> I don't see any reason why there couldn't be as much > variation among buildings designed on Sthapatya- > Vedic principles as there is in any style of > architecture. For that matter, it seems to me S-V > principles could be adapted to many *different* > styles of architecture, so there would be variation > among as well as within styles.
And the grid layout for the cities? What happens to those cities that were creative enough to respect the natural flow of the land they were built on, and are not laid out along NESW grid lines? Or those cities and buildings that were designed to comply with *different* formulations of "ideal" layout, such as fung shei, Celtic geomancy, Tibetan Sa-che, or even Masonic guidelines (as in Washington, D.C.)? And aren't you forgetting Stage IV, in which all the old buildings are torn down? Sounds to me as if Maharishi is just another crackpot who is trying to impose his idea of "ideal" on people, justifying it by claiming it's the "ideal" of the gods or nature. He doesn't care about *their* traditions and *their* beliefs, only the imposition of his own. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
