raw (eg rolled oats etc).

talasiga: The essence of homeopathy is the principle

that "like cures like"

and the truly poetic sensibility will explore that essence

rather than escape it.

Originally posted by darwin:

Homeopathy doesn't follow this instruction.

Homeopathy uses fake medicine that is so diluted that

there is probably not even one molecule of the "ingredient"

in it.

talasiga:

The "principle" is not an "instruction" and "essence" is not an "ingredient".

Try a good dictionary next time.

Or, better still, start at square one and find a different monkey .....

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 11-08-2001).]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

There is no reason to consider the material realm as inferior than Hari, as Hari is its operative cause and He is always Absolute. According to Vedanta no one should disdain Hari’s lilas of creation.

Bilkul ! Satyaraja Babaji !

Bilkul !

By Lord's Grace, one need not even go near any

Vedaantic text to know this.....

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 11-08-2001).]