What is the reason for this?in places the Ganges which usually flows in southeasterly direction turns north or northerly for few miles,
Aren't all rivers backflow in some places?
What is the reason for this?in places the Ganges which usually flows in southeasterly direction turns north or northerly for few miles,
This is not backflow. Backflow occurs where some large rivers empty into the ocean. It happens when the tide is rising. The tide rises higher than the water flowing out and this causes water from the ocean to flow back up the river....in some cases for quite a ways...but not far enough to reach varanasi....I even looked at a map to see if varanasi was near the ocean...which it is not.
Ganges turns north in places due to the slope of the land/terrain. I am sure north flowing rivers like Russia's Ob, Lena, and Yenisey rivers turn south in places due to same reason.
For a woman to become pregnant without having sex is not a mystery....I would explain how it is done but I don't want to risk censure so I won't.
I'll recap a part of a plot from an Indian soap opera because it really captures the essence of what I'm talking about:chownah wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:51 amOh, good. Now I understand. I know that english is not your first language....when you say "People who are into science seem to have the most intense penchant for superstition ..." it is usually taken to mean that scientists are superstitious.
Thanks for the clarification.
Now, can you explain what this has to do with what I was talking about?
But this is EXACTLY the topic of this thread
This is exactly the point I want to make in this thread.You can see this pattern in scientifically minded people who omit some vital part of a ritual, thus effectively making it a superstition.
Like when people try to come up with common-sense explanation for how a bowl could float in the opposite direction of a river's flow, completely omitting the relevance of whose that bowl was, who spoke of it, and in what circumstances.
And it says:
Even if the river would, for some entirely mundane physical reason change direction of the flow, this should still have no bearing on how a devoted Buddhist understands the story about the Buddha's bowl floating upwards the stream on a special occasion.
So, now you are saying that anyone who does not understand the story in the way you think it should be understood is not devoted? ....just like you were saying that you understand my mother-in-laws understanding about her superstitions even though you have never met her or even heard anything about her......what kind of bs is this?binocular wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:24 amAnd it says:Even if the river would, for some entirely mundane physical reason change direction of the flow, this should still have no bearing on how a devoted Buddhist understands the story about the Buddha's bowl floating upwards the stream on a special occasion.
Dhammanando wrote: ↑Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:20 amThe power of augury operating via dhammaniyāma, prophetic dreams, earthquakes occurring at pivotally auspicious moments, marvels wrought by saccakiriyās, etc. are all impeccably Buddhist, even if they happen not to find favour with protestant Buddhists of the drearily modernist sort.
One doesn't have to know someone personally in order to recognize that an action they do is a ritual. Ask any anthropologist.chownah wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2018 3:19 amIt really is remarkable that you seem to think that you understand what my thai mother in law was teaching me and her attitudes toward money.......you must be clairvoyant in the extreme since you don't know who I am or who my thai mother in law was.......but I guess you know better than me.....
It was never the issue here until you made it an issue. I made a simple post and you have a better explanation of my mother in laws attitudes (a woman you have never met and know absolutely nothing about) than I have.....again you are slipping into some delusional alternate reality taking this thread off topic.....binocular wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 6:21 pmOne doesn't have to know someone personally in order to recognize that an action they do is a ritual. Ask any anthropologist.chownah wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2018 3:19 amIt really is remarkable that you seem to think that you understand what my thai mother in law was teaching me and her attitudes toward money.......you must be clairvoyant in the extreme since you don't know who I am or who my thai mother in law was.......but I guess you know better than me.....
Whether a particular person has performed such a ritual with a mind of superstition or not is another matter, and was never the issue here.
I have a question for you. Why did you ask the question "Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?"SarathW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:17 amThis is exactly the point I want to make in this thread.You can see this pattern in scientifically minded people who omit some vital part of a ritual, thus effectively making it a superstition.
Like when people try to come up with common-sense explanation for how a bowl could float in the opposite direction of a river's flow, completely omitting the relevance of whose that bowl was, who spoke of it, and in what circumstances.