丙午年，有些什么事发生？

有的，道家 和 道教 的英文翻译不同，而且区别很重要，对应的是中国语境中“哲学传统”与“宗教体系”的差别。 一、道家 的英文翻译 ✅ Daoism / Taoism (philosophical Daoism) 最常见、也最规范的译法是： Daoism（拼音式，现代学术界主流） Taoism（威妥玛拼音，旧式但仍常见） 👉 当“道家”指思想流派、哲学传统时，常用： Philosophical Daoism （哲学道家） 使用场景 老子、庄子 《道德经》《庄子》 无为、自然、齐物、反功利 作为哲学、思想体系讨论 📌 示例： Laozi and Zhuangzi are central figures of philosophical Daoism. Daoism emphasizes wu wei (non-action) and harmony with nature. 二、道教 的英文翻译 ✅ Daoism / Taoism (religious Daoism) 道教在英文中仍然用 Daoism / Taoism，但必须加限定语，否则容易混淆： Religious Daoism （宗教道教） 使用场景 张道陵、天师道 道观、道士、符箓、斋醮 内丹、外丹、炼气、神仙体系 宗教组织、仪式与信仰实践 📌 示例： Religious Daoism developed elaborate rituals, priesthoods, and cosmology. Daoist temples are important centers of religious Daoism. 三、为什么英文容易混淆？ 因为英文里只有一个词： Daoism / Taoism 而中文有清晰区分： 道家 → 思想 / 哲学 道教 → 宗教 / 制度 / 修行体系 所以在严肃写作中，英文通常通过 修饰语 来区分。 四、常见但不推荐的译法 ⚠️ 中文 错误 / 不推荐译法 原因 道家 Daoist Philosophy School 不地道 道教 Tao Religion 学术上不用 道家 Lao-Zhuang School 太局限 五、最规范的对照总结表 中文 标准英文 说明 道家 Philosophical Daoism 老庄思想 道教 Religious Daoism 宗教体系 道 Dao (Tao) 核心概念，不翻 道士 Daoist priest 道观 Daoist temple 六、学术语境中的一句“标准说法” Scholars usually distinguish between philosophical Daoism (associated with Laozi and Zhuangzi) and religious Daoism, which developed organized rituals, institutions, and pantheons. 如果你愿意，我也可以： 帮你润色一段英文学术文本，避免道家/道教混淆 或比较 Confucianism / Ruism（儒家） 的类似翻译问题 丙午年，有些什么事发生？ “丙午年”每 60 年一次，所以你这个问题要看指的是哪一个丙午年。历史与民间讨论中，最常被提及的是 1966 年丙午，其次是 1906、1846 等。我按常见理解 + 历史脉络给你一个清晰说明。 一、最常被问的：1966 年（丙午年，火马年） 这是现代中国语境里影响最大、讨论最多的丙午年。 1️⃣ 重大历史事件 文化大革命正式开始（1966–1976） 5 月《五一六通知》 红卫兵运动兴起 教育、文化、政治体系剧烈震荡 中国社会结构发生深层断裂 知识分子、传统文化遭到系统性冲击 👉 在历史研究中，1966 丙午年常被视为一个时代的断裂点。 2️⃣ 民间说法：「丙午火马年，不吉」 这是民俗层面，不是科学结论，但影响非常大。 常见说法包括： “火马年多灾多难” “丙午年出生者命硬、克父母” 因此 1966 年出生率明显下降 📌 这个现象在人口统计学上是真实存在的，但原因是： 社会动荡 民俗恐惧 政策与现实压力 而不是“天命”。 3️⃣ 命理象征（文化解释层面） 丙：阳火 午：火 丙午 = 火上加火 在传统象征体系中： 火 → 变动、激烈、破坏、更新 因而被后人事后解释为“应验” ⚠️ 但要强调： 这是文化解释，不是历史因果。 二、其他重要的丙午年 🔹 1906 年（丙午） 清末危机加深 列强势力扩张 革命思潮高涨（距辛亥革命仅 5 年） 铁路、工业、学生运动开始活跃 👉 常被视为旧帝国崩溃前的加速期 🔹 1846 年（丙午） 清道光年间 社会矛盾严重 鸦片问题加剧 为之后的**太平天国运动（1851）**埋下伏笔 三、为什么“丙午年”总被记住？ 不是因为“天干地支有魔力”，而是： 历史选择性记忆 大事件发生后，人们会回头寻找“象征” 丙午 = 火极 → 容易被用来解释“剧烈变化” 一句话总结： 不是丙午年导致动乱，而是动乱发生后，人们记住了丙午年。 四、一句话总结 丙午年 = 每 60 年一次 1966 年丙午：文化大革命开始，影响极深 “火马年不吉”是民俗心理 + 历史创伤的叠加 从学术角度看： 👉 社会结构决定事件，纪年只是标签 如果你愿意，我也可以： 从 道家 / 易学 / 历史社会学三个角度分别解释丙午 或专门分析 1966 丙午为何成为“集体记忆中的禁忌年”

The History of Tantra

In the New York sector, only Ganesha truly understands the history of Tantra. When Ba’Ba’ visited Taiwan and delivered this talk, Ganesha was beside Him. These photographs were presented to demonstrate the antiquity of Chinese civilization. When we interpret the concept of “civilization,” we do so according to the Chinese understanding, rather than the Western definition or framework. When ancient Chinese thinkers explained “civilization,” they consistently approached it from spiritual and mental dimensions, with little or no emphasis on physical or material perspectives.

Marx was right

A group of people get together in an office, a store, a factory, and by complicated coordination of work, they transform raw material, say a lumber and glue into a finished product. Let's call it a chair. And then they sell that and get the money. And what do they do with the money? They use a portion of the money to replace the lumber and the glue and the hammers and the nails that go into production that have been used up. They use another part of the revenue they get from selling chairs to pay the workers their salaries. And then there's a residue. It's called the profit. Sometimes it's called a surplus. It's what's left over when you've sold the chair, taken care of replacing tools and equipment used up, and paying the workers. It's what it's the part that goes to the capitalist, the owner, the entrepreneur, the person who's running the business. And of course, the people who are running the business have every interest in minimizing what they spend on tools, equipment, and raw material, and minimizing what they pay their workers, because the more they minimize those things, the more they'll maximize what's left over. Which goes to them. And to whom do these people give the leftover profits? Well, of course, they give it mostly to themselves. That's why we have rich people, not-so-rich people, and poor people. If you're a worker, you get a wage. If you're a capitalist, you get your cut of the profit. If businesses run to maximize profits, that's what the economics profession says it should be. Well then, the system is run to benefit the profit earners, not the others. The profit earners of 3% of our people. That's what the US Census Department says the capitalists are. The other 97% are the ones who are not the objects of how this system works. Capitalism makes the capitalist rich, and we all know, as Marx shows us, the results. The capitalists want capitalism to spread. They want to get more and more workers working to produce what is left over for them. They are expanding. They don't care what the cost of expansion is. That's their income. They squeeze the worker every chance they get. Long hours, lousy pay, no breaks, and minimal conditions. You know the story you're already living in. And then the capitalists will become very wealthy by getting the profits and having their whole system focus on maximum profits for them. They understand they're surrounded by a sea of people who are not rich, and they worry about those people's envy and bitterness. So they don't want to let those people have the vote. They fought against it. The workers finally got it. When America began as an independent country, only a minority was allowed to vote. You should know that workers had to fight everywhere. And once work of had the vote, now the capitalists said they're the majority. They're 97%. We're 3. We'd better control the politics. So they went and took their money and bought the politicians. We know all about that. Marx did too, and talked about it. The system is very unstable because these workers, these capitalists, may or may not invest their money. It's their freedom, free enterprise. But if they don't invest their money, there are no jobs for the people who depend on them. This is a system of unfairness built into it. Injustice is built into it. Marx was right about something else. He said this system is built, and has built into it expansion. These capitalists are always trying to get more workers build their in industry. If they can't get more workers, if they can't sell the output that they're making, they'll charge output, a new kind of output. They’ll come up with something else. They'll pay people to invent new things so they can hire people and get the profit. Because the more profit you have, the safer you are. The more politicians you can buy, the more protection you have. So the system grows, Marx pointed out. It will produce a world, the unified economy, it's done that. Just like Marx said. He was right again. But he said the way it's gonna do it is contradictory. It's gonna blow itself up even as it grows. Well, how did capitalism grow globally? The answer: Colonialism. The early capitalist countries, Britain, Western Europe, North America, Japan became domineering countries that had to carve up Asia, Africa, and Latin America to control them. You know, we're seeing it again now with Mr. Trump's new interest in Latin America, making the folks down there tremble. They've been here before. And Marx said eventually this domination, this capitalist use of Asia, Africa, Latin America, simply for the labor you could get there for the raw materials, using them for the wealth of Europe and North America. That's why the world looks the way it does today. Very rich in a few places, very poor in most of the others. We have an inequality in the world that's like what you had in ancient Egypt. Capitalism hasn't freed us from inequality; it's just reorganized an inequality, which Marx said it would. And then he predicted that eventually the colonial territories would say we're not tolerating this anymore. Marx also said that the working class in a capitalist country wouldn't tolerate it anymore either. One of them would make labor unions and fight the battle that way. That's in the advanced countries. Another would make colonial revolutions. You know what shook Asia, Africa and Latin America? Still does. Bitter, horrible fights between a colonial power trying to control and the people who don't want to be controlled. If you need an example today, try Gaza. See how that fits or not. Marx was right about most of these things. He was right that capitalism would be technologically very dynamic. Every capitalist has to worry that he'll be outcompeted by another one as long as there's competition. So to get a jump on the one who's trying to get a jump on him. They'll compete, and they'll develop new technologies, particularly the kind that's save on workers, replacing a lot of workers with your machine. Of course, that's horrible for the workers. But as Carl Marx kept showing, capitalism is not designed for the workers. That's a mythology. It tries to create in the mind of the worker, fearing that if the worker understands what's actually going on, they will be anti-system, anti capitalist too. Which is indeed what Marxists have tried to cultivate for the last 150 years with considerable success. Marx was right about a lot. This is a system, Marx said, that carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction. Might the United States that we're living in. Now, be experiencing through the decline of our empire. The decline of our social solidarity as a nation, the bitter divisions racking the country. The fact that the last half dozen wars that the United States has been involved in, the United States has lost. Are these signs of the seeds of your own self-destruction that Marx pointed to? The goods and services we all depend on to lead our lives. The food, the clothing, the shelter, the transportation, education, medical care, all of it. If you look closely at the production, here's how it works. A group of people get together in an office, a store, a factory, and by complicated coordination of work, they transform raw material, say a lumber and glue into a finished product. Let's call it a chair. And then they sell that and get the money. And what do they do with the money? They use a portion of the money to replace the lumber and the glue and the hammers and the nails that go into production that have been used up. They use another part of the revenue they get from selling chairs to pay the workers their salary. And then there's a residue. It's called the profit. Sometimes it's called a surplus. It's what's leftover when you've sold the chair, taken care of replacing tools and equipment used up, taking care of paying the workers. It's what it's the part that goes to the capitalist, the owner, the entrepreneur, the person who's running the business. And of course, the people who are running the business. Have every interest in minimizing what they spend on tools, equipment, and raw material, and minimizing what they pay their workers, because the more they minimize those things, the more they'll maximize what's leftover. Which goes to them. And to whom do these people give the leftover the profits? Well, of course they give it mostly to themselves. That's why we have rich people and not so rich people and poor people. If you're a worker, you get a wage. If you're a capitalist, you get your cut of the profit. If businesses run to maximize profits, and that's what the economics profession says it should be. Well then the system is run to benefit the profit earners, not the others. The profit earners of 3% of our people. That's what the US Census Department says the capitalists are. The other 97% are the ones who are not the objects of how this system works. Capitalism makes the capitalist rich, and we all know, as Marx shows us, the results. The capitalist want capitalism to spread. They want to get more and more workers working to produce what is leftover for them. They are expansion. They don't care what the cost of expansion is. That's their income. They squeeze the worker every chance they get. Long hours, lousy pay, no breaks, minimal condition. You know the story you're already living in. And then the capitalists will become very wealthy by getting the profits and having their whole system focus on maximum profits for them. They understand they're surrounded by a sea of people that are not rich, and they worry about those people's envy and bitterness. So they don't want to let those people have the vote. They fought against it. The workers finally got it. When America begins as an independent countries, only a minority are allowed to vote. You should know that workers had to fight everywhere. And once work of had the vote, now the capitalist said they're the majority. They're 97%. We're 3. We better control the politics. So they went and took their money and bought the politicians. We know all about that. Marx did too, and talked about it. The system is very unstable because these workers, these capitalists, may or may not invest their money. It's their freedom, free enterprise. But if they don't invest their money, there are no jobs for the people who depend on them. This is a system of unfairness built into it. Injustice built into it. Marx was right about something else. He said this system is built, has built into it expansion. These capitalists are always trying to get more workers build their in industry. If they can't get more workers, if they can't sell the output that they're making, they'll charge output, a new kind of output. They’ll come up with something else. They'll pay people to invent new things so they can hire people and get the profit. Because the more profit you have, the safer you are. The more politicians you can buy, the more protection you have. So the system grows, Marx pointed out. It will produce a world, the unified economy, it's done that. Just like Marx said. He was right again. But he said the way it's gonna do it is contradictory. It's gonna blow itself up even as it grows. Well, how did capitalism grow globally? The answer? Colonialism. The early capitalist countries, Britain, Western Europe, North America, Japan became domineering countries who had to carve up Asia, Africa, Latin America to control them. You know, we're seeing it again now with Mr. Trump's new interest in Latin America, making the folks down there tremble. They've been here before. And Marx said eventually this domination, this capitalist use of Asia, Africa, Latin America, simply for the labor you could get there for the raw materials, using them for the wealth of Europe and North America. That's why the world looks the way it does today. Very rich in a few places, very poor in most of the others. We have an inequality in the world that's like what you had in ancient Egypt. Capitalism hasn't freed us from inequality, it's just reorganized an inequality, which Marx said it would. And then he predicted that eventually the colonial territories would say we're not tolerating this anymore. Marx also said the working class in the capitalist country, they wouldn't tolerate it anymore either. One of them would make labor unions and fight the battle that way. That's in the advanced countries. Another would make colonial revolutions. You know what shook Asia, Africa and Latin America? Still does. Bitter, horrible fights between a colonial power trying to control and the people who don't want to be controlled. If you need an example today, try Gaza. See how that fits or not. Marx was right about most of these things. He was right that capitalism would be technologically very dynamic. Every capitalist has to worry that he'll be outcompeted by another one as long as there's competition. So to get a jump on the one who's trying to get a jump on him. They'll compete and they'll develop new technologies, particularly the kind that's save on workers, replace a lot of workers with your machine. Of course, that's horrible for the workers. But as Carl Marx kept showing, capitalism is not designed for the workers. That's a mythology. It tries to create in the mind of the worker, fearing that if the worker understands what's actually going on, they will be anti system, anti capitalist too. Which is indeed what Marxists have tried to cultivate for the last 150 years with considerable success. Marx was right about a lot. This is a system, Marx said, that carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction. Might the United States that we're living in. Now. Be experiencing through the decline of our empire. The decline of our social solidarity as a nation, the bitter divisions racking the country. The fact that the last half dozen wars that the United States has been involved in, the United States has lost. Are these signs of the seeds of your own self destruction that Marx pointed to?

黎智英

黎智英：（这个人该死在监狱）美国的视频, 他参加一个美国的论坛他怎么说美国应该考虑用和动用和属性攻击中国来保卫香港民主. 这种是人讲的话吗？ 有时候政治斗要有一点界线在，这种话怎么会讲出来？在论坛公开讲，讲的面不改其色，我说难听一点的话，汪精卫也不过如此。我本来对他印象是没有特别好，没有特别坏中性。我不敢相信，我亲耳听到，还在论坛上这样讲，如果视频是别人发的，我还怀疑不是美国媒体发的，是讲英文，他英文也不差。我英文也不差，我听得懂，可以吗？ 我想怎么会有这种人呢！

Racism coup in Prama

Racism coup in Prama led by Visha Mitra and Ramesha.Last year, when I had a conflict with Annitsha, Visha Mitra and Ramesha did not ask me what had happened or inquire into the details. They simply announced my punishment. They said that Ganesha could not attend the HOA meeting. I did not know there was a private courthouse in Ananda Marga. Their behavior made me very furious with them. But what could I do? The only thing I could do was ask them what law they were basing their decision on. Then they realized they had no legal basis to make this kind of decision. From their actions, I could see that they were very used to operating their own “private courthouse.”