The proper yoga as described in Hindu scriptures consists of 8 limbs:
Ashtangha Yoga or the eight limbs of Yoga-
The proper yoga as described in Hindu scriptures consists of 8 limbs:
i) Ahimsa: Nonviolence (this also includes not eating meat)
ii) Satya: truthfulness
iii) Asteya: non-stealing
iv) Brahmacharya: chastity, sexual restraint
v) Aparigraha: non-avarice, non-possessiveness
i) Shaucha: purity of mind, speech and body
ii) Santosha: contentment
iii) Tapas: austerity, self-discipline
iv) Svadhyaya: study of Vedas(Holy books of Hindus)
v) Ishvarapranidhana: contemplation of the Ishvara (God)
Asana is a posture that one can hold for a period of time, staying relaxed, steady, comfortable and motionless. The aasana postures are believed to have been given by Mahadeva (Hindu God) himself. Hatha Yoga Pradipika mentions 84 aasanas.
More from Health
Thread on how atheism leads to mental retardation (backed with medical citations🧵💉)
To start with, atheism is an unnatural self-contradicting doctrine.
Medical terminology proves that human beings are naturally pre-disposed to believe in God. Oxford scientists assert that people are "born believers".
https://t.co/kE0Fi588yn
https://t.co/OqyXcGIMJn
It should be known that atheism could never produce an intelligently-functioning society and neither ever will.
Contrastingly, Islam produced several intellectuals & polymaths, was on the forefront of scientific development, boasting 100% literacy
It is also scientifically proven that atheism led to lesser scientific curiosity and scientific frauds, which is also why atheists incline to pseudo-science.
Whereas, religion in general and Islam in particular boosted education.
https://t.co/19Onc84u3g
Atheists are also likely to affected by pervasive mental and developmental disorders like high-functioning autism.
Cognitive Scientists and renowned Neurologists found that more atheism is leads to greater autism.
https://t.co/zRjEyFoX3P
To start with, atheism is an unnatural self-contradicting doctrine.
Medical terminology proves that human beings are naturally pre-disposed to believe in God. Oxford scientists assert that people are "born believers".
https://t.co/kE0Fi588yn
https://t.co/OqyXcGIMJn
It should be known that atheism could never produce an intelligently-functioning society and neither ever will.
Contrastingly, Islam produced several intellectuals & polymaths, was on the forefront of scientific development, boasting 100% literacy
If the Muslim world had not existed, there literally would be no technology/achievements today.
— Starks\u262a\ufe0f\U0001f1f9\U0001f1e9 (@MegaIntelIect) January 8, 2021
Science only developed because of Islam, Europe should be grateful to Islam for civilizing their barbaric cult.
Source: The Caliph's Splendor, Pg 204-05 https://t.co/HVypO52Tpc pic.twitter.com/00jYSbaDSs
It is also scientifically proven that atheism led to lesser scientific curiosity and scientific frauds, which is also why atheists incline to pseudo-science.
Whereas, religion in general and Islam in particular boosted education.
https://t.co/19Onc84u3g
Atheists are also likely to affected by pervasive mental and developmental disorders like high-functioning autism.
Cognitive Scientists and renowned Neurologists found that more atheism is leads to greater autism.
https://t.co/zRjEyFoX3P
You May Also Like
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
