How can we encourage our kids to go to temple more?

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Very interesting Renu. The idea of a gene predisposing humans for theism or atheism maybe sorta appealing for some, i suppose. We differ from apes in around 1 percent of dna. So i suppose such a gene (if any) lies in this 1 percent of dna

Buddhism, Jainism, confucianism, even Shintoism and Taoism, do not depend on the principle of a creator-god. I feel the concepts of these faiths arose from thinkers and philosphers who examined things from a naturalist pov. Hope the practitioners of these religions are not viewed as those with a genetic defect !!

To me, agnosticism, theism and atheism are just experiences of a soul along its journey. I beleive unless a soul experiences all forms, varieites, and hues of situations/events/experiences, it cannot move towards release.

For all we know, the soul of Richard Dawkins may have been that of Kulothunga Chola in a previous birth (so fanatical in his faith that he persecuted vaishnavas). Generally those involved in a particular specific aspect of life, very deeply in one birth, turn out to be attracted to the same thing, in an other (random) birth. So Kulothunga Chola and Richard Dawkins both turn out to be involved in religion.

Then again, the brain is designed to be optimistic, because that possibly gives humans an evolutionary edge in enhancing their survival prospects. I often wonder about this fight for good against evil in various religious scriptures (bible, quran, puranas/itihasas, etc).

After exploring the concept of evil in various religions, i realise that any concept which helps survival for one group is seen as 'good' (with the other ofcourse dubbed 'evil', 'selfish', 'greedy', etc). Which is why you have pagans with trishuls dubbed 'evil' over which christianity/islam is 'good'.

I suppose every 'religion' absorbs motifs of older faiths, which help that 'religion' to survive with some fables / stories, and end up dubbing those who prevent the 'religion' from flourishing as 'evil'.

I have no idea if there is anything called 'good' or 'evil' per se. Its all relative.

Then there are some people, who are rather content in accepting things in life as they occur, and do not sense a void in their neural networks, no matter what happens. Such people, i feel are in a state of moksham in a way. But to get to that stage is tuf, i suppose...

Then again, there are extremely rare souls like that of Namalvar, immersed in the divine from birth.

So, Renu, what i feel (so far) is there are various states of consciousness, each with its own experience (own loka), and each individual during his/her lifetime may pass thru several states of consciouness. I would not dub anything 'good or 'bad'...

If genes do determine our emotional states, then possibly we may have a situation, where an experiment should be able to track every transmigrating soul from a genetic pool with all its expereinces well tabulated, in order to infer something from it. We should also be able to track which event was borne out of free will and which did not come out of free will from any of the previous births.

But Renu, instead of all this, i simply beleive in karma. And each individual's journey as it is. For whatever it is, 'good' or 'bad'.

Regards.

Dear HH,

Agree with you 100%..so then we can also say that Karma decides who gets the Atheist or Theist gene after all we do even attribute some afflictions and diseases to our past karma.

I didnt touch on Karma in my post earlier as I wanted to keep the options open for those who dont go by the Poorva Janam Karma theory.

Thanks for your reply
regards

 

[valli]

Dear HH and Renu

Sorry for interfering! But it is so nice to see each other 'liking' the other's post and replying! I just like this!

Love you both!

Kind regards
Valli

 

[sangom]

The idea of a creator god or Supreme god or the ultimate truth or Parabrahman — all these arise and are viforously advocated by various religions because, viewed in any whichever way, all things in this world (and perhaps the earth,and... the entire universe) are constantly undergoing change and since Man also does the same (undergoing changes all the time) but becomes "no more" eventually, this mortality or 'naSvara' quality has been arbitrarily tagged on to everything and so some creator, some ultimate thing which is immortal or amrutha, became a central theme for the upanishadic composers, imho.

From that basic premise has arisen much of hindu philosophy and vedanta, too.

But suppose this basic premise itself was erroneous? Suppose that, unlike Man and other "living" entities, the rest are immortal but ever-changing? Then all the philosophy will call for revision.

From such thinking arises perhaps the first sparks of agnosticism which grows into atheism because the existence of a creator god or Supreme god or the ultimate truth or Parabrahman, cannot be proved and has only to be "believed".

But such change of views can happen, imho, only when there is no "fear of god".

 

[happyhindu]

But such change of views can happen, imho, only when there is no "fear of god".

Sir what if there is no fear of god, instead there is love of god? unconditional love.

 

[happyhindu]

Dear HH,

Agree with you 100%..so then we can also say that Karma decides who gets the Atheist or Theist gene after all we do even attribute some afflictions and diseases to our past karma.

I didnt touch on Karma in my post earlier as I wanted to keep the options open for those who dont go by the Poorva Janam Karma theory.

Thanks for your reply
regards

Dear Renu,

Lets take one example.

There are paradigms in evolution. Like, the earth cooled and the first cells appeared. Then these cells started to reproduce. How and why all this happened is a mystery.

A theist may beleive it happened bcoz god or supernatural energy caused cells to form and reproduce.

An atheist may beleive it happened bcoz certain conditions prevailed at that time, and those conditions set off certain events to happen.

Which one is correct no one knows. Am not sure if genes decide our "approach" to examinable issues.

Renu wud you feel phenotypes are the workings of our karma?

 

[sangom]

Sir what if there is no fear of god, instead there is love of god? unconditional love.

I think it is here that we may look for some peculiar kind of gene which will cause love for an imaginary entity or lover. Many people will find it easier to imagine about a real object of love. May be I am an exception.

Even Meerabai went in "search of" her Krishna and was not satisfied with just sitting in one place and getting herself lost in her love of Krishna, iirc.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri guruvayurappan Ji,

Never in million years did I intend to be harsh. I used the analogy to point out that everything under the Sun is natural, including being a theist/atheist. That's all. Srimathi Renuka Ji, has explained it very well.

Even then, if I have offended your sensibilities, I apologize.

Regards,
KRS

dear krs !
i could understand your sincere belief in GOD( you are theist) and question to Mr.Y. but the quote"Yes, the non believers always existed, and with a small percentage they always will, but I consider them as exceptions rather than mainstream, like homo sexuality in a majority hetero sexual universe." is little bit harsh. again mr . yamaha will say science will explain only about a function known to him and not about the super natural powers
guruvayuarappan

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

As "Meerabai went on in search of her Krishna" we have to search ourselves to find a solace
to our soul too. There is a famous proverb "Man Never Seeks Good but God seeks Man" i.e.
whether we pray Him daily or not, he always takes care of his child. This why, it is said, that
God, his nature is holy and high. If we are going to visit a king or a Minister, there is a way
to approach them. We cannot have a conclusion that we can't see Him anywhere with our
naked eyes. If we do have a belief in HIM, then we have to read ourselves the works of righteousness
or to follow a believer who guides us. There are different routes/approaches to reach the God.
One such is doing Bhajans or Nama Sangeerthanams of God with complete dedication and devotion,
which will certainly address our problems.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[renuka]

Dear Renu,

Lets take one example.

There are paradigms in evolution. Like, the earth cooled and the first cells appeared. Then these cells started to reproduce. How and why all this happened is a mystery.

A theist may beleive it happened bcoz god or supernatural energy caused cells to form and reproduce.

An atheist may beleive it happened bcoz certain conditions prevailed at that time, and those conditions set off certain events to happen.

Which one is correct no one knows. Am not sure if genes decide our "approach" to examinable issues.

Renu wud you feel phenotypes are the workings of our karma?

Dear HH,

Since phenotypes are part and parcel of our physical body and the physical body which we have obtained in this birth is determined by our past karma..then I feel Yes..Phenotypes are the workings of our karma too.

But Phenotypes do have influence of environmental factors too besides its genetic expression so I have no idea how much is determined by our past karma.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri tks Ji,

Sorry for my tardy response.

First of all, let me say how happy I am to see you here also.

You provoked my thinking as well by your posting. Let me lay out my thinking for your consideration.

1. This Universe is magic. In a place where millions of permutations and combinations are allowed and everything can go wrong, they do not. Sun comes up everyday and as Louis Armstrong soulfully sang 'what a wonderful world!'. This magic goes in to the makeup of a human being.

2. This magic is what is addressed by religion and can not be by science.

3. When a human being interacts with this magic, based on their personality, culture, intelligence, a personal faith is born.

4. Much is made of man making up religions. There is no requirement that 'GOD' had to give it for it to be valid. A big need is there for religions to be an important factor in peoples lives, seen by the importance of religion in human lives. We all start with a religion we are born in to, but as we grow up, based on the factors I mentioned above in #3, a person's personal faith is thought out. For many it is a 'personal' God, for others it is the 'non personal' God you mention, and for still others it is a change of religion, and still for others it is faith rooted in one's moral behavior not worrying about existence of any God, and definitely for a minority, it is about not believing that any 'God' existed.

5. Yes, given the above, the last category above does form a personal faith. Their religion is Science (usually). I agree totally with you on this.

Thank you for you compliments!

Regards,
KRS

Sri KRS -

I came to visit here after a while to see how my special friends in the forum are doing and it is a pleasure to see you posting here.

When I joined the forum earlier in the year I was impressed with your thoughtful, sensitive and measured approach to moderation though that role was unfortunately not understood in the minds of some that you could be a contributor sharing your views at the same time as well. I am happy to see you here as a posting Veteran!

As an ex-Physicist (with more focus on theory than experiment in my PhD days here in America) with a corporate career I can now understand why I may have resonated well with some of your posts in the past.

To have a reasonable discussion on topics such as this I realize that one needs commitment to academic integrity to truly want to learn the mysteries of the world. I know the usage of the word Integrity in one of your posts generated a lot of attention - I remember those details more because I was still relatively new to the workings of this forum then!

Second, regardless of formal academic qualifications which is often irrelevant , one needs critical thinking and abstraction skills . Otherwise statements such as this "well known system theory one can not understand what lies outside of a closed system, if one is part of that system. We are a part and parcel of a closed system called a Universe or several Universes" by you will never be understood by anyone wanting to debate.

Almost all Hindus make up their own theory about God, religion etc. This also complicates their world view since they are almost always wrong and any challenges in a reasonable setting will reveal weakness in their understanding. Commitment to learn from proper teacher becomes important. In some sense the self proclaimed Atheists have been doing a service by taking some people to task

Without these three attributes - commitment to academic integrity to search for truth, well developed abilities in critical thinking and abstraction skills. and commitment to learn from qualified teacher of universal principles it is not possible to teach anyone much less children who will ask questions such as 'why should one go to a temple'..

I don't intend to visit this forum often but do want to share a few thoughts while I am here.

- There is a world of knowledge that can be understood without "faith" or a belief system. Often faith means suspension of reasoning abilities in my view

- Since Upanishads (Vedanta) and its teaching is NOT about faith there is no room for belief based GOD. In fact Theism does not mean belief in a Personal God at all. For the curious you are welcome to research into this on your own

- Atheists are believers - it is a belief system to say something does not exist which cannot be proven or dis-proven. Also human beings are not born as theists or atheists by conventional meaning of the word. We are all born ignorant and many of us stay that way for most of our life

- Science and Technology are in the realms of Knowledge and they do not contradict any other time invariant and space invariant truths which is about knowledge.

-Upanishads cannot be understood by translation - they all refer to one subject matter and every description fits in like pieces in a puzzle but only a qualified teacher can bring this out. I am saying this from my experience.

- Contrary to some popular ideas they are not about Science and Technology at all. Any such ideas are always retrofits to Upanishads and arises from wrong understanding.

- Upanishads describe knowledge. Some of the Hindu traditions which fall under the umbrella of religion are based on that knowledge. However one does not have to be a Hindu to read and appreciate the universal knowledge that applies to all beings , not just human beings

My children both do PhD at MIT in Engineering areas and their need to understand about our universe without faith was important. They are exposed to some teachings of other religions but their respect for universal knowledge expounded in the Upanishads and B.Gita has enabled them to appreciate the profundity and apply to their day today life. They know why our Vedas and Vendanta (Upanishads) do not have a single commandment or have anything remotely resembling laws such as 'Sharia Laws".

With the right understanding it is possible to appreciate visits to the temples and celebrate religious functions.

I will respond to reasonable responses from anyone that are respectful, thoughtful and display commitment to a sense of academic integrity

KRS - Hope you are doing well

Regards

PS: The icon I chose is the personification of knowledge - nothing to do with a personal God

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

I do not have much knowledge on this post. However, I would like to seek
a small clarification as to the distinction of genetype - phenotype - does
it mean heredity and development, which means the transmission of genetic
characters from parents to off spring. In other words the faults/flaws of
parents relating to previous generation, which we decipher as Karma; I do
not know whether I am out of this post in raising this issue.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[renuka]

I do not have much knowledge on this post. However, I would like to seek
a small clarification as to the distinction of genetype - phenotype - does
it mean heredity and development, which means the transmission of genetic
characters from parents to off spring. In other words the faults/flaws of
parents relating to previous generation, which we decipher as Karma; I do
not know whether I am out of this post in raising this issue.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

Dear sir,

Click on this link..it explains well

Genotype and Phenotype

 

[tks]

Dear Sri tks Ji,

Sorry for my tardy response.

First of all, let me say how happy I am to see you here also.

You provoked my thinking as well by your posting. Let me lay out my thinking for your consideration.

1. This Universe is magic. In a place where millions of permutations and combinations are allowed and everything can go wrong, they do not. Sun comes up everyday and as Louis Armstrong soulfully sang 'what a wonderful world!'. This magic goes in to the makeup of a human being.

2. This magic is what is addressed by religion and can not be by science.

3. When a human being interacts with this magic, based on their personality, culture, intelligence, a personal faith is born.

4. Much is made of man making up religions. There is no requirement that 'GOD' had to give it for it to be valid. A big need is there for religions to be an important factor in peoples lives, seen by the importance of religion in human lives. We all start with a religion we are born in to, but as we grow up, based on the factors I mentioned above in #3, a person's personal faith is thought out. For many it is a 'personal' God, for others it is the 'non personal' God you mention, and for still others it is a change of religion, and still for others it is faith rooted in one's moral behavior not worrying about existence of any God, and definitely for a minority, it is about not believing that any 'God' existed.

5. Yes, given the above, the last category above does form a personal faith. Their religion is Science (usually). I agree totally with you on this.

Thank you for you compliments!

Regards,
KRS

Sri KRS -

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Here is a set of responses in a random order of importance

1. I did not just imply impersonal Isvara in my post

2. Actually there is a unifying knowledge in which notions presented in Nasadiya Suktham is also consistent with notions of Personal Isvara.

3. For most part I understand and tend to agree with what you have stated except with the use of the word religion to mean more than what it is.

4. Universal knowledge expounded in Upanishads is not dependent on any religion but some of the Hindu religious traditions are based on the concepts in the Upanishads. This knowledge can be understood to in order to understand the magic you have alluded to.

5. All religious traditions begin and end with pursuits of Artha and Kama for its followers regardless of what faith they subscribe to. In this sense religion as practiced cannot help explain the magic you have referred to

Regards

 

[guruvayurappan]

dear KRS !
i did not mean you are harsh.the sencentence is harsh as you said it is harsh to my sensibility.but i liked the words since it gives the idea about exceptions which is different from majority.
regards,
guruvayurappan

 

[sangom]

As "Meerabai went on in search of her Krishna" we have to search ourselves to find a solace
to our soul too. There is a famous proverb "Man Never Seeks Good but God seeks Man" i.e.
whether we pray Him daily or not, he always takes care of his child. This why, it is said, that
God, his nature is holy and high. If we are going to visit a king or a Minister, there is a way
to approach them. We cannot have a conclusion that we can't see Him anywhere with our
naked eyes. If we do have a belief in HIM, then we have to read ourselves the works of righteousness
or to follow a believer who guides us. There are different routes/approaches to reach the God.
One such is doing Bhajans or Nama Sangeerthanams of God with complete dedication and devotion,
which will certainly address our problems.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

Shri Bala,

Since I have lived a good number of years like any other ordinary tabra, I can understand what you intend to mean by the words "to find a solace", etc. But don't you think all this longing for "solace", 'god always taking care of his child' irrespective of the indescribable sufferings of human beings we witness in some parts of Africa, etc., comes from a deep-seated discontent of what we are and where we are?

You then say, "If we do have a belief in HIM, then we have to read ourselves the works of righteousness
or to follow a believer who guides us. There are different routes/approaches to reach the God." If God always takes care of his children, as you first posit, why is it necessary for people to "approach" God? Does it not imply that your first premise is wrong, that God is not a loving father (at least for the "parayan wallas" and "bhajanwallas" and since they are outside God's circle of care, they have to make extra efforts to cultivate his acquaintance, attention and grace?

IMO, this is the subtle mischief of religion. They advertise god in some way, but if it does not work for the benefit of the priestly class, they are shrewd to contradict themselves and introduce a new line.

 

[sangom]

dear KRS !
i did not mean you are harsh.the sencentence is harsh as you said it is harsh to my sensibility.but i liked the words since it gives the idea about exceptions which is different from majority.
regards,
guruvayurappan

Since homosexuality has also now come to be accepted as natural, just as heterosexuality, homosex is also one of the "magics of god" possibly. They are exceptions because they do not form the majority; but who knows, some decaded from now homos and lesbs may become majority and then belief in god and religion may also become rare exception!

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

Dear sir,

Click on this link..it explains well

Genotype and Phenotype

Thank you, let me go through it.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[wrongan]

A relevent incidence which I cosider to be posted here.

I had a chance to converse with a well known psychologist who is a strong non believer of GOD.
He told me that most of the patient with depression has no friends to share his problems,or either
not having a responsible and well wishing companion to share his burden either wife or parents.
But a person who has unquestionabe faith(he emphasized the word Unquestionable)in GOD mostly
avoid coming to me.The reason he weeps before the statue which he believes is hearing him.
His repeated repent before the statue make his
heart light and he feels so.That is why I find that class is less in number coming to me.Eventhough
I am a non believer I have portrait of all Gods in my room it is a kind of therapy to cure

 

[Yamaka]

dear KRS !
i did not mean you are harsh.the sencentence is harsh as you said it is harsh to my sensibility.but i liked the words since it gives the idea about exceptions which is different from majority.
regards,
guruvayurappan

Dear Guru:

Thanks for "catching" KRS Sir on bringing homosexuality into this discussion from out of the blue.

1. He could have easily refuted my number that about 2.5 billion people in the world are non-Believers, who are non-worshipers (this estimated number includes all the Atheists, Agnostics, most people in China and former Soviet Union etc.).

Assuming he accepts this 2.5 billion, this would constitute about 36% of the total 7 billion population in the world.

Then ask the other question: What is the % of homosexuals in the world? It's hardly about 10% of the total as we know now.

To me KRS Sir is terribly wrong in his opinion that non-Believers are as small as homosexuals!

36% of the total is not a small number as 10% of the total, period.

2. For many of the "religious people" in the world - like Ron Reagans, Jerry Falwells, and many in India - homosexuality is God's Wrath on the "nasty people".

That's why I have a serious question as to why KRS Sir brought this issue out of the blue.

Only he knows WHY he did it! I just can't accept that's because of the majority/minority point! And, curiously, Renuka came to his rescue (perhaps, she also smelled the rotten rat), which gave comfort to KRS Sir! Lol

Cheers.

 

[guruvayurappan]

dear sangom !
already forum formed in the name of LGT (LESBIAN .GAY AND TRANSGENDER ). THE NEWS IS AVAILABLE IN TIMES OF INDIA.

 

[guruvayurappan]

Dear Guru:

Thanks for "catching" KRS Sir on bringing homosexuality into this discussion from out of the blue.

1. He could have easily refuted my number that about 2.5 billion people in the world are non-Believers, who are non-worshipers (this estimated number includes all the Atheists, Agnostics, most people in China and former Soviet Union etc.).

Assuming he accepts this 2.5 billion, this would constitute about 36% of the total 7 billion population in the world.

Then ask the other question: What is the % of homosexuals in the world? It's hardly about 10% of the total as we know now.

To me KRS Sir is terribly wrong in his opinion that non-Believers are as small as homosexuals!

36% of the total is not a small number as 10% of the total, period.

2. For many of the "religious people" in the world - like Ron Reagans, Jerry Falwells, and many in India - homosexuality is God's Wrath on the "nasty people".

That's why I have a serious question as to why KRS Sir brought this issue out of the blue.

Only he knows WHY he did it! I just can't accept that's because of the majority/minority point! And, curiously, Renuka came to his rescue (perhaps, she also smelled the rotten rat), which gave comfort to KRS Sir! Lol

Cheers.

Dear Mr.Yamaka !
it is not catching any body . i am following your post as well as others without any prejudgment and my comments come spontaneously since i am reading all post in their true meaning.it enables me to know about new topics in vedas and in present day lateral thinging.
my policy is sex is not sin if it is with your wife only.
prayer is good as long as it is good for society without exploitation
charity to the needy and not for lazy persons.our generocity should not be miused.
cheers
guruvayurappan

 

[sangom]

A relevent incidence which I cosider to be posted here.

I had a chance to converse with a well known psychologist who is a strong non believer of GOD.
He told me that most of the patient with depression has no friends to share his problems,or either
not having a responsible and well wishing companion to share his burden either wife or parents.
But a person who has unquestionabe faith(he emphasized the word Unquestionable)in GOD mostly
avoid coming to me.The reason he weeps before the statue which he believes is hearing him.
His repeated repent before the statue make his
heart light and he feels so.That is why I find that class is less in number coming to me.Eventhough
I am a non believer I have portrait of all Gods in my room it is a kind of therapy to cure

Shri wrongan,

What you say is possibly very likely. But there are cases of people with "unquestioning faith in god" (not unquestionable, by the way) who can be seen in places like Chottaanikkara Kizhkkavu Devi temple and similar places, where ghosts and other similar 'spiritual' entities are exorcised. This is because, for such faithful people, the depression has to be traced to possession by evil spirits and exorcism by a more powerful god/goddess and that faith is really 'unquestionable' as you say! I know a few cases at least who have become completely useless, just vegetating people (mostly women) who might have fared better had they gone to a psychiatrist when their unhearing and non-responsive god failed to ameliorate their condition.

 

[sangom]

Dear Guru:

Thanks for "catching" KRS Sir on bringing homosexuality into this discussion from out of the blue.

1. He could have easily refuted my number that about 2.5 billion people in the world are non-Believers, who are non-worshipers (this estimated number includes all the Atheists, Agnostics, most people in China and former Soviet Union etc.).

Assuming he accepts this 2.5 billion, this would constitute about 36% of the total 7 billion population in the world.

Then ask the other question: What is the % of homosexuals in the world? It's hardly about 10% of the total as we know now.

To me KRS Sir is terribly wrong in his opinion that non-Believers are as small as homosexuals!

36% of the total is not a small number as 10% of the total, period.

2. For many of the "religious people" in the world - like Ron Reagans, Jerry Falwells, and many in India - homosexuality is God's Wrath on the "nasty people".

That's why I have a serious question as to why KRS Sir brought this issue out of the blue.

Only he knows WHY he did it! I just can't accept that's because of the majority/minority point! And, curiously, Renuka came to his rescue (perhaps, she also smelled the rotten rat), which gave comfort to KRS Sir! Lol

Cheers.

Shri Y,
May be homos are due to wrath of god! But then god becomes fallible, doesn't he? He created those children thinking they would be very pious and normal humans but he did not succeed. Only two explanations can I imagine for this:

• God is creating humans as factory products and there are off-spec items coming out and god's quality control dept., is lousy!
• There is some power above god and it controls the results of even god's actions; god proposes but that power disposes, so to say!

Either way god is in a very unenviable situation

 

[prasad1]

I have a problem with the numbers being thrown out by people.
Out of 7 billion people in this world, how many can intelligently answer that question about belief.

So all your percentages may be totally wrong.
You should include people who can define their GOD.
Then categorize believers and non-believers of that GOD.

Because one non-believer is not same as the next one.

I am believer of my definition of GOD (Brahman), I do not believe in the abrahamic GOD (judge, Jury, etc). So these broad categories of believers and non-believers do not mean anything.
Then again even if I am the only one believer against 7 million non-believers, so be it.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

I have as well as Srimathi Renuka Ji already explained my analogy. I don't understand why you still question my motive? . I have nothing against homosexuality and honor it as a part of nature.

By the way, I was talking about the population of 'atheists'. And your number is not correct on that basis.

Most studies have shown that 'atheism' population is about 2 to 11% of the world population, depending on the definition of atheism. So my analogy to depict it as a minority human condition is very apt.

By the way, I think that as a Forum etiquette, it would be nice if you direct your discussions towards myself, if you are addressing the points I have raised, instead of addressing them to a third party. . That way, I can directly address your concerns.

Regards,
KRS