--- In [email protected], cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Jason Spock <jedi_spock@> wrote: > > > > > > Well Sir barry, I think Jim is correct. > > > > The Hindu Philosophy states, Sidhis are by-products that come > on its own. > > > > It also states, they are distractions that should be avoided > at all costs. > > > > That's the same old tired misinterpretation of Patañjali! > Everyone should believe by now, that the demonstrative > pronoun "te" in "te samaadhaav upasargaa..." apparently > refers MAINLY to the siddhis mentioned in the previous suutra. > Why would Patañjali present e.g. tha flying suutra (aakaasha-gamanam) > *after* that "disclaimer", if it applied to all the siddhis? > >>>>>
if you tell your child not to put the hand in fire, shouldn't you tell/show the child what fire is?
