Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 It is defensive. I would like to express a viewpoint different from the partially thought out positions presented here. All of the issues discussed here are understood since ancient times.Many think they have reinvented the wheel - this is because of their limited understanding of the history and traditions of the issues involved. Plus yesterday Todd attacked Ayurvedic traditions - vegetarians - and Indian culture. Doesn't this demand response - Gandhiji always thought one should never let people intimidate you into submission. He never gave even one inch to those who would try to shut him up. This is the job of the mature people in society. It is curious that vegetarians are somehow thought of as passive. Vegetarians need not be made to feel inferior to the meateaters. For many here the idea is ludicrous. Of course to try to demonstrate the validity of the teachings of our Guru's in short arguments is not possible. as an example wants me to provide my B12 test results - and he wants references for my assertions. I wonder if the Vedic scholars - Ghandi - Vivekananda - Chinmayananda - the Shankaracharyas - Tagore - Sri Ramakrishnan - Lord Krishna himself - Issac Newton - William Blake - need to present their B12 results or site their sources. This intellectual approach is useless and is not the one that best demonstrates the truths of Ayurveda. Few of the leading Vaidyas in the world know anything of these western scientific concepts. Yet this in no way keeps them from understanding the patient and what is needed to cure or treat the disease. The modern western research model is not helpful for India since we already see the results of having the pharmaceutical companies fund studies. There is really no other research mechimnism in India. Ayurveda and natural law in general is self evident and needs no further validation. Actually it seems that those who are doubtful of their own positions often hide behind studies - valid or not. It absolves one from self responsibility. If defense of our science,religion, race, and culture is an old mans agression - I accept the role - since my God (Krishna and Rama) - my Guru's and influences (such as Gandhi and Vivekananda) were not shrinking violets - and advocated a strong defense. I am not exactly sure what Noel thinks is my main fault - defending myself and my traditions - being 64 - expressing an alternative view??? I did not realize that one must submit to some particular PC code here. I am not good at that - because I think for myself. I also generally do not try to bolster my opinions with any other authority or referances than the scriptures because all other intellectual positions are mear speculation - no matter how broadly one has read into the research. Here is something I wrote about research for another forum - If one goes into any group of people studying in this area (as well as any other field you might want to mention) there will be as many theories as there are people. Several months ago I participated in a seminar in London on Genetic Profiling in population studies. The theme of the seminar was the unreliability of depending on research to define any issue. A man and wife team from Berlin presented a demonstration showing how one can prove almost any position one might propose. They took several subjects and demonstrated the opposing sides and the incontrovertible evidence on both sides. One of the demonstrations was the popular controversy between the vegetarians and meat eaters. He presented dozens of major studies done in US - Japan - Europe that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that those who do not live on a high protein (animal flesh and fat) low carbohydrate diet do not thrive and develop almost every known physical disorder. He only took the least controversial - most rigorously conducted impartial studies. Remember researchers above all others are suspicious of studies because they know that a large percentage of studies are designed for various intellectual and financial reasons that are not related to scientific objectives. The list was long of disorders associated with low protein high carbohydrate diet. The wife offered her presentation that refuted - with equally rigorous research - the ravages of a high protein - low carbohydrate diet. In these studies animal proteins and fats are demonstrated to be major contributing factors in heart disease - cancer (especially the evidence for the relationship of animal fats to breast and prostate cancers)- arthritis - on and on. One set of studies proved with out a doubt that eating animal proteins and fats is toxic and will destroy health and that eating a diet of natural grains, legumes, natural produced vegetable fats, fruits, and vegetables is in and of itself restorative and healing from many of these disorders - the other set of studies proves that those eating a low animal protein, low animal fat, diet die early from various degenerative processes. Many studies show that if one switches to red meat and low glycemic foods one will rapidly and permanently solve all of your metabolic disorders. The fact is one can prove any point one wants with studies. That is why one must have a personal overview of the subject one is interested in otherwise one is at the mercy of studies and theories that demonstrate little more than the intellectual or financial interests of either the researcher or those funding the study. I like the tendency of ordinary people becoming authorities in the field of self healing and antiaging and many other areas of life. The more one knows about oneself the better chance one has of solving the problems that arise in life. But one tendency among some nouveau researchers is that they often fall for the trap of throwing away all evidence that does not fit their model. I believe the opposite approach is more useful - study everything and slowly your own path will start unfolding. It is a natural path. I in no way see my struggle to expand my own and others consciousness on this subject as a battle with you or your ideas or ideals. Ideas exist in an abstract place where all things are ultimately true and just as ultimately false. Not you,me, or anyone else has all of the answers. But maybe you have part of the puzzle for yourself - and I have part of it for myself. Actually I am much less interested in theories than in practical experience. I know very well that there are many people in the internet who are setting in front of their computers in their underwear - drinking chemical cocktails - smoking pot - overweight - depressed - compulsive - lethargic - manic - angry - etc. who are passing themselves off as scientific authorities. I know one person in the Internet who weighs more than 400 pounds who thinks of himself as a world authority on ideal diets. One must be alert and the best defense against this trap is to know thoroughly all sides of the issues. ayurveda, "Noel" <sattva@p...> wrote: > Dear Vinod > > I find it curious that a 64 year old vegetarian is so > aggressive. Please forgive me if I have offended you. I was just voicing my > opinion; it wasn't intended to be a personal attack. Bless you my friend. > .... Noel ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 > > Plus yesterday Todd attacked Ayurvedic traditions - vegetarians - and > Indian culture. when did I do this Vinod? it is clear that you misread & misinterpreted my comments jumped to conclusions, made your assertions and attacks, and then evaded responsibility for this my apologies to those of you on the list who are bored/tired/shocked by the nature and tone of the discussion in internet terminology, i was 'flamed' something that most internet protocols define as undesirable obviously Vinod has felt some affrontry to anti-vegetarian web sites out there, and she has channeled her pent up angst towards them against me i'm sorry, but I refuse to play windmill to Vinod's Don Qixote i have been passionately interested in Ayurveda and Indian culture for more than ten years i have studied Ayurveda from my teacher here in Canada (who by the way is a vegetarian and a ISKCON member), and from my teachers in Kerala (some of whom were Hindus, other Christians) I have studied (north) Indian classical vocal, tabla, mrdangam and shanai my second son was even born in India! i have traveled all over India, from Goa to Orissa, from Tamil Nad to Punjab, and enjoyed elements of every aspect of India culture: the people, the food, the music, the movies: everything! ALL, except the kind of fundamentalist "hindu" ethic and non-sectarian violence that resulted in Ayodha: this I have also come across too often Here in Canada I teach Ayurvedic medicine as part of a three yr clinical training program in Western herbal medicine, and use Ayurveda in my daily practice and personal life I think its pretty clear, unless the criteria that Vinod maintains is purely racial, that I have a strong and deep interest and passion for Ayurveda and Indian culture, vegetarianism notwithstanding > as an example wants me to provide my B12 test results - and he > wants references for my assertions. I wonder if the Vedic scholars - > Ghandi - Vivekananda - Chinmayananda - the Shankaracharyas - Tagore - > Sri Ramakrishnan - Lord Krishna himself - Issac Newton - William > Blake - need to present their B12 results or site their sources. Vinod, with all humility, are you saying you are in the same class as these people? you have more or less insinuated that asking for references or evidence is akin to being a fanatic, and hence have accused me of being a fanatic ***all for saying that vegetarianism has nothing to do with Ayurveda*** this has been my thesis at the outset, and every kind of argument has been thrown at me, except that nobody has contradicted this statement my mistake was to even try to bother addressing the extracurricular arguments, but I have to say, some of them are just so silly and twisted (like all the major world religions support vegetarianism!), that i gave in to them for all concerned, i ask for references b/c this one way to validate an argument otherwise the argument goes round and round Vinod's insistence on not providing references and even disparaging the WHOLE CONCEPT of providing evidence has made this debate a lot longer and more convoluted than needed i'm sorry, but I have a scholarly ethic: what is fanatical about providing sources of knowledge that others can digest and verify for themselves? doesn't it seem rather more fanatic to say something is so, and then have no evidence to back it up? isn't it this same kind of willingness to state explicit opinions based on nothing except prejudice that allows for the true atrocities to happen? Some of you may criticize science and academia, especially when it is funded by big corporate interests, but my assertion is that well-thought out arguments supported by relevant data is a respectable way to debate any issue, and it is gold standard in every center of learning, India included i'm not asking for scientific papers from Vinod except where the comments relate to assertions about science as far as Ayurveda goes, I also ask for references here as well, because if I'm wrong I would like to know - if Vinod or any of you can find any comment in the greater or lesser triad of Ayurvedic texts that states that vegetarianism is an important principle of Ayurveda I shall prostrate myself before you and clearly and humbly state that I am wrong > > Ayurveda and natural law in general is self evident and needs no > further validation. Despite the implications of what you are saying, there is good evidence that Ayurveda is a heterodox tradition; for this I refer you and everyone else to Kenneth Zysk's text "Asceticism and Healing in Ancient India" in this text, Zysk makes the argument that it was the wandering vedic bhishaj, and later, the wandering buddhist monks (and the essentially buddhist uinversities such Taxashila and Nilanda), that made many of the innovations in Ayurveda, especially those that relate to the mundane, but important elements of Ayurveda such as herbal medicine (my speciality and interest) this is paralled in the work of other wandering herbalists such as the rhizomotoki of ancient Greece, of which Dioscorides is part, as well as the modern day hakim of Unani medicine Zysk contends that the bhishaj had an empirical bias towards Ayurveda, unlike the magico-religious approach to healing of the brahmanic elite; the sruggle between these two basic approaches is long evident in almost every culture: I count myself among the former its an interesting read, but perhaps only if you have an open mind... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 > > ALL, except the kind of fundamentalist "hindu" ethic and non-sectarian violence that resulted in Ayodha: this I have also come across too often sorry, i meant Ayodhya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.