India & Israel - Birds of a Feather Flock Together - PKKH.tv

[Dillinger]

Sorry that is wrong story. There was no sati system then. None of the widows except Pandu's wife Madri committed Sati. Krishna weds those women symbolically to re-integrate them back into the society as honored women.

Karna's first wife committed sati too, sati as a practice existed, but probably not as a social compulsion where many women were forced into it as custom.

Krishna did indeed marry them, not exactly to "integrate" them into society, rather to look after their welfare and to countermand the harm that had befallen them as they were not even considered to be wives of Narkasur but rather as despoiled war bounty, primitive as most of society was back then it would have never seen past its ossified traditions to accept them, so Krishna did, and in doing so earned quite a bit of reproach and insults.

 

[Dr Lee]

How did you become a doctor, a surgeon no less? Was your evaluator able to decipher your language? Or do Pakistanis do not have to give any written test to become a doctor?



You are right. Allah and Bhagwan/Paramatma are not one. Hindus are not aware of their religion and confuse all gods as gods. Allah actually does not come even close to one of our demigods in attributes leave alone paramatma or Brahman.

Haha, yes we don't need to give written exams here. I didn't insult your Bhagwaan and I still doubt your level of intellect .

 

[Indrani]

Karna's first wife committed sati too, sati as a practice existed, but probably not as a social compulsion where many women were forced into it as custom.

Krishna did indeed marry them, not exactly to "integrate" them into society, rather to look after their welfare and to countermand the harm that had befallen them as they were not even considered to be wives of Narkasur but rather as despoiled war bounty, primitive as most of society was back then it would have never seen past its ossified traditions to accept them, so Krishna did, and in doing so earned quite a bit of reproach and insults.

That was exactly what I meant. Else they would have had to remain as outcasts. I do not think the society was primitive or bound to ossified traditions. Draupadi's marriage to the five brothers was not tradition, yet she was accepted. Kings were marrying fisher women. They adapted to the situations as it emerged with one or other inventions.

Haha, yes we don't need to give written exams here. I didn't insult your Bhagwaan and I still doubt your level of intellect .

LOL. Any doubts you raise is good. Keep working on it. One day you will reach an IQ of 69 and above and will be qualified as borderline intellectual functioning. I am with you every step of the way. Do not be afraid.

 

[faisal6309]

Well I dont know. Some how I feel that he was not sure what to do at that time.

Deleted

Just forget it!

 

[Dillinger]

That was exactly what I meant. Else they would have had to remain as outcasts. I do not think the society was primitive or bound to ossified traditions. Draupadi's marriage to the five brothers was not tradition, yet she was accepted. Kings were marrying fisher women. They adapted to the situations as it emerged with one or other inventions.

Oh no! It was plenty ossified. Krishna himself commented that it was. Draupadi's marriage to five husbands was considered an aberration, in fact that was exactly what was used in the dyut sabha to justify her disrobing, the news of the marriage and its specifics in fact caused quite an uproar, even Drupad himself was staunchly opposed to it, going so far as to suggest that it was better if Panchali took her life rather than consent to such a thing, it was again Krishna who had to intervene and in no uncertain terms tell Drupad to "lay off".

Similarly, while a King could go around lusting and loving outside of caste boundaries, by the dwapar yug the caste boundaries themselves had set in, in fact various characters (Krishna, Bhishma, Karna) have their own bits where they extensively comment upon it and criticize said social practice. That is why till the end the Pandavas refused to even offer tilanjali for Karna till Kunti told them the truth, this after the fact that they were more than willing to offer the same tilanjali for even Dushasan (a man far "more wicked" than Karna).

The very reason Mahabharat was required was because of this ossification, Dharma is not the rules you read of in the shastras, it is not your customs and it is not your "rit/riti", those things are expressions of dharma but not dharma themselves, as it was known by those with the knowledge of the universe dharma itself moves with said universe, it takes into account the ONLY two laws of creation (causality and change/motion), when the latter is forgotten and ossification takes place then "tradition" becomes more important than the said two laws, the same traditions then become tools of oppression in the hands of the powerful used only to guard their own power jealously, it is under such circumstances that a cleansing is required.

Evil is easy to fight, and the Mahabharat and the Geeta have very little to do with "fighting evil" as much as it has to do with the more difficult task (MUCH MORE DIFFICULT) of dealing with otherwise righteous men (not Duryodhan, he's not even the "villain" of the epic) who use their strength to further what they view to be their personal dharma in contravention of universal dharma (Bhishma's unwillingness to change his oath despite being cognizant of the fact that its context had been perversely inverted and was in fact leading to grievous harm to the land of Bharat, break your oath and be reviled if you must, let men laugh and taunt you, lose all the prathista you have accrued if you must, but in a position of power do that which is just to all and not just "morally correct" for you personally).

 

[Indrani]

Oh no! It was plenty ossified. Krishna himself commented that it was. Draupadi's marriage to five husbands was considered an aberration, in fact that was exactly what was used in the dyut sabha to justify her disrobing, the news of the marriage and its specifics in fact caused quite an uproar, even Drupad himself was staunchly opposed to it, going so far as to suggest that it was better if Panchali took her life rather than consent to such a thing, it was again Krishna who had to intervene and in no uncertain terms tell Drupad to "lay off".

Okay you are mistaking any resistance to change as ossification, but that is a fact of life in any society any given time including 21st century. No new changes are accepted without facing resistance. Point is she was accepted as the queen finally and the society frowned on her insult resulting in the war. Except for the Kauravas, everyone was remorseful of their one lapse of judgment with respect to Draupadi including Karna.

Similarly, while a King could go around lusting and loving outside of caste boundaries, by the dwapar yug the caste boundaries themselves had set in, in fact various characters (Krishna, Bhishma, Karna) have their own bits where they extensively comment upon it and criticize said social practice. That is why till the end the Pandavas refused to even offer tilanjali for Karna till Kunti told them the truth, this after the fact that they were more than willing to offer the same tilanjali for even Dushasan (a man far "more wicked" than Karna).

Every damsel there seemed to have a kid out of wedlock including Kunti who with her husband's permission begot 5 more sons for herself and Madri from men/gods who were not her husbands. Yes there were some caste corruptions and class barriers but then that is again like society at any given point of time, is it not? Do we have a caste free or a class free society anywhere in the world?

The very reason Mahabharat was required was because of this ossification, Dharma is not the rules you read of in the shastras, it is not your customs and it is not your "rit/riti", those things are expressions of dharma but not dharma themselves, as is the way of those with the knowledge of the universe dharma itself moves with said universe, it takes into account the ONLY two laws of creation (causality and change/motion), when the latter is forgotten and ossification takes place then "tradition" becomes more important the the said two laws, the same traditions then become tools of oppression in the hands of the powerful used only to guard their own power jealously, it is under such circumstances that a cleansing is required.

I never said riti-riwaz is dharma. Dharma does not change, traditions may. What I read in your commentary is a lot of marxist slant and class struggle. It was not oppression in Mahabharat due to tradition, rather the violation of Dharma that led to the war.

Evil is easy to fight, and the Mahabharat and the Geeta have very little to do with "fighting evil" as much as it has to do with the more difficult task (MUCH MORE DIFFICULT) of dealing with otherwise righteous men (not Duryodhan, he's not even the "villain" of the epic) who use their strength to further what they view to be their personal dharma in contravention of universal dharma (Bhishma's unwillingness to change his oath despite being cognizant of the fact that its context had been perversely inverted and was in fact leading to grievous harm to the land of Bharat, break your oath and be reviled if you must, let men laugh and taunt you, lose all the prathista you have accrued if you must, but in a position of power do that which is just to all and not just "morally correct" for you personally).

Agreed.

 

[Dillinger]

Okay you are mistaking any resistance to change as ossification, but that is a fact of life in any society any given time including 21st century. No new changes are accepted without facing resistance. Point is she was accepted as the queen finally and the society frowned on her insult resulting in the war. Except for the Kauravas, everyone was remorseful of their one lapse of judgment with respect to Draupadi including Karna.




Every damsel there seemed to have a kid out of wedlock including Kunti who with her husband's permission begot 5 more sons for herself and Madri from men/gods who were not her husbands. Yes there were some caste corruptions and class barriers but then that is again like society at any given point of time, is it not? Do we have a caste free or a class free society anywhere in the world?




I never said riti-riwaz is dharma. Dharma does not change, traditions may. What I read in your commentary is a lot of marxist slant and class struggle. It was not oppression in Mahabharat due to tradition, rather the violation of Dharma that led to the war.



Agreed.

Of course the nature if not the specifics of the ills were the same as they always have been, what makes you think that our society is any less primitive even today in many ways? After all these ills are the expression of ego and ignorance, both are found aplenty even today.

You and I see it as a resistance to change within a specific context and within say a set period of time, the paramatman saw it not as broken actions and instances but as a whole generation who's actions were the result of accumulated ossification over the course of three yugas, the difference in the vantage points is VERY great, ergo why we repeatedly fail to understand the real urgency for the cleansing, even today you hear folks sympathizing with Karna or Bhishma or trying to critique Krishna's actions with regard to "allowing" the war (not that I have any issues with said critiquing, being an atheist I'm all on board with critiquing all gods and divinity) without understanding that the Kauravas and Pandavas (their life, actions, contexts) were all a culmination of many millenniums worth of actions and causation which could only be reset by a radical purge.

I'm the farthest away from Marxist thought as can be, nor did I state that caste oppression/division caused the war, simply that said divisions existed and were prevalent, more so they were critiqued by the titular characters of the epic, the causation of the war as a whole was of course something much larger than "class conflict".

 

[Indrani]

Of course the nature if not the specifics of the ills were the same as they always have been, what makes you think that our society is any less primitive even today in many ways? After all these ills are the expression of ego and ignorance, both are found aplenty even today.

It is not just our society, every society out there has the same flaws and compulsions. If we were to tag all of them primitive, then there really has never been a modern society ever anywhere.

You and I see it as a resistance to change within a specific context and within say a set period of time, the paramatman saw it not as broken actions and instances but as a whole generation who's actions were the result of accumulated ossification over the course of three yugas, the difference in the vantage points is VERY great, ergo why we repeatedly fail to understand the real urgency for the cleansing, even today you hear folks sympathizing with Karna or Bhishma or trying to critique Krishna's actions with regard to "allowing" the war (not that I have any issues with said critiquing, being an atheist I'm all on board with critiquing all gods and divinity) without understanding that the Kauravas and Pandavas (their life, actions, contexts) were all a culmination of many millenniums worth of actions and causation which could only be reset by a radical purge.

I am not certain I agree with the reasoning given for the war or how parmatman saw it because what followed has not been much better either which sort of beats the purpose of war does it not?

Anyway, I am still a novice in religion and I need to read a lot before I can speak with authority on behalf of parmatman.

 

[Dillinger]

It is not just our society, every society out there has the same flaws and compulsions. If we were to tag all of them primitive, then there really has never been a modern society ever anywhere.



I am not certain I agree with the reasoning given for the war or how parmatman saw it because what followed has not been much better either which sort of beats the purpose of war does it not?

Anyway, I am still a novice in religion and I need to read a lot before I can speak with authority on behalf of parmatman.

Of course, there is relative primitiveness which prevails everywhere, we mistreat someone based on his birth as signified by his last name somewhere else another society goes about inflicting horrendous atrocities on minorities because they cannot agree upon a common name for God. Relatively we are better off than we were say 2-3000 years ago, sure, but its still a relative comparison and not an absolute condition of having left the base and the primitive behind.

The war served its purpose, had it not occurred the land of Bharat would have been ruined beyond repair, as in forever more it would have ceased to hold any recognizable form, is that the case today? No, we are here as we were before, diminished but extant. The war was renewal, as was the sixth manav avatar's cleansing of the Kshatriya race, as was the vadh of Ravan, did rakshahs or evil men with might in their arms cease to exist, of course not but the result of their actions as driven by causality was mitigated by the interventions. The parmatan cannot run the lives cumulatively of all beings, if it were otherwise than wither free will?

Rather think of it as the application of a defibrillator. You spent years clotting your arteries and abusing yourself, your heart gave in, in that most desperate of moments the defibrillator is applied, it may make your heart beat again, perhaps it will save you from that particular calamity which was a result of your accumulated past actions. It cannot undo said past actions (your arteries are still clogged, this time you may live, in a year you may end up with another heart attack due to said clogged arteries) nor can the defibrillator and its application ensure that you will not repeat said actions in the future. Now unless we want the medic applying the defib to then direct our actions for the rest of our mortal lives all we can ask for and expect is the timely application of the defib, the rest as always is upto us.

 

[AbhimanyuShrivastav]

Sorry that is wrong story. There was no sati system then. None of the widows except Pandu's wife Madri committed Sati. Krishna weds those women symbolically to re-integrate them back into the society as honored women.

Thanks for clarifying

 

[Indrani]

Of course, there is relative primitiveness which prevails everywhere, we mistreat someone based on his birth as signified by his last name somewhere else another society goes about inflicting horrendous atrocities on minorities because they cannot agree upon a common name for God. Relatively we are better off than we were say 2-3000 years ago, sure, but its still a relative comparison and not an absolute condition of having left the base and the primitive behind.

The war served its purpose, had it not occurred the land of Bharat would have been ruined beyond repair, as in forever more it would have ceased to hold any recognizable form, is that the case today? No, we are here as we were before, diminished but extant. The war was renewal, as was the sixth manav avatar's cleansing of the Kshatriya race, as was the vadh of Ravan, did rakshahs or evil men with might in their arms cease to exist, of course not but the result of their actions as driven by causality was mitigated by the interventions. The parmatan cannot run the lives cumulatively of all beings, if it were otherwise than wither free will?

Rather think of it as the application of a defibrillator. You spent years clotting your arteries and abusing yourself, your heart gave in, in that most desperate of moments the defibrillator is applied, it may make your heart beat again, perhaps it will save you from that particular calamity which was a result of your accumulated past actions. It cannot undo said past actions (your arteries are still clogged, this time you may live, in a year you may end up with another heart attack due to said clogged arteries) nor can the defibrillator and its application ensure that you will not repeat said actions in the future. Now unless we want the medic applying the defib to then direct our actions for the rest of our mortal lives all we can ask for and expect is the timely application of the defib, the rest as always is upto us.

I do not agree. We are not better off in any way in terms of society. The extent of cruelty and injustice seen in the last 2000-3000 years far far exceeds anything that happened during Mahabharata in magnitudes of exponential proportions. How ruined could Bharat have been if there was just a limited war ending with the destruction of Kauravas but everyone else intact.

I think the reason for the war was as stated bringing back Dharma, but also as a lesson for the future yugas, especially to help us through Kali yuga.

The parmatman is running lives cumulatively because all that exists is parmatman. Free will is necessary and an absolute part of life because without it the entire purpose of life vanishes.

 

[Dillinger]

I do not agree. We are not better off in any way in terms of society. The extent of cruelty and injustice seen in the last 2000-3000 years far far exceeds anything that happened during Mahabharata in magnitudes of exponential proportions. How ruined could Bharat have been if there was just a limited war ending with the destruction of Kauravas but everyone else intact.

I think the reason for the war was as stated bringing back Dharma, but also as a lesson for the future yugas, especially to help us through Kali yuga.

The parmatman is running lives cumulatively because all that exists is parmatman. Free will is necessary and an absolute part of life because without it the entire purpose of life vanishes.

All exists within the transcendent soul as it exists within us (the very meaning and root form of "Vishnu") but that does not translate to running lives, not at all, Krishna repeatedly told those around him that control is something that he neither desired nor was willing to exercise in the manner in which they defined control. Otherwise you could equally argue that why allow adharma at all, because that choice is yours, you may choose to act in such a manner and the lord may chose to neither intervene nor mitigate the consequence of said action. After all, he could have simply sealed Shishupal's mouth shut and left it at that, the choice to act will not be taken away from you BUT the said action's consequence will find you no matter what you do, not once will you find any representations of divinity altering causality.

We are worse off simply because this is kalyug, either way things will be worse than dwapar yug, question is how worse.

It wasn't a "limited war", how many kings walked out of that war, check again? Were Kauravs the only one who were killed, what of Virat, Drupad, Shalya and scores of other kings, what of the Yadukul which would perish in totality as a result of the war? Pretty much all the factions extant at the time were wiped out decisively, with very few exceptions.

How did it help, it delayed the oncoming collapse, as I said, when Vishnu intervenes it is to reset things, NOT TO PERMANENTLY keep society in a stasis wherein dharma prevails.

You have stated that the fact that the ills of our world today outweigh perhaps the ills that were, as if that is something unnatural. When in fact that is exactly how it is supposed to be.
Pay heed to the very verse from the Geeta:-

Yada yada hi dharmasya
glanir bhavati bahrata
abhyudhanam adharmasya
tadatmanam srijam-ya-ham
praritranaya sadhunam
vinashaya cha dushkritam
dharm sansthapanaya
sambhavami yuge yuge

The above verse EXPLICITLY mentions that in the course of time, after every intervention of the Lord Dhama will indeed decline AGAIN, this cycle of decline and then restoration is EXACTLY what is encompassed within that verse, so yes the war did not somehow make society a monolith where change would not occur for better OR FOR WORSE (and many time indeed for worse). This is exactly why Vishnu manifests again AND THEN AGAIN. Because said manifestations are interventions to cause a reset, after said reset things may decline again, the same ills will indeed arise again, and so he will make himslef manifest again

 

[Indrani]

All exists within the transcendent soul as it exists within us (the very meaning and root form of "Vishnu") but that does not translate to running lives, not at all, Krishna repeatedly told those around him that control is something that he neither desired nor was willing to exercise in the manner in which they defined control. Otherwise you could equally argue that why allow adharma at all, because that choice is yours, you may choose to act in such a manner and the lord may chose to neither intervene nor mitigate the consequence of said action. After all, he could have simply sealed Shishupal's mouth shut and left it at that, the choice to act will not be taken away from you BUT the said action's consequence will find you no matter you do, not once will you find any representations of divinity altering causality.

Running our lives as in since every individual is part of parmatman himself, it cannot be without his will. But yes since the very purpose of manifestation is to experience existence in varied forms, free will was given as well as forgetfulness of who we are. Herein the unmanifest parmatman will not interfere or attempt to control events because that goes against the very purpose of creation. So I am not suggesting anything different from what Krishna said, but giving you the reason as to why free will has to exist. Why law of karma has to function without interference from parmatman.

It wasn't a "limited war", how many kings walked out of that war, check again? Were Kauravs the only one who were killed, what of Virat, Drupad, Shalya and scores of other kings, what of the Yadukul which would perish in totality as a result of the war? Pretty much all the factions extant at the time were wiped out decisively, with very few exceptions.

I was arguing against your theory that total destruction was essential for cleansing of cumulative bad karma of the whole set of characters involved in the war. My question was how could Bharat be ruined more than it has been for the last 2000-3000 years if Mahabharata had not happened or the war was not as devastating as it was. What if they could have just settled it between just the two families without involving all the other kingdoms in it.

How did it help, it delayed the oncoming collapse, as I said, when Vishnu intervenes it is to reset things, NOT TO PERMANENTLY keep society in a stasis wherein dharma prevails.

Which collapse was delayed? Yugas run cyclically. So there is a yuga where there is stasis and dharma prevails, Satya Yuga. They were at the cusp of Kaliyuga, so the reset was needed.

You have stated that the fact that the ills of our world today outweigh perhaps the ills that were, as if that is something unnatural. When in fact that is exactly how it is supposed to be.
Pay heed to the very verse from the Geeta:-
Yada yada dharmasya
glanir bhavati bahrata
abhyudhanam adharmasya
tadatmanam srijam-ya-ham
praritranaya sadhunam
vinashaya cha dushkritam
dharm sansthapanaya
sambhavami yuge yuge
The above verse EXPLICITLY mentions that in the course of time, after every intervention of the Lord Dhama will indeed decline AGAIN, this cycle of decline and then restoration is EXACTLY what is encompassed within that verse, so yes the war did not somehow make society a monolith where change would not occur for better OR FOR WORSE (and many time indeed for worse). This is exactly why Vishnu manifests again AND THEN AGAIN. Because said manifestations are interventions to cause a reset, after said reset things may decline again, the same ills will indeed arise again, and so he will make himslef manifest again

I was just disputing the reason you gave for the war, not the war itself. No arguments about the rest of your reasoning though.

 

[Dillinger]

Running our lives as in since every individual is part of parmatman himself, it cannot be without his will. But yes since the very purpose of manifestation is to experience existence in varied forms, free will was given as well as forgetfulness of who we are. Herein the unmanifest parmatman will not interfere or attempt to control events because that goes against the very purpose of creation. So I am not suggesting anything different from what Krishna said, but giving you the reason as to why free will has to exist. Why law of karma has to function without interference from parmatman.



I was arguing against your theory that total destruction was essential for cleansing of cumulative bad karma of the whole set of characters involved in the war. My question was how could Bharat be ruined more than it has been for the last 2000-3000 years if Mahabharata had not happened or the war was not as devastating as it was. What if they could have just settled it between just the two families without involving all the other kingdoms in it.




Which collapse was delayed? Yugas run cyclically. So there is a yuga where there is stasis and dharma prevails, Satya Yuga. They were at the cusp of Kaliyuga, so the reset was needed.




I was just disputing the reason you gave for the war, not the war itself. No arguments about the rest of your reasoning though.

Ah, so it is the war specifically that you are referring to.

It could not have been settled between the two families, in fact the families did not matter, the dispute was the pretext so as to ensure the destruction, Krishna simply engineered the circumstances but even then he left the freedom to choose (Duryodhan, Karna, Bhishma, Drona, Dhritarashtra could have each in their individual capacities averted the war).

That is the whole point, it is not supposed to be any better today, just as the devastation brought about by Vishnu when he manifested as Matsya did not end adharma or the ills of the world. You could equally ask, why was the deluge required, could it not have been settled any other way, after all despite the deluge and the astronomical loss of life it caused adharma still rose soon after. Because that is what the Lord offers, a reset followed by a respite as the progression of the yugas continue (and said progression necessitates the cyclic nature of the rise and decline of Dharma in practice itself). The verse of the Geeta presupposes just that, that after EVERY intervention the lessons will be forgotten and so here we are, unmindful of the lessons of the last intervention and paving the path for the next.

After the Mahabharat war concluded Parikshit was followed by 23 kings in the Kuru line, and the epic states that they ruled in relative peace and prosperity, this despite the fact that all of them reigned in the Kalyug, THAT was the respite before the conditions prevalent in the Kalyug truly took hold.

Sans said respite the land of Bharat would have disintegrated long before any conqueror ever set foot on this land, our best preserved links to the culture ancient would be forged within this period of respite so that something, even the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction of what was would be preserved even within the Kalyug, so that there would still be dharma left for those who would endeavor to adhere to it even in the most desperate of times no matter how difficult and slight such an avenue would be, it would preserve that one last path through which all may be remembered again, albeit an astronomically difficult path it maybe to tread, Krishna/Vishnu preserves Indrani and so he did preserve said path for those who would follow even in the last and darkest of yug.




ALSO, WE SHOULD REALLY TAKE THIS DISCUSSION OF THIS THREAD, WE'RE GOING WAY OT!

 

[shivgan3]

Ah, so it is the war specifically that you are referring to.

It could not have been settled between the two families, in fact the families did not matter, the dispute was the pretext so as to ensure the destruction, Krishna simply engineered the circumstances but even then he left the freedom to choose (Duryodhan, Karna, Bhishma, Drona, Dhritarashtra could have each in their individual capacities averted the war).

That is the whole point, it is not supposed to be any better today, just as the devastation brought about by Vishnu when he manifested as Matsya did not end adharma or the ills of the world. You could equally ask, why was the deluge required, could it not have been settled any other way, after all despite the deluge and the astronomical loss of life it caused adharma still rose soon after. Because that is what the Lord offers, a reset followed by a respite as the progression of the yugas continue (and said progression necessitates the cyclic nature of the rise and decline of Dharma in practice itself). The verse of the Geeta presupposes just that, that after EVERY intervention the lessons will be forgotten and so here we are, unmindful of the lessons of the last intervention and paving the path for the next.

After the Mahabharat war concluded Parikshit was followed by 23 kings in the Kuru line, and the epic states that they ruled in relative peace and prosperity, this despite the fact that all of them reigned in the Kalyug, THAT was the respite before the conditions prevalent in the Kalyug truly took hold.

Sans said respite the land of Bharat would have disintegrated long before any conqueror ever set foot on this land, our best preserved links to the culture ancient would be forged within this period of respite so that something, even the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction of what was would be preserved even within the Kalyug, so that there would still be dharma left for those who would endeavor to adhere to it even in the most desperate of times no matter how difficult and slight such an avenue would be, it would preserve that one last path through which all may be remembered again, albeit an astronomically difficult path it maybe to tread, Krishna/Vishnu preserves Indrani and so he did preserve said path for those who would follow even in the last and darkest of yug.




ALSO, WE SHOULD REALLY TAKE THIS DISCUSSION OF THIS THREAD, WE'RE GOING WAY OT!

You are wasting your time here, collect this a create a dcoumentry,