Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 Hi Paulie: Thanks for your kind words. I'll have to look up that book. You made an interesting comment, "If karma is related to momentum, then meditation gives the universe a chance to interrupt my momentum and possibly send me in a different direction ..." I think this is absolutely so. In simplest terms, Shaktism explains the hugely complex unfolding of the Cosmos in terms of three basic qualities of matter/energy; or gunas: Sattva is the spiritual tendency back toward the Source of Cration; Tamas is the material tendency away from that Source; and Rajas is the neutral quality of motion that can carry us in either direction. Sadhana is, at bottom, a disciplined, systematic movement upward against the material (downward) flow of material creation. Which is, in a way, exactly the effect that you noted in your own practice. By the way, it's worth noting that Shaktism reads a pivotal moment in the Devi Mahatmyam to illustrate precisely this point. Chapter 2, Verses 9 onward describe what is commonly understood as the "birth" of Devi from the collective energies of the gods. The secret meaning of this passage is quite obvious when you think in terms of the gunas, as discussed above. After all, the energies of the gods are the devis. The gods are not the source of Devi's energy - because SHE is energy itself. The gods are not "creating" Devi from their own various qualities -- rather, they are accessing and making manifest the SOURCE of those qualities, who is Devi Herself. By following their diverse and discrete powers back upward to the common Source of them all, they are reversing the material "downward" tendency toward multiplication of forms. That is what is means when the Shakta Tantras speak of "becoming Devi." That is why sadhana yields certain siddhis or powers as the upward journey toward the Source is made. By our sadhana, we are reversing the tendency toward material differences and distinctions, and merging upward into Devi, our Common Source. Aum MAtangyai NamaH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 I have no words to say!! such clarity!! We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He shall be a great Guru sometime. lets have discussions like this and not discussions on geneology. such subjects are OK as long as it has some connection with sadhana. Otherwise such questions should be curbed. Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta wrote: Hi Paulie: Thanks for your kind words. I'll have to look up that book. You made an interesting comment, "If karma is related to momentum, then meditation gives the universe a chance to interrupt my momentum and possibly send me in a different direction ..." I think this is absolutely so. In simplest terms, Shaktism explains the hugely complex unfolding of the Cosmos in terms of three basic qualities of matter/energy; or gunas: Sattva is the spiritual tendency back toward the Source of Cration; Tamas is the material tendency away from that Source; and Rajas is the neutral quality of motion that can carry us in either direction. Sadhana is, at bottom, a disciplined, systematic movement upward against the material (downward) flow of material creation. Which is, in a way, exactly the effect that you noted in your own practice. By the way, it's worth noting that Shaktism reads a pivotal moment in the Devi Mahatmyam to illustrate precisely this point. Chapter 2, Verses 9 onward describe what is commonly understood as the "birth" of Devi from the collective energies of the gods. The secret meaning of this passage is quite obvious when you think in terms of the gunas, as discussed above. After all, the energies of the gods are the devis. The gods are not the source of Devi's energy - because SHE is energy itself. The gods are not "creating" Devi from their own various qualities -- rather, they are accessing and making manifest the SOURCE of those qualities, who is Devi Herself. By following their diverse and discrete powers back upward to the common Source of them all, they are reversing the material "downward" tendency toward multiplication of forms. That is what is means when the Shakta Tantras speak of "becoming Devi." That is why sadhana yields certain siddhis or powers as the upward journey toward the Source is made. By our sadhana, we are reversing the tendency toward material differences and distinctions, and merging upward into Devi, our Common Source. Aum MAtangyai NamaH / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 Actually my questions where on mythology not on geneology... Alexandra sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote: I have no words to say!! such clarity!! We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He shall be a great Guru sometime. lets have discussions like this and not discussions on geneology. such subjects are OK as long as it has some connection with sadhana. Otherwise such questions should be curbed. Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta wrote: Hi Paulie: Thanks for your kind words. I'll have to look up that book. You made an interesting comment, "If karma is related to momentum, then meditation gives the universe a chance to interrupt my momentum and possibly send me in a different direction ..." I think this is absolutely so. In simplest terms, Shaktism explains the hugely complex unfolding of the Cosmos in terms of three basic qualities of matter/energy; or gunas: Sattva is the spiritual tendency back toward the Source of Cration; Tamas is the material tendency away from that Source; and Rajas is the neutral quality of motion that can carry us in either direction. Sadhana is, at bottom, a disciplined, systematic movement upward against the material (downward) flow of material creation. Which is, in a way, exactly the effect that you noted in your own practice. By the way, it's worth noting that Shaktism reads a pivotal moment in the Devi Mahatmyam to illustrate precisely this point. Chapter 2, Verses 9 onward describe what is commonly understood as the "birth" of Devi from the collective energies of the gods. The secret meaning of this passage is quite obvious when you think in terms of the gunas, as discussed above. After all, the energies of the gods are the devis. The gods are not the source of Devi's energy - because SHE is energy itself. The gods are not "creating" Devi from their own various qualities -- rather, they are accessing and making manifest the SOURCE of those qualities, who is Devi Herself. By following their diverse and discrete powers back upward to the common Source of them all, they are reversing the material "downward" tendency toward multiplication of forms. That is what is means when the Shakta Tantras speak of "becoming Devi." That is why sadhana yields certain siddhis or powers as the upward journey toward the Source is made. By our sadhana, we are reversing the tendency toward material differences and distinctions, and merging upward into Devi, our Common Source. Aum MAtangyai NamaH / / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 You are so right when you say that we are happy to have DB among our midst.I wouldnt mind adding the word"fortunate" along with being happy.As you pointed out he will someday make a great Guru,hopefully I will be around to have him as my "guru". regards. Chumki. , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > > I have no words to say!! such clarity!! > > We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He shall be a great Guru sometime. > > lets have discussions like this and not discussions on geneology. such subjects are OK as long as it has some connection with sadhana. Otherwise such questions should be curbed. > > > > Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote: Hi Paulie: > > Thanks for your kind words. I'll have to look up that book. > > You made an interesting comment, "If karma is related to momentum, > then meditation gives the universe a chance to interrupt my momentum > and possibly send me in a different direction ..." > > I think this is absolutely so. > > In simplest terms, Shaktism explains the hugely complex unfolding of > the Cosmos in terms of three basic qualities of matter/energy; or > gunas: Sattva is the spiritual tendency back toward the Source of > Cration; Tamas is the material tendency away from that Source; and > Rajas is the neutral quality of motion that can carry us in either > direction. > > Sadhana is, at bottom, a disciplined, systematic movement upward > against the material (downward) flow of material creation. Which is, > in a way, exactly the effect that you noted in your own practice. > > By the way, it's worth noting that Shaktism reads a pivotal moment in > the Devi Mahatmyam to illustrate precisely this point. Chapter 2, > Verses 9 onward describe what is commonly understood as the "birth" > of Devi from the collective energies of the gods. > > The secret meaning of this passage is quite obvious when you think in > terms of the gunas, as discussed above. After all, the energies of > the gods are the devis. The gods are not the source of Devi's energy - > because SHE is energy itself. The gods are not "creating" Devi from > their own various qualities -- rather, they are accessing and making > manifest the SOURCE of those qualities, who is Devi Herself. By > following their diverse and discrete powers back upward to the common > Source of them all, they are reversing the material "downward" > tendency toward multiplication of forms. > > That is what is means when the Shakta Tantras speak of "becoming > Devi." That is why sadhana yields certain siddhis or powers as the > upward journey toward the Source is made. By our sadhana, we are > reversing the tendency toward material differences and distinctions, > and merging upward into Devi, our Common Source. > > Aum MAtangyai NamaH > > > > Sponsor > > > > Links > > > / > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 , "Chumki" <blueblackeyes> wrote: > You are so right when you say that we are happy to have DB > among our midst.I wouldnt mind adding the word"fortunate" > along with being happy.As you pointed out he will someday > make a great Guru,hopefully I will be around to have him > as my "guru". > > regards. > > Chumki. > > > Absolutely! When the whole world sees the truth in One, then that person is already the One. > > , sankara menon <kochu1tz> > wrote: > > > > I have no words to say!! such clarity!! > > > > We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He > shall be a great Guru sometime. > > > > lets have discussions like this and not discussions on geneology. > such subjects are OK as long as it has some connection with sadhana. > Otherwise such questions should be curbed. > > > > > > > > Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote: Hi Paulie: > > > > Thanks for your kind words. I'll have to look up that book. > > > > You made an interesting comment, "If karma is related to momentum, > > then meditation gives the universe a chance to interrupt my momentum > > and possibly send me in a different direction ..." > > > > I think this is absolutely so. > > > > In simplest terms, Shaktism explains the hugely complex unfolding of > > the Cosmos in terms of three basic qualities of matter/energy; or > > gunas: Sattva is the spiritual tendency back toward the Source of > > Cration; Tamas is the material tendency away from that Source; and > > Rajas is the neutral quality of motion that can carry us in either > > direction. > > > > Sadhana is, at bottom, a disciplined, systematic movement upward > > against the material (downward) flow of material creation. Which is, > > in a way, exactly the effect that you noted in your own practice. > > > > By the way, it's worth noting that Shaktism reads a pivotal moment in > > the Devi Mahatmyam to illustrate precisely this point. Chapter 2, > > Verses 9 onward describe what is commonly understood as the "birth" > > of Devi from the collective energies of the gods. > > > > The secret meaning of this passage is quite obvious when you think in > > terms of the gunas, as discussed above. After all, the energies of > > the gods are the devis. The gods are not the source of Devi's energy - > > because SHE is energy itself. The gods are not "creating" Devi from > > their own various qualities -- rather, they are accessing and making > > manifest the SOURCE of those qualities, who is Devi Herself. By > > following their diverse and discrete powers back upward to the common > > Source of them all, they are reversing the material "downward" > > tendency toward multiplication of forms. > > > > That is what is means when the Shakta Tantras speak of "becoming > > Devi." That is why sadhana yields certain siddhis or powers as the > > upward journey toward the Source is made. By our sadhana, we are > > reversing the tendency toward material differences and distinctions, > > and merging upward into Devi, our Common Source. > > > > Aum MAtangyai NamaH > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > Links > > > > > > / > > > > > > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 "blueblackeyes wrote: You are so right when you say that we are happy to have DB among our midst.I wouldnt mind adding the word"fortunate" along with being happy.As you pointed out he will someday make a great Guru,hopefully I will be around to have him as my "guru"." Thank you Chumki and Ashok. When kochu post that, it is meant to tease DB. I had known DB for sometime and consider myself really a blessings to have gain his trust and friendship. I therefore would like to make an appeal to others stop continue complimenting DB and "guruship" in this message board, as this will make him very uneasy and embarrassed. Kindly redirect all compliments personally to him. Thank you for your understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 Dear Nora.....my apologies. warm regards. Chumki. , "N. Madasamy" <ashwini_puralasamy> wrote: > "blueblackeyes wrote: You are so right when you say that we are > happy to have DB among our midst.I wouldnt mind adding the > word"fortunate" along with being happy.As you pointed out he will > someday make a great Guru,hopefully I will be around to have him as > my "guru"." > > Thank you Chumki and Ashok. When kochu post that, it is meant to > tease DB. I had known DB for sometime and consider myself really a > blessings to have gain his trust and friendship. I therefore would > like to make an appeal to others stop continue complimenting DB > and "guruship" in this message board, as this will make him very > uneasy and embarrassed. Kindly redirect all compliments personally > to him. > > Thank you for your understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 Dear Chumki, Dont have to apologise at all. ********************************************************************** ".. you may shoot me with your words... you may cut me with your eyes ... you may kill me with your hatefulness, but still like air, I will rise ..." Maya Angelou " Some people come into our lives and quickly go. Some stay for a while and leave foot prints on our heart and we are never ever the same again " Shakti Sadhana Homepage at http://www.shaktisadhana.org New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 A warm thank you to Chumki and Ashoka for their kind words -- I am touched and humbled -- but I'm afraid Nora is right. The majestically mischievous Kochu is just razzing me; he's a lovely fellow but can be a wee bit sarcastic at times. :-)) , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > > I have no words to say!! such clarity!! > > We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He shall be a great Guru sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 yes I confess I was in a very naughty mood that day. Bur do not say i was being sarcastic. I was not. Sarcasm in the true sense is a negative feeling. I had only happiness and admiration at the lucid flowing statement. Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta wrote: A warm thank you to Chumki and Ashoka for their kind words -- I am touched and humbled -- but I'm afraid Nora is right. The majestically mischievous Kochu is just razzing me; he's a lovely fellow but can be a wee bit sarcastic at times. :-)) , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > > I have no words to say!! such clarity!! > > We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He shall be a great Guru sometime. / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not feel sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. , sankara menon <kochu1tz> wrote: > > yes I confess I was in a very naughty mood that day. But do not say i was being sarcastic. I was not. Sarcasm in the true sense is a negative feeling. I had only happiness and admiration at the lucid flowing statement. > > > Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote: > A warm thank you to Chumki and Ashoka for their kind words -- I am touched and humbled -- but I'm afraid Nora is right. The majestically mischievous Kochu is just razzing me; he's a lovely fellow but can be a wee bit sarcastic at times. :-)) > > , sankara menon <kochu1tz> > wrote: > > > > I have no words to say!! such clarity!! > > > > We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He shall be a great Guru sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 i didnt see any sarcasm either. chumki. , "Ashoka " <ashoka_h@h...> wrote: > Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not feel > sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. > > > , sankara menon <kochu1tz> > wrote: > > > > yes I confess I was in a very naughty mood that day. But do not say > i was being sarcastic. I was not. Sarcasm in the true sense is a > negative feeling. I had only happiness and admiration at the lucid > flowing statement. > > > > > > Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > A warm thank you to Chumki and Ashoka for their kind words -- I am > touched and humbled -- but I'm afraid Nora is right. The majestically > mischievous Kochu is just razzing me; he's a lovely fellow but can be > a wee bit sarcastic at times. :-)) > > > > , sankara menon > <kochu1tz> > > wrote: > > > > > > I have no words to say!! such clarity!! > > > > > > We are indeed happy to have the likes of DB among our midst. He > shall be a great Guru sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 blueblackeyes wrote "I didnt see any sarcasm either" I supported Ashok, Chumki and Kochu's stand. The statement is not sarcasm but a sincere and honest. As a friend, we like to tease each other. Both Kochu and me being naughty that day and we just thought of wanting to tease DB for a change. But the main issue it see is this, this idea of Guruship is indeed a very sensitive and contraversial. There are some people who wants so much to be a guru and will do whatever even to lie about it, whilst those who are really have the "Guru" in them, try to play down or distance themselves from this role. I would use the word resist. I am being reminded that Guruship is a great responsibility. It is not an easy task to undertake, but again we all have our obligations not only to our faith but also to those before and after us. I remember during my nursing days, my own nursing "guru" whom I respected so much till today told me once "you have the obligation to guide others especially the young nurses, and to pass on the skills I have taught you and what you have learnt on your own. That is how things are. Otherwise how you do expect the profession to go on and advance or it will die of natural death." This reminds me of a versse : "Bhartruhari says that everyone is a guru to everyone else because anyone; just anyone will have something to teach. If we are Gurus, you are one too. We Bow to you too!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 Dear Ashoka oh what you called that again? I am not suprised , "Ashoka " <ashoka_h@h...> wrote: > Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not feel > sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 You are correct Jose, as are Asoka, Chumki and Nora: Kochu's words to me were clearly spoken with a kind, sincere and loving spirit. I was incorrect to use the word sarcasm, because it can suggest a negative connotation -- all I meant to indicate is that he was teasing me. ;-) And just for the record I will tell you something more: I have known Kochu for a long time, and have spent countless hours conversing and socializing with him -- both in profound seriousness and in lighthearted laughter. And so I speak wth authority when I say he is a most kind, compassionate and good-hearted soul ... "of the highest water," as they used to say in the old days, a real gem. And, I would add, with two lovely and brilliant daughters, whom I also have the honor of knowing -- and the child often tells us much of the parent. I assure you (because I think you need assuring) that Kochu is as good a man as I've ever known, and that, if you feel otherwise, you have misread or misunderstood him. And that, my friend, is a fact. That I can, with assurance, promise you. DB , "Jose Enrique Rosa" <master4114> wrote: > Dear Ashoka > > oh what you called that again? I am not suprised > > , "Ashoka " <ashoka_h@h...> > wrote: > > Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not feel > > sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 Dear Devi Bhakta: It is great that you can answer these postings in this manner. What I was trying to say when I said that I was not suprised is that in certain situations we tend to react in the same manner we are treated. Jose , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > You are correct Jose, as are Asoka, Chumki and Nora: Kochu's words > to me were clearly spoken with a kind, sincere and loving spirit. I > was incorrect to use the word sarcasm, because it can suggest a > negative connotation -- all I meant to indicate is that he was > teasing me. ;-) > > And just for the record I will tell you something more: I have known > Kochu for a long time, and have spent countless hours conversing and > socializing with him -- both in profound seriousness and in > lighthearted laughter. And so I speak wth authority when I say he is > a most kind, compassionate and good-hearted soul ... "of the highest > water," as they used to say in the old days, a real gem. And, I > would add, with two lovely and brilliant daughters, whom I also have > the honor of knowing -- and the child often tells us much of the > parent. > > I assure you (because I think you need assuring) that Kochu is as > good a man as I've ever known, and that, if you feel otherwise, you > have misread or misunderstood him. And that, my friend, is a fact. > That I can, with assurance, promise you. > > DB > > , "Jose Enrique Rosa" > <master4114> wrote: > > Dear Ashoka > > > > oh what you called that again? I am not suprised > > > > , "Ashoka " <ashoka_h@h...> > > wrote: > > > Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not feel > > > sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2004 Report Share Posted July 16, 2004 Hi Jose: Of course, I understand. But should we not strive to follow our own standards in such exchanges, rather than emulating the actions and words of those who offend us? That way we disburse bad energy rather than feeding it. Amritaji suggests that we take this attitude: "Even my enemies have life; and life is Devi. So I respect them, forgive them, and try to look at their point of view and make friends. If I can't do it, I will love them all the same; will not reject them, but maintain a respectful distance. My love does not expect that they should love me in return. It has no conditions attached. I share because I like sharing. That is all." Seems like pretty sound advice to me. DB , "Jose Enrique Rosa" <master4114> wrote: > Dear Devi Bhakta: > > It is great that you can answer these postings in this manner. What I > was trying to say when I said that I was not suprised is that in > certain situations we tend to react in the same manner we are treated. > > Jose > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > You are correct Jose, as are Asoka, Chumki and Nora: Kochu's words > > to me were clearly spoken with a kind, sincere and loving spirit. I > > was incorrect to use the word sarcasm, because it can suggest a > > negative connotation -- all I meant to indicate is that he was > > teasing me. ;-) > > > > And just for the record I will tell you something more: I have known > > Kochu for a long time, and have spent countless hours conversing and > > socializing with him -- both in profound seriousness and in > > lighthearted laughter. And so I speak wth authority when I say he is > > a most kind, compassionate and good-hearted soul ... "of the highest > > water," as they used to say in the old days, a real gem. And, I > > would add, with two lovely and brilliant daughters, whom I also have > > the honor of knowing -- and the child often tells us much of the > > parent. > > > > I assure you (because I think you need assuring) that Kochu is as > > good a man as I've ever known, and that, if you feel otherwise, you > > have misread or misunderstood him. And that, my friend, is a fact. > > That I can, with assurance, promise you. > > > > DB > > > > , "Jose Enrique Rosa" > > <master4114> wrote: > > > Dear Ashoka > > > > > > oh what you called that again? I am not suprised > > > > > > , "Ashoka " <ashoka_h@h...> > > > wrote: > > > > Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not feel > > > > sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2004 Report Share Posted July 16, 2004 Dear Devi Bhakta: Thank you for sharing Amritaji;s advice. In a way I feel like that advice applies to me too. I have at times reacted back in a negative manner when negative energy was "thrown' at me. Thank You Jose , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > Hi Jose: > > Of course, I understand. But should we not strive to follow our own > standards in such exchanges, rather than emulating the actions and > words of those who offend us? That way we disburse bad energy rather > than feeding it. > > Amritaji suggests that we take this attitude: "Even my enemies have > life; and life is Devi. So I respect them, forgive them, and try to > look at their point of view and make friends. If I can't do it, I > will love them all the same; will not reject them, but maintain a > respectful distance. My love does not expect that they should love > me in return. It has no conditions attached. I share because I like > sharing. That is all." > > Seems like pretty sound advice to me. > > DB > > > , "Jose Enrique Rosa" > <master4114> wrote: > > Dear Devi Bhakta: > > > > It is great that you can answer these postings in this manner. > What I > > was trying to say when I said that I was not suprised is that in > > certain situations we tend to react in the same manner we are > treated. > > > > Jose > > > > > > > > , "Devi Bhakta" > > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > > You are correct Jose, as are Asoka, Chumki and Nora: Kochu's > words > > > to me were clearly spoken with a kind, sincere and loving > spirit. I > > > was incorrect to use the word sarcasm, because it can suggest a > > > negative connotation -- all I meant to indicate is that he was > > > teasing me. ;-) > > > > > > And just for the record I will tell you something more: I have > known > > > Kochu for a long time, and have spent countless hours conversing > and > > > socializing with him -- both in profound seriousness and in > > > lighthearted laughter. And so I speak wth authority when I say > he is > > > a most kind, compassionate and good-hearted soul ... "of the > highest > > > water," as they used to say in the old days, a real gem. And, I > > > would add, with two lovely and brilliant daughters, whom I also > have > > > the honor of knowing -- and the child often tells us much of the > > > parent. > > > > > > I assure you (because I think you need assuring) that Kochu is > as > > > good a man as I've ever known, and that, if you feel otherwise, > you > > > have misread or misunderstood him. And that, my friend, is a > fact. > > > That I can, with assurance, promise you. > > > > > > DB > > > > > > , "Jose Enrique Rosa" > > > <master4114> wrote: > > > > Dear Ashoka > > > > > > > > oh what you called that again? I am not suprised > > > > > > > > , "Ashoka " > <ashoka_h@h...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > Clarity and lucidity is not a matter of chance. I did not > feel > > > > > sarcasm in Kochu's words rather a sincerity. > > > > > > > > > > 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.