End of topic

[Guest guest]

Dear Group members,

The Todd incident has been very unfortunate and has deflected the

discusion on the group from its basic aim. Before putting a full stop

to the entire incident I would like to clarify a few things.

 

1) Freedom of speech is subjective and does not include the right to

abuse or demean.

Each one of us tends to lose control of our action and thoughts once

in a while.

When we look back at it after we have cooled of, we realise how

foolish we have been.

2) I did not remove Todd from moderatorship but only disabled his

right to edit and post messages as some of the messages coming in

were still personal in nature and we could not expect either party to

cool off as long as they continued to be posted. Hence this was a

temporary measure. However Todd chose to leave from the group

altoghether. His reason for doing the same is mentioned at the end of

this post.

3) This club is not about any individual including myself. That is

the reason I have consistently refused to identify myself by name and

have been content with moderating the group. There is no question of

pleasing anybody nor of opposing just for the sake of opposing.

4) The basic aim of this group as I have mentioned many times is to

share information. This is not a competition. Anyone can put forward

his views. If you feel it is not correct say so and put forward your

views. But do not make personal remarks. This group is for those who

have only a brief idea of ayurveda as much as it is for those who

have spent a lifetime in it.

5) Infact the idea is that we get varied views on one particular

topic. You will agree with me that inspite of the vast spread of the

internet sometimes we quite dont get what we are looking for. And

over here we have had many topics where even those who are well

versed in ayurveda got to learn something new or got a new

perspective.

6) One thing that disturbed me is that one of the members has said

that many members complained to him about Todd. I don't see why they

could not drop me a line. In the future if you have any complaint

whatsoever please feel free to write (or atleast send a CC) to me at

cybervaidya

7) This unfortunate incident happened as both myself and the other

moderator were out of town and Todd had to deal with a deluge of

messages mostly attacking him. I would not like to make comments on

his attitude but even a general reading of most of those attacks will

provoke even a saintly person. Unfortunately both those messages and's replies (which were equally vicious) just kept getting posted

when they should have been deleted or edited.

8) Anyway I once again appeal to all to forgive, forget and make a

fresh start. Nobody won or nobody lost over here. Many members made

an appeal to Todd both personally and on the group message board. His

reply to the same is as follows :-

 

----

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

thank you all for your very kind messages

i am humbled by your request to have me back

and i will consider it in the future

although i am quite positive there are some that are happy to see me

go ;-)

as a note, i was not so much as hurt as i was getting tired and bored

with the tone of the discussions

but i can see how my actions might have seemed a little dramatic, and

I

apologize for this

 

participating on this little internet community has been fun and I

hope

that I have been helpful

but it is a very small part of my life that was increasingly taking

too

much time

like all of you, I have real time pressing concerns that include

family, patients and students

 

i also believe that i was unfairly targeted with some pretty silly

tactics and had my basic knowledge of Ayurveda questioned on more

than

one occasion- its hard to be helpful, or even want to be helpful,

when

such prejudices exist

 

i am a member of several other email lists, although all of them are

professional in nature: this was my first foray in open list, general

discussions that included non-professionals

 

as I'm sure you all know, i enjoy a lively debate, even when the

issues

are contentious (as I know some of my opinions are), but believe that

we need a generally accepted frame of reference to discuss anything -

perhaps my fault is being a professional and having an academic bent,

hoping and expecting that others would understand and follow this

basic

ethic, even when the debate becomes heated

 

best wishes...

Caldecott

----

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

 

I think it is time now to put an end to all of this. No messages

containing any reference to this topic will be posted.

 

Cybervaidya

[Guest guest]

Dear group members,

 

While message of Cybervaidya is very clear, (a part of it is

reproduced here for emphasis and quick reference), the author would

like to add just few paragraphs.

 

We have quite a few well experienced/qualified health professionals

on our list, some of them having their web-site also. Despite this,

many querries remain unanswered. If you have a certain information to

help the members, please post. Many members join the group to see if

someone here (expert or no-expert) can help to solve their chronic

problems. Whether your information really helps him/her in practice

is of secondary importance. The happiness multiplies and grief

reduces by sharing.

 

Who knows where God is? Author recollects two educational years lost

due to a chronic health problem (Ayurveda or allopathy could not

solve it), which finally was solved by a young Yoga Teacher's advice.

He was nothing less than God. You can also become God in somebodies

eyes.

 

The list-owner as well as moderator have interest in

propogating "share the information and help others through this

sharing culture". They have no interest in propelling themselves to

limelight.

 

Hence, it is suggested that let us aim at the goal "every querry will

get a reply within a week". List-owner or moderator will reply a

querry only if it is not replied by others and falls in the area of

their knowledge. This will also ensure that list is not dominated by

few personalities. All members must feel that this is "their" list.

 

In order to know whether a querry is replied or not, members are

requested to use group home page to reply, so that is able to

store all the reference structure.

 

Regards

Dr. Bhate

 

 

 

 

ayurveda, "Cybervaidya"

<cybervaidya> wrote:

 

 

3) This club is not about any individual including myself. That is

> the reason I have consistently refused to identify myself by name

and

> have been content with moderating the group. There is no question

of

> pleasing anybody nor of opposing just for the sake of opposing.

> 4) The basic aim of this group as I have mentioned many times is to

> share information. This is not a competition. Anyone can put

forward

> his views. If you feel it is not correct say so and put forward

your

> views. But do not make personal remarks. This group is for those

who

> have only a brief idea of ayurveda as much as it is for those who

> have spent a lifetime in it.

> 5) Infact the idea is that we get varied views on one particular

> topic. You will agree with me that inspite of the vast spread of

the

> internet sometimes we quite dont get what we are looking for. And

> over here we have had many topics where even those who are well

> versed in ayurveda got to learn something new or got a new

> perspective.

[Guest guest]

Thanx for that vote of confidence Cybervaidya.

 

You said it appropriately, and I could not have said it better.

 

No comments on this topic.

Durgesh Mankikar,MD

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Durgesh,

I must really hand it to you.

I fail to understand how my reply was a vote of confidence for you.

If there is one thing practitioners of modern medicine have done it is

to first blast everyone having a different idea proclaiming them to be

unscientific and then when the same ideas turn out to be right claim

credit for the same.

You have constantly confrontred everybody who was not a licensed

practitioner when they post their views on modern medicine while

yourself making statements on ayurveda when you are not "formally"

trained in it nor have a "license" for the same.

And when a formally trained person with a valid licence replies to

your outburts you simply turn around and say 'thank you'????

Well as I said before this a open forum which aims (as opposed to

claims) to present different views and not only "licensed" views, I

cannot ask anybody to offer apologies for their remarks, but this does

not mean that anybody can come on this forum, demean it and then add

insult to injury by making it appear as if he was the last defender of

this science.

 

While the moderators have tried their best to be impartial on this

forum we categorically deny the "vote of confidence" to Dr. Mankikar.

 

Cybervaidya

[Guest guest]

Dear Cybervaidya, or a group of your Moderators, you are wrong in your

presumption.

 

I have taken a formal Course in Ayurveda, from Wooster, Massachusetts,

where the likes of David Frawley and Vasant Lad have taught. I have been

certified in

Ayurveda by examination. I can practice Ayurveda in the United States.

 

This is how you classify people according to your bias. You, too, it seems

cannot see beyond your bias of Modern vs Traditional only. And that is very

unfortunate. I have tried to show that Practice of Medicine is not necessarily

so classified into categories. You first study the subject, and get to know it,

and try to blend the various good points of each system, and not deride what you

either do not comprehend or think is opposite in phiosophy, merely because you

have that bias.

 

I expected more from you.

 

In all my postings, I have defended both Modern as well as traditional, and

showed where the bias is wrong. You can go through all the posts and show me any

single post, where I have derided or demeaned Ayurveda. I have shown the need to

understand both the systems, and that no system is completely perfect. That even

Ayurveda claims that there are Asadhya rogas, just as Modern Medicine cannot

cure everything.

 

In fact, if you have not forgotten, I was asked by you to be a Moderator for

this very on-line post in its early days, and which I had declined because of my

other commitments.

 

Durgesh Mankikar,MD

[Guest guest]

> Dear Cybervaidya, or a group of your Moderators, you are wrong in

> your presumption.

 

Dear Dr. Mankikar,

I have not made any presumptions in my postings hence the question

of they being wrong does not arise.

 

> I have taken a formal Course in Ayurveda, from Wooster,

Massachusetts, where the likes of David Frawley and Vasant Lad have

> taught. I have been certified in Ayurveda by examination. I can

> practice Ayurveda in the United States.

 

Well this precisely is my point. You have consisitently pointed out

that many of the fallacies (if any) in modern medicine are being

brought out by untrained or very less trained person. You have

questioned the authority of nurses or para-medical professionals to

make any kind of statements on modern medicine. And yet when it

comes to Ayurveda only "formal training" suffices? While the likes

of Dr. Frawley and Dr. Lad are doing tremendous work in the field of

spreading ayurveda awareness I do not think the training they offer

is bachelor level training. By your own admission only those who

are "licensed" can speak with authority and here you mention that

you "can practise" Ayurveda in the United States which is separate

from you are "licensed" to practise ayurveda. Can a BAMS or even MD

(ayu.) from any Indian University even practise ayurveda in the

United States. If so there would be many persons willing to know the

procedure for the same.

 

> This is how you classify people according to your bias. You, too,

> it seems cannot see beyond your bias of Modern vs Traditional

> only. And that is very unfortunate. I have tried to show that

> Practice of Medicine is not necessarily so classified into

> categories. You first study the subject, and get to know it,

> and try to blend the various good points of each system, and not

> deride what you either do not comprehend or think is opposite in

> phiosophy, merely because you have that bias.

 

I have not classified anybody into any group. If it were so I would

have moderatored membership and not allowed any dissenting voice to

be raised on the platform. But then that defeats the whole aim of

the group. I for one believe that anybody and everybody can

understand and practise ayurveda. Only the level of sophistication

will differ depending on how much you wish to study. For a common

man the study of "dinacharya" and "rutucharya" will suffice for

prevention of disease and leading a healthy life. For a person from

other field of medicine some basic knowledge will be required in

order to appreciate the principles on which it is founded. While for

one who aims to treat people using ayurveda an indepth knowledge

will be required. However many people study ot the level of

dinacharya and rurucharya and they think they can apply this to all

levels of ayurveda. The concept of doshas at the dinacharya level is

different from that at the rasayan karma level.

Simply blending the various good points of each system is not

enough. Good points and bad points are not black and white.

On the other hand it is you who classify people saying that "you

have a bias", "you are wrong in your assumption", "you do not

comprehend what I say", "what I say is science, everything else

is verbal diarrhea (your term precisely)"

 

> I expected more from you.

 

Sorry about that. You cannot please all the people all the time.

 

> In all my postings, I have defended both Modern as well as

> traditional, and showed where the bias is wrong. You can go

> through all the posts and show me any single post, where I have

> derided or demeaned Ayurveda. I have shown the need to understand

> both the systems, and that no system is completely perfect. That

> even Ayurveda claims that there are Asadhya rogas, just as Modern

> Medicine cannot cure everything.

 

I have never said you have derided or demeaned ayurveda.

If you are refering to the last post my question to you was what did

you mean by me by me giving you a "vote of confidence" when I had

written the post to offer an apology to a person offended by your

unbiased views. On the other hand if you are making a general

statement then I would like to liken you statement to the following

joke which ofcourse was very funny at the time of the Cold war.

An American and a Russian were talking and both were trying to

impress the other by saying how great their country is. Each matched

each other for all things, untill the American decided to use the

democracy card. He said, "You know there is democracy in my country,

I can stand in the middle of a public park in any big city in

America and shout slogans against the American president and nobody

will touch me because I have freedom of speech". To this the Russian

replied, "What's so great about that? Even I can stand in the middle

of a public park in any big city in Russia and shout slogans against

the American president and not only will anybody touch me but infact

I will be rewarded for the same"

 

> In fact, if you have not forgotten, I was asked by you to be a

> Moderator for this very on-line post in its early days, and which

> I had declined because of my other commitments.

 

To be a moderator you need not be an expert in ayurveda. Only thing

you need is a passion and commitment to help people. You were one

among the many I approached for moderatorship since you have been an

active member on this group. Also the fact that your earlier post

were relating to ayurveda implied to me that you were a MD (ayu.).

Anyway that does not matter. Since you now seem to be free from your

commitments to vociferously pursue biases and wrong presumptions on

this particular group, the offer of moderatorship still stands. You

may be aware of the Indian saying - It is good to have a critic as

your neighbour. We never shy away from that.

 

I would have liked to say that this is the end of the topic, but to

be fair I will allow you to have the last word.

I leave it to the group members to make their own conclusions.

 

Cybervaidya

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

In my personal opinion, I think this "exchange of views" has gone way too

far!!!! So much so, that I guess none of us would like to see any more

derogatory mails from the "trained to practice Ayurveda" member floating around

anymore!!

 

I believe that we are all on the "learning curve" all our lives. Everyday, we

learn something new which goes on to make us better human beings and add value

to people and the surrounding in which we live.

 

Yourself, Dr. Bhate, Jagannathji, Prof Ashish Phadke, Dr. Venugopal, to

name a few, are doing a great job in promoting Ayurveda and enhancing people

like us who are learning a lot in the process...

 

As Eva mentions in her post, we are all here to learn and to enrich our family

lives by putting the knowledge of Ayurveda we have to practical use!

 

I commend you all on the brilliant job you are doing and please keep up the good

work. I would be glad to continue being an active member of Ayurvedaonline and

if I can do anything for the betterment of this group, I'll be very honoured!!

 

Warm Regards

Bhairvi Raichura

 

Cybervaidya <cybervaidya wrote:

> Dear Cybervaidya, or a group of your Moderators, you are wrong in

> your presumption.

 

Dear Dr. Mankikar,

I have not made any presumptions in my postings hence the question

of they being wrong does not arise.