--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 11:49 AM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Scott Girard / Vedic exercise > > > > --- In HYPERLINK > "mailto:FairfieldLife% 40yahoogroups.com"FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick > Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: HYPERLINK > "mailto:FairfieldLife% 40yahoogroups.com"FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:HYPERLINK > "mailto:FairfieldLife% 40yahoogroups.com"[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 > > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 8:53 AM > > To: HYPERLINK > "mailto:FairfieldLife% 40yahoogroups.com"FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Scott Girard / Vedic exercise > > > > > > > > There are many good Purushas not sold out to rajasic activity, mostly > > they are in the Himalayas. > > > > You're not in the Himalayas. Are you sold out to rajasic activity? > > I'm not on Purusha, in case you did not know. > > I knew that. So if Purushas not in the Himalayas tend to be rajasic, what > does that make non-Purushas? Seems to me that by your way of thinking, > non-Purushas would generally be more rajasic than Purushas.
Not necessarily, but usually. Without a certain amount of rajas, how else would the outer world go round.
