Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 - >It does sound like a pain in the neck, but understand that these >principles (three prime attributes, five elements and 20 >qualities--and there are still others) permeate *everything* and, once >recognized, the patterns emerge all around. For me, instead of a pain >in the neck, the world became coherent. For me to understand that, I'd have to believe it, I take it in some sort of spiritual sense. >The importance, care and feeding of the pineal gland also goes way >back in the texts. Said care and feeding being? > > Come on, I'll send you some jam if you need more. I'm not saying >I'm going > > to adopt such a dietary regimen, but I'm quite curious about what it >would > > consist of. > >Another post, please, I am not up to a cyber-flaying by the >list-caesar at this time, and request your benevolent mercies. So how about this post? Though I could of course be wrong, I think I'm generally quite polite to anyone who's not rude. (If I'm wrong, my apologies.) - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 , > I was asking how often excess stomach acid production is diagnosed, because > my understanding is that it's actually a fairly rare condition and possibly > extremely rare. I don't know the frequency, but it would not be diagnosed without careful consideration of the presenting signs and symptoms. That's the thing, each patient is looked at and treated as a unique individual--on every level. Someone with excess stomach acid production is going to have very specific, consistent, supporting signs/symptoms, behavioral and psychological, physical appearance, not just a burning feeling in their gut at times. > It depends what you mean by " encompass " . I could imagine someone saying > that and meaning that anything science comes up with will already be there > in ayurveda. I didn't mean all science, I mean medical/health stuff. Excuse my bad writing. I do think this is true, that whatever it is, has already been addressed in some dusty little rhyming couplet in Sanskrit somewhere. > I'm not arguing that there's no truth to ayurveda. I'm arguing that as > science progresses, metaphoric systems should seek to literalize themselves. I don't see that it doesn't. I think it is unique in its ability to be completely modern, always. But if I see evidence to the contrary, I assure you, I will change my mind. > But how do you know that these diagnoses are accurate and will lead to > productive changes? I know I have seen many people confirm diagnoses that the doctor made with no prior information other than the person standing in front of them for a minute and reading their tongue and pulse. This is not fortune-telling (although it looks like it) but astute observation. I have no idea what people do when they go off to live their lives as much advice they are given is like what one would receive here: eat reasonable food, adjust your stress levels and detoxify your lifestyle, take these nasty-tasting herbs for three months--who knows the follow-through? Not infrequently, one is advised to go to a western specialist for further, more conclusive tests. It's not at all unusual for a top Ayurvedic doctor to be well-versed in allopathic medicine and surgery, if not hold degrees in same. I cetainly don't think it's for everybody, but on this forum, I mention when something is paralleled somehow in Ayurveda, I get asked questions, and I'm thus frequently talking about it. > OK, but if that analogy holds, then most or at least much present-day > ayurvedic dogma is garbage, just as most present-day western dietary dogma > is garbage. You're not just sayin' it. One must be very careful with these things. This is why I wouldn't actually recommend it to someone as a solution to seek on their own--there is too much garbage. I just geek out on it. B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 > - > > >It does sound like a pain in the neck, but understand that these > >principles (three prime attributes, five elements and 20 > >qualities--and there are still others) permeate *everything* and, once > >recognized, the patterns emerge all around. For me, instead of a pain > >in the neck, the world became coherent. > > For me to understand that, I'd have to believe it, I take it in some sort > of spiritual sense. Forgive me, but I have a very crude and perhaps incorrect understanding of what a " spiritual sense " is, exactly, probably because I was raised by devout atheists. For me, the above comes down to recurring patterns, and I think anyone familiar with the elements of life in the world--physical or biological--in modern science might see the world in a similar fashion, recurring patterns of one sort or another, regardless of a spiritual practice--I don't know your definition of believing in something in a spiritual sense, but it smells like--dunno--<sniff> deities? > > >The importance, care and feeding of the pineal gland also goes way > >back in the texts. > > Said care and feeding being? Cycling sleep--specifically light and darkness--diet, pressure points for stimulation and therapeutic effect. > >Another post, please, I am not up to a cyber-flaying by the > >list-caesar at this time, and request your benevolent mercies. > > So how about this post? Though I could of course be wrong, I think I'm > generally quite polite to anyone who's not rude. (If I'm wrong, my apologies.) Ever-grateful recipient of your forbearance, B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 - > > >It does sound like a pain in the neck, but understand that these > > >principles (three prime attributes, five elements and 20 > > >qualities--and there are still others) permeate *everything* and, once > > >recognized, the patterns emerge all around. For me, instead of a pain > > >in the neck, the world became coherent. > > > > For me to understand that, I'd have to believe it, I take it in some sort > > of spiritual sense. > >Forgive me, but I have a very crude and perhaps incorrect >understanding of what a " spiritual sense " is, exactly, probably >because I was raised by devout atheists. Maybe I should have said " mystical " or " supernatural " or " religious " , particularly in light of your later post on the subject. > For me, the above comes down >to recurring patterns, and I think anyone familiar with the elements >of life in the world--physical or biological--in modern science might >see the world in a similar fashion, recurring patterns of one sort or >another, regardless of a spiritual practice--I don't know your >definition of believing in something in a spiritual sense, but it >smells like--dunno--<sniff> deities? Patterns, sure, but not in the sense that everything has to fit into one of a handful of different types of mystical energy. >Cycling sleep--specifically light and darkness--diet, pressure points >for stimulation and therapeutic effect. By cycling sleep do you mean shifting the times of sleep, or making sure that it's consistent? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 - > > I'm not arguing that there's no truth to ayurveda. I'm arguing that as > > science progresses, metaphoric systems should seek to literalize >themselves. > >I don't see that it doesn't. I think it is unique in its ability to >be completely modern, always. But if I see evidence to the contrary, >I assure you, I will change my mind. So you regard " fire " and " ether " and whatnot as literal physical realities? To me, saying a particular physiological type has lots of " fire " , which is associated with various characteristics, is a metaphoric description of physical reality, even if it's a good one. >I know I have seen many people confirm diagnoses that the doctor made >with no prior information other than the person standing in front of >them for a minute and reading their tongue and pulse. This is not >fortune-telling (although it looks like it) but astute observation. Oh, I don't dispute that that's possible. MDs themselves doubtless used to be better observers, before they began to rely so much on charts of " normal " ranges of test values due to the growth of the pharmaceutical industry. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 , > So you regard " fire " and " ether " and whatnot as literal physical > realities? To me, saying a particular physiological type has lots of > " fire " , which is associated with various characteristics, is a metaphoric > description of physical reality, even if it's a good one. No, I suppose I don't think of them as literal physical realities--and neither are they meant to be--but I do find myself thinking in those terms anymore. Another crude example: I have taken course work in anatomy--including cadaver dissection--also physiology. Yet when presented with a patient at the sports medicine clinic (and I am well-respected there for an ability to hone in on a problem with no prior information) my thoughts are along the lines of, " the flow--it's not moving down the leg, " or " you...too...hot! " or some such nonsense. B. > > >I know I have seen many people confirm diagnoses that the doctor made > >with no prior information other than the person standing in front of > >them for a minute and reading their tongue and pulse. This is not > >fortune-telling (although it looks like it) but astute observation. > > Oh, I don't dispute that that's possible. MDs themselves doubtless used to > be better observers, before they began to rely so much on charts of > " normal " ranges of test values due to the growth of the pharmaceutical > industry. > > > > - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 On 9/17/05, downwardog7 <illneverbecool@...> wrote: > No, I suppose I don't think of them as literal physical realities--and > neither are they meant to be--but I do find myself thinking in those > terms anymore. Another crude example: I have taken course work in > anatomy--including cadaver dissection--also physiology. Yet when > presented with a patient at the sports medicine clinic (and I am > well-respected there for an ability to hone in on a problem with no > prior information) my thoughts are along the lines of, " the flow--it's > not moving down the leg, " or " you...too...hot! " or some such nonsense. > B. To me, intuitively, I believe that these ideas about " flow " and " energy " are physically real. When I get sick, for example, the idea of some kind of energy becoming stagnant-- especially in my joints-- is precisely the subtle feeling I get. And, as I was trying to say in the Etheric bodies thread, I don't think this indicates that there is something fundamentally *different* from what we can observe through our so-called " Western " methods of observation, but rather, being something real, something that is definitely observable but we just haven't pieced together how it fits in with the so-called " Eastern " paradigm yet. Doesn't everything in life come down to whether you gots " flow " or not? Whether everyone else feelin' it or not, that just happens to be what's up. Chris > > > > > >I know I have seen many people confirm diagnoses that the doctor made > > >with no prior information other than the person standing in front of > > >them for a minute and reading their tongue and pulse. This is not > > >fortune-telling (although it looks like it) but astute observation. > > > > Oh, I don't dispute that that's possible. MDs themselves doubtless > used to > > be better observers, before they began to rely so much on charts of > > " normal " ranges of test values due to the growth of the pharmaceutical > > industry. > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > <HTML><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC " -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN " > " http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd " ><BODY><FONT > FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " > > <B>IMPORTANT ADDRESSES</B> > <UL> > <LI><B><A > HREF= " / " >NATIVE > NUTRITION</A></B> online</LI> > <LI><B><A HREF= " http://onibasu.com/ " >SEARCH</A></B> the entire message > archive with Onibasu</LI> > </UL></FONT> > <PRE><FONT FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " ><B><A > HREF= " mailto: -owner " >LIST OWNER:</A></B> > Idol > <B>MODERATORS:</B> Heidi Schuppenhauer > Wanita Sears > </FONT></PRE> > </BODY> > </HTML> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 Chris- >To me, intuitively, I believe that these ideas about " flow " and > " energy " are physically real. When I get sick, for example, the idea >of some kind of energy becoming stagnant-- especially in my joints-- >is precisely the subtle feeling I get. Well, obviously they're physically real. Sensation is a physical reality -- there can be no sensation of any kind without something going on in the brain and body. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 > Maybe I should have said " mystical " or " supernatural " or " religious " , > particularly in light of your later post on the subject. It's true that Ayurveda is a " secondary " veda, developed from verses that were not written by men, but communicated orally via inspired sages. These were teachers who went into deep meditation and described the realities they experienced. While Henry Gray, the anatomist, would be considered a modern version of one of these " rishis " (as would Einstein) the sages did not have to do dissections, they went into deep meditation and viewed their own bodies and described them. Ayurveda is indeed considered not a creation of men, but a science, nonetheless, which intrigues--not repels--me. At one time--fairly recently, I might add--I would have considered this utter bilge. What you are calling spiritual/religious, I see as merely acknowledging " the mystery, " which seems to me the whole reason for science--modern or otherwise--in the first place. AFAIK it is a nondual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondual) perspective. > > Patterns, sure, but not in the sense that everything has to fit into one of > a handful of different types of mystical energy. I see things in recurring patterns, but I am, admittedly, primitive in my thinking, and I wonder sometimes how/why I am permitted to contribute to this forum. See, here's another thing, people were yammering about the inappropriate use of the word " energy " in alternative medicine, but Ayurveda does not toss that word around. The closest analogy I can think of is " prana " and that is a very specific thing: the ever-elusive life force, the cellular intelligence that carries communication from cell to cell. What is the western word for it? I suppose that mineral-rich soil--of which you regularly mourn the loss--would be considered " high prana " soil or, at least, bear " high prana " crops. Take milk, for example: milk fresh from the (well-nourished) cow would be high in prana, but that same milk from an ill creature, pasteurized, homogenized, boxed and shipped long distances would be devoid of prana, yet would have the same food energy, no? What is the word for this? A person can be described by others as having " high energy " but you or I--and others on this list--are well-aware that this person may just be hyperactive and have very low " prana " . That is all. But wait, there's more: when you look you " energy " in the index of a book on Ayurveda, you will mostly find references to " virya " or " potent food energy " which is the heating/cooling property of any given food I've already described. Oh, there is something else, called " ojas " , a subtle essence, analogous to " essential essence " , and manifesting as high immune function, strength and vitality. This is what gives healthy, happy people their glow of " good energy " , but again, it is not Ayurveda using the word " energy " inappropiately, but people here ignorant of the concepts. > >Cycling sleep--specifically light and darkness--diet, pressure points > >for stimulation and therapeutic effect. > > By cycling sleep do you mean shifting the times of sleep, or making sure > that it's consistent? I haven't read up on it, but I know sleep should occur at certain times of night and end--at the latest--just before sunrise and absolute darkness is specified. This stuff is relatively recent in our own science AFAIK. At certain times, it's advised to stay up all night--new moons, I think--because there is a shift in the breathing pattern--the dominant nostril shifts from one to the other in the night--affecting the active hemisphere of the brain. Here comes the science! B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 On 9/17/05, Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > Chris- > > >To me, intuitively, I believe that these ideas about " flow " and > > " energy " are physically real. When I get sick, for example, the idea > >of some kind of energy becoming stagnant-- especially in my joints-- > >is precisely the subtle feeling I get. > > Well, obviously they're physically real. Sensation is a physical reality > -- there can be no sensation of any kind without something going on in the > brain and body. Yes, that's true. But I guess I'm saying that I believe the basic concept of an energy flow, and disease resulting from a stagnation of that flow, is correct in some way. Granted, this is just an intuitive feeling and does not constitute evidence. Chris -- Statin Drugs Kill Your Brain And Cause Transient Global Amnesia: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Statin-Drugs-Side-Effects.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 [Chris] > >To me, intuitively, I believe that these ideas about " flow " and > > " energy " are physically real. When I get sick, for example, the idea > >of some kind of energy becoming stagnant-- especially in my joints-- > >is precisely the subtle feeling I get. [] > Well, obviously they're physically real. Sensation is a physical reality > -- there can be no sensation of any kind without something going on in the > brain and body. What I'm saying is, these things are not necessarily intuitive--much less mystical--although intuition can/does contribute to an assessment. I look at a leg and see a lack of " vitality " /circulation in the skin tone, or a slight edema that others miss entirely, or a flushed appearance that others take for granted, perhaps a telltale curve in the posture. Some people grant me these wild intuitive powers--and it would be convenient to encourage them, or even lie to myself--but it is not so, I'm looking at distinct visible signs. The sensations you describe, are from stagnant " chi " (akin to " air " element in Ayurveda) but also explained to satisfaction by western science; however, you are rare in that you even have such awareness of your body's functions. B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 On 9/17/05, downwardog7 <illneverbecool@...> wrote: > See, here's another thing, people were yammering about the > inappropriate use of the word " energy " in alternative medicine, but > Ayurveda does not toss that word around. The closest analogy I can > think of is " prana " and that is a very specific thing: the > ever-elusive life force, the cellular intelligence that carries > communication from cell to cell. What is the western word for it? Paracrine hormones. Actually, if you want to consider all inter-cellular communication (paracrine would just be communication between adjascent cells), and isolate some fundamental commonality between all this communication as well as intracellular communication, what it ultimately boils down to is the preservation of arrangements and the potential to change those arrangements, which is ultimately dictated by the laws of thermodynamics. And what is the one, singular word we would use to summarize this dynamic? " Energy. " > I suppose that mineral-rich soil--of which you regularly mourn the > loss--would be considered " high prana " soil or, at least, bear " high > prana " crops. Take milk, for example: milk fresh from the > (well-nourished) cow would be high in prana, but that same milk from > an ill creature, pasteurized, homogenized, boxed and shipped long > distances would be devoid of prana, yet would have the same food > energy, no? What is the word for this? It might have the same caloric density (actually I suspect the caloric density would be lower) but it is the complexity of the arrangements within and between molecules that provides the " potential energy " that is necessary to fuel all the life processes. You could call it " stored complexity, " or just " energy " would be accurate in a very non-specific sense. > A person can be described by others as having " high energy " but you or > I--and others on this list--are well-aware that this person may just > be hyperactive and have very low " prana " . That is all. > > But wait, there's more: when you look you " energy " in the index of a > book on Ayurveda, you will mostly find references to " virya " or > " potent food energy " which is the heating/cooling property of any > given food I've already described. > > Oh, there is something else, called " ojas " , a subtle essence, > analogous to " essential essence " , and manifesting as high immune > function, strength and vitality. This is what gives healthy, happy > people their glow of " good energy " , but again, it is not Ayurveda > using the word " energy " inappropiately, but people here ignorant of > the concepts. Right, the use of the word " energy " vastly predates the notions of modern physics. It is only a conflation when the person discussing it fails to investigate what the actual intended meaning is. > At certain times, it's advised to stay up all night--new moons, I > think--because there is a shift in the breathing pattern--the dominant > nostril shifts from one to the other in the night--affecting the > active hemisphere of the brain. Here comes the science! > B. Hunh. I wonder if this has any relation to why every so often I have a couple days where I can't sleep. Never bothered to see if there was a pattern. Chris -- Statin Drugs Kill Your Brain And Cause Transient Global Amnesia: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Statin-Drugs-Side-Effects.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 Chris- >Yes, that's true. But I guess I'm saying that I believe the basic >concept of an energy flow, and disease resulting from a stagnation of >that flow, is correct in some way. Granted, this is just an intuitive >feeling and does not constitute evidence. Inasmuch as all bodily processes involve movement of some sort, and all illness and disease involves a derangement of bodily processes, I guess that's one way to look at it. I don't believe in mystical energies, but certainly chronic fatigue involves a lack of adequate energy, for example! - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 - >It's true that Ayurveda is a " secondary " veda, developed from verses >that were not written by men, but communicated orally via inspired >sages. We're getting off on a tangent here, but if the idea is that ayurveda was communicated to sages by some sort of divine (or non-human, at any rate) agency, well, then we're definitely going to be parting company on that point. >What you are calling spiritual/religious, I see as merely >acknowledging " the mystery, " which seems to me the whole reason for >science--modern or otherwise--in the first place. AFAIK it is a >nondual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondual) perspective. What do you mean by mystery? The unexplained, which arouses intellectual curiosity in some? Or something along the line of religious " mysteries " ? I'm not sure I see what nonduality has to do with either, though. >I see things in recurring patterns, but I am, admittedly, primitive in >my thinking, and I wonder sometimes how/why I am permitted to >contribute to this forum. Huh? There's no censorship of ideas here, regardless of what I or anyone else might think of them. >Take milk, for example: milk fresh from the >(well-nourished) cow would be high in prana, but that same milk from >an ill creature, pasteurized, homogenized, boxed and shipped long >distances would be devoid of prana, yet would have the same food >energy, no? What is the word for this? Nutrition? >Oh, there is something else, called " ojas " , a subtle essence, >analogous to " essential essence " , and manifesting as high immune >function, strength and vitality. This is what gives healthy, happy >people their glow of " good energy " , but again, it is not Ayurveda >using the word " energy " inappropiately, but people here ignorant of >the concepts. Well, we haven't been discussing ayurveda exclusively, if you look at the entire recent discussion on " energy " and alternative medicine and whatnot. >I haven't read up on it, but I know sleep should occur at certain >times of night and end--at the latest--just before sunrise and >absolute darkness is specified. > >This stuff is relatively recent in our own science AFAIK. I don't know how new it actually is, but it's certainly outside the mainstream, anyway. >At certain times, it's advised to stay up all night--new moons, I >think--because there is a shift in the breathing pattern--the dominant >nostril shifts from one to the other in the night--affecting the >active hemisphere of the brain. Here comes the science! Gotta admit that sounds pretty loopy -- particularly the moon business. It would be easy enough to test the rest, I'd think. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 , > We're getting off on a tangent here, but if the idea is that ayurveda was > communicated to sages by some sort of divine (or non-human, at any rate) > agency, well, then we're definitely going to be parting company on that point. I'm not trying to conjoin your company on any point. When I read such a dismissal, I feel stung at first, then realize that I'm not trying to convince you of anything, merely attempting to answer questions you have been asking me about a given subject--of which I am no expert--as best I can. This is the history of the Vedas--and Ayurveda--like it or not. No one knows where they came from, definitively. These dudes were living in caves, meditating and spouting off aphorisms creating the oldest collection of writings still in use. It's a significant body of work, from almost any perspective. > What do you mean by mystery? The unexplained, which arouses intellectual > curiosity in some? Or something along the line of religious > " mysteries " ? I'm not sure I see what nonduality has to do with either, though. Well, I see it as the one, but don't bristle at the other. I mentioned the nonduality for clarity. > I don't know how new it actually is, but it's certainly outside the > mainstream, anyway. Well, the pineal gland didn't officially become a part of the endocrine system until 1898. And studies about light and melatonin didn't occur until the 1950's. > Gotta admit that sounds pretty loopy -- particularly the moon business. It > would be easy enough to test the rest, I'd think. Yes, that's what I meant, it's seems easy enough to test. Next new moon is 3 Oct so the following morning the left nostril should become dominant at sunrise for one hour, then switch to the right. Everybody: sheathe your tongues and check the nostrils! B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 - >I'm not trying to conjoin your company on any point. When I read such >a dismissal, I feel stung at first Why stung? I think I've made it clear on multiple occasions that I don't believe in mystical explanations of the world, so I'd think it'd be unsurprising that I'd be extremely skeptical of the idea of information transmitted supernaturally. >Yes, that's what I meant, it's seems easy enough to test. Next new >moon is 3 Oct so the following morning the left nostril should become >dominant at sunrise for one hour, then switch to the right. Everybody: > sheathe your tongues and check the nostrils! How does one tell which nostril is dominant? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 > Why stung? I think I've made it clear on multiple occasions that I don't > believe in mystical explanations of the world, so I'd think it'd be > unsurprising that I'd be extremely skeptical of the idea of information > transmitted supernaturally. True. I'm attempting to give you a history, though, and I receive what appears to be a judgment--meh, everyone knows I'm hypersensitive. Maybe I would have preferred you to answer, " well, that's interesting, and thx for taking the time, but I find myself unable to suspend my disbelief about these origins...I wonder what else could explain it? " What do you see as the source of inspiration/inspired works? And where might meditative states fit in there? > How does one tell which nostril is dominant? Block off one nostril with a finger and inhale, then the other. One will have a more powerful--yet easy--intake. This will switch off during the day. A person can also switch them at will, to function in the most appropriate hemisphere for the job. There are rare times when both function equally. B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 On 9/18/05, Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > Chris- > > >Yes, that's true. But I guess I'm saying that I believe the basic > >concept of an energy flow, and disease resulting from a stagnation of > >that flow, is correct in some way. Granted, this is just an intuitive > >feeling and does not constitute evidence. > > Inasmuch as all bodily processes involve movement of some sort, and all > illness and disease involves a derangement of bodily processes, I guess > that's one way to look at it. I don't believe in mystical energies, but > certainly chronic fatigue involves a lack of adequate energy, for example! I don't know what " mystical " would even mean in this context and frankly for that matter I don't even know what it means to only believe in the " material " world. Either the energy is there or it's not. If it's there, what criteria would one use to determine whether or not it was " mystical? " In any case what I'm trying to say is that I suspect-- granted I *suspect* (I know of know evidence of this or serious investigation)-- that the concepts of energy flow and stagnation, and the general Eastern ideas of mapping out the pathways of this " energy flow " correspond to something real, measurable, and material. Chris -- Statin Drugs Kill Your Brain And Cause Transient Global Amnesia: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Statin-Drugs-Side-Effects.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2005 Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 - >True. I'm attempting to give you a history, though, and I receive >what appears to be a judgment--meh, everyone knows I'm hypersensitive. > Maybe I would have preferred you to answer, " well, that's >interesting, and thx for taking the time, but I find myself unable to >suspend my disbelief about these origins...I wonder what else could >explain it? " I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, but I guess I misunderstood where you were coming from. I thought we were discussing the alleged scientific foundations (or perhaps I should say " accuracy " or " nature " rather than " foundations " ?) of ayurveda, so I took the history as an assertion of fact. >What do you see as the source of inspiration/inspired works? And >where might meditative states fit in there? Creativity? People of most or all cultures and faiths have claimed divine or supernatural inspiration for some of their works. Many have probably believed that they were really transcribing the word of god/gods/whatever. But they all conflict with each other to varying degrees and they all contain both untestable and false elements. >Block off one nostril with a finger and inhale, then the other. One >will have a more powerful--yet easy--intake. This will switch off >during the day. A person can also switch them at will, to function in >the most appropriate hemisphere for the job. There are rare times when >both function equally. Since the nostrils merge pretty quickly, I'm wondering what mechanism there could be for something like this. At any rate, my nostrils switch dominance by this test quite frequently -- with variations in allergic affect. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2005 Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 Hi , > Creativity? People of most or all cultures and faiths have > claimed divine > or supernatural inspiration for some of their works. Many > have probably > believed that they were really transcribing the word of > god/gods/whatever. But they all conflict with each other to varying > degrees and they all contain both untestable and false elements. Okay. I'm never gonna catch up with the back emails and I'm getting ready to take off to central New York State for a really, really wacky three day weekend workshop so I probably won't be able to contribute much to any new info for a while. The discussion that I actually have managed to read has been fascinating. has an interesting view. also. As to the above -- the work has already been largely done. Ken Wilber and his group (Integral Institute) have spent years looking at as many of the various inspired/religious philosophies they could get their hands on and distilling out the common threads among them. I have heard him talk about this but have not read much of his work that is directly related to it so I cannot speak knowledgeably. I'm much more in a phase of try it out and sort out the results afterwards than I am in let's debate it to death before we take any steps. And this mode is paying off interestingly. There is absolutely _something_ going on here but my thoughts are not well enough formed to explain it in Western lingo/paradigm. To some degree I've had to turn off my rational, debating mind and allow myself to just experience. I use my ability to be rational to find a practice I find interesting and then vet the teacher. If it all looks right I dive in with no reservations and just let it happen. Ron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2005 Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 > Since the nostrils merge pretty quickly, I'm wondering what mechanism there > could be for something like this. At any rate, my nostrils switch > dominance by this test quite frequently -- with variations in allergic affect. , I think they are expected to switch about every 90 mins. According to Harish Johari, a scholar on the subject, " When there is a disturbance in the natural cycle, and the proper nostril does not open, body chemistry becomes disturbed and physiological and psychological disturbances become more likely. " Here comes the science: " The interplay of sensory stimulation, convection cooling, and ionic balance links breath pattern with brain activity. Air of a temperature at variance with normal body temperature passes through the nostrils at a realtively high velocity, exciting the sensory nerves lining the inner passage. These nerves are extensions of the olfactory bulbs on the underside of either lobe--an organ directly linked to the lage, complex structure of the rhinoncephelon, or 'smell brain.' This organ controls a vast network of associative neves linked with every structure of the brain. And despite the fact that its primary input comes from the neves leading to the nostrils, only a comparitively small segment of this organ deals with the sense of smell. The intake of air also cools and dehydrates the inner surface of the nostrils and sinus cavities. Cooling slows chemical reactions in the hemisphere on the same side (right hemisphere if right nostril operates). Evaporation creates a demand for additional mucus and additional energy from the same-side hemisphere. Electrically charged ions permeate the atmosphere and pass into the body with each inhalation... Significantly, the breath tends to fill the lobe of the lung on the operating side more than the lobe on the nonoperating side. The interaction of these two factors creates a relatively major difference in ionic stimulation of the nerve energy in the two sides of the respiratory tract and body... Breathing through one nostril not only cools the hemsiphere on the same side, but stimulates the opposite hemisphere as well. Differences in ionic stimulation, electrical activity, blood flow, and skin temperatures can always be detected between the two halves of the body--except when both nostrils operate. " Phew. B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2005 Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 On 9/20/05, RBJR <rbjr@...> wrote: > Hi , > > > Creativity? People of most or all cultures and faiths have > > claimed divine > > or supernatural inspiration for some of their works. Many > > have probably > > believed that they were really transcribing the word of > > god/gods/whatever. But they all conflict with each other to varying > > degrees and they all contain both untestable and false elements. <snip> > As to the above -- the work has already been largely done. Ken Wilber and > his group (Integral Institute) have spent years looking at as many of the > various inspired/religious philosophies they could get their hands on and > distilling out the common threads among them. I have heard him talk about > this but have not read much of his work that is directly related to it so I > cannot speak knowledgeably. Hi Ron, Good to talk directly with you after eavesdropping on so many conversations. Thanks for the lead on Ken Wilber. He looks to be an interesting read, judging by his reading list if nothing else. Maybe I'll swing by the library on the way home - they've got " Integral Psychology " on the shelves... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 Hi , > Good to talk directly with you after eavesdropping on so many > conversations. Yes. You took over nicely when I disappeared and brought the conversation to a level that I could not yet go as this is all fairly new to me. I've enjoyed reading your comments. > > Thanks for the lead on Ken Wilber. He looks to be an interesting > read, judging by his reading list if nothing else. Maybe I'll swing > by the library on the way home - they've got " Integral Psychology " on > the shelves... My way in was through two of his most accessible books. _The Marriage of Sense and Soul_ and _A Theory of Everything_. Reading Sense and Soul was a real stretch for me at the time as I was still pretty well in the end of my Any Rand phase when I read it and much of what he said was way out of my reality. _A Theory of Everything_ is a little heavy going at the beginning but is a must read for anyone interested in how humans work. His structures have to come to inform much of my thinking. As of now those are the only two books that I've read and there are volumes to read. I have spent a fair amount of time listening to the interviews that he posts to his website (www.integralnaked.org) and learned much about his thought processes from them. The one with Larry Wachowski of Matrix fame was fun. The Deepak Chopra ones made me want to burn all of Deepak Chopra's books. I've heard a few other interviews in which Wilber was the subject that were very good, too. Enjoy, Ron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2006 Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 > > ths candida diet that you have posted bee, is it basically very > similar to the high alkaline diet i read much about thanks- jack ==>I do not believe in any type of diet that is tries to balance pH (acidity/alkalinity) - see articles about this in the Candida Diet folder (I think that's where they are) where that Fad has been debunked by Dr. Weston A. Price and a researcher. You can maybe find the article easier by going to the 2nd Folder " A) Candida LIST of Files, Folders & Links " and use your browser's Edit Find function to locate them. Cheers, Bee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 , pumpkin and other squash might not be permitted by some of the stricter candida diets. I think it's OK to use small amounts of pumpkin and many fruits that might be on some of those lists particularly if you're taking inulin or lots of inulin foods to balance the sugar content and grow more bifidobacteria. Remember it's less about glycemic index than total carb loading, so high-carb portions, even fruit and pumpkin, should be kept fairly small. Duncan > > Hi all...a question.. > Is pumpkin generally permitted on a strict candida > diet? I know potatoes and other high carb vegies are > out but after searching for some time, was not able to > find if pumpkin is safe. > Anybody know? > Thanks.. > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ ______________ > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast > with the Search weather shortcut. > http://tools.search./shortcuts/#loc_weather > 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.