PPCAC Prout Pacific Coast Action Committee

08/20/2026

368 - Prout’s key banking policies

PROUT (Progressive Utilization Theory), the socio-economic theory developed by P.R. Sarkar, proposes a cooperative, decentralized, and non-profit-oriented banking system aimed at circulating money for productive use, preventing exploitation, and supporting local economies rather than allowing wealth concentration or speculation.

Key Banking Policies

• Managed by cooperatives: The bulk of the banking system (local and commercial banking) is run by cooperatives. These act as both savings and lending institutions for individuals and collectives. People naturally form cooperative banks to deposit earnings and access credit for productive needs (e.g., equipment or infrastructure for other cooperatives). Businesspeople are not to manage banks, based on historical experience that profit-driven operators have often endangered ordinary depositors’ savings through risky or self-interested investments.

• Central/federal bank under government control: Only the central or federal bank is controlled by the immediate (local) government. Its primary role is guaranteeing the currency.

• Non-profit, service-oriented operation: Banks function as non-profit cooperative organizations. Ideally, after covering necessary expenses, the balance is zero. The core mission is to “keep money rolling” (in continuous productive circulation) rather than allowing it to become stagnant pools of personal or speculative wealth. Money’s value increases with its mobility and productive use.

• Currency and monetary policy: Currency must be backed by a proportionate amount of physical bullion (typically gold) held in reserves. Governments and banks must not print money indiscriminately without corresponding reserves. This is intended as a safeguard against inflation, which PROUT views as a tool that enriches the wealthy while harming ordinary people and distorting trade. Central banks should be prepared to redeem currency in gold equivalent.

• Support for the broader PROUT economy: Cooperative banks facilitate lending for productive purposes (especially to other cooperatives in agriculture, production, and services) and help maintain economic decentralization and local self-reliance. They align with PROUT’s goals of guaranteeing minimum necessities, steadily raising the purchasing power of ordinary people, and preventing capital drain from local economies. Speculation and pure profit-seeking in finance are opposed.

• Rejection of speculative markets: PROUT holds that speculation allows a few to accumulate wealth without contributing to real production or the collective welfare. It distorts prices, creates artificial booms and busts, drains capital from productive local economies, and concentrates economic power. Sarkar and PROUT sources describe such activities as part of the “demonic greed” that harms ordinary people.

These policies form part of PROUT’s three-tiered industrial structure (key industries under local government on a no-profit/no-loss basis, medium and large enterprises as cooperatives, and small private enterprises) and its emphasis on economic democracy over pure political democracy or capitalist/communist models. Sources for these points include Sarkar’s discourses compiled in works such as Proutist Economics and PROUT in a Nutshell, as summarized on proutist sites.

PROUT strongly rejects speculative markets as exploitative and advocates banning them.
In the Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT) of P.R. Sarkar, speculative markets—including stock exchanges, futures, commodities speculation, and similar activities aimed at profiting from price fluctuations rather than productive use—are viewed as a major source of economic exploitatio

How This Fits with Banking and the Broader Economy
• Cooperative banks (the main form under PROUT) would operate without outside profit-seeking shareholders. Interest rates would be nominal/service-oriented, and the goal is circulating money for productive purposes (supporting cooperatives, local enterprises, infrastructure) rather than speculation or wealth hoarding. This structure is designed to eliminate the conditions that fuel speculative markets.
• Capital is kept circulating productively within decentralized socio-economic units. Export of essential resources or capital drain for speculative gain is opposed.
• The overall aim is economic democracy: raising the purchasing power of ordinary people, guaranteeing minimum necessities, and maximizing rational utilization of resources—not generating paper profits through market timing or leverage.

In short, under PROUT, finance serves production and collective welfare on a cooperative, non-profit (or service) basis. Speculative markets, which treat money and assets primarily as tools for private gain via price movements, are incompatible with this vision and would be phased out or banned.

08/11/2026

367 - Neo-humanist critique of a Muslim NATO

https://open.substack.com/pub/alexkrainer/p/muslim-nato-marks-the-end-of-us-hegemony?r=1nrfb0&utm_medium=ios

From a neo-humanist angle, this Mecca pact looks more like a symptom of the same old problem than a real step forward.

Neo-humanism starts from the idea that real security and progress come from expanding the circle of concern—across nations, religions, and even species—rather than drawing harder lines around identity groups.

Building a collective defense arrangement primarily around shared religion and “Islamic solidarity,” even if officials insist it’s purely defensive and open to others, still risks hardening those lines.

It treats security as something that flows from tribal or civilizational belonging instead of from practical interdependence, reason, and shared human interests.

The practical critique is straightforward. These three states have real capabilities and legitimate reasons to want more reliable deterrence given the chaos with Iran and questions about American reliability.

But history shows religious or civilizational military blocs rarely stay purely defensive for long.

They tend to amplify zero-sum thinking, create pressure to take sides in local disputes, and make de-escalation harder once something goes wrong. Turkey’s existing NATO membership already creates dual obligations; adding a parallel religiously framed structure just multiplies the potential for contradiction and miscalculation.

A neo-humanist view would rather see energy go into institutions that reduce the need for such pacts in the first place—stronger regional diplomacy, economic ties that raise the cost of conflict for everyone, and planetary-scale problem-solving on things like energy, climate, and technology that actually affect daily human lives. Military alliances framed around identity usually postpone those harder conversations.
It’s understandable that countries want insurance. The deeper question is whether more NATO-style structures, just with different membership, actually expand human freedom and flourishing or simply rearrange the same power games under a different banner.

All three signatories of the Mecca Joint Force Agreement have the same enemy and their position can’t be changed with simple bribery. In hindsight, this will prove to have been a watershed event.

08/09/2026

Prout’a Theory of History

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

08/01/2026

366 - Neo-humanist comments about Radicalization of the Smithsonian

https://open.substack.com/pub/public/p/radicalization-of-universities-behind?r=1nrfb0&utm_medium=ios

A neo-humanist perspective on the radicalization of the Smithsonian (particularly the National Museum of American History) starts from core commitments: the dignity and agency of individual human beings, the pursuit of truth through evidence rather than ideology, the value of civilizational achievement as a shared inheritance, and skepticism toward any framework that reduces history primarily to power struggles, oppressor/oppressed binaries, or tools for contemporary political transformation.

Core diagnosis

Institutional capture of this kind is anti-humanist in the deepest sense. Classical humanism (and its neo variants that reaffirm reason, evidence, and human potential amid modern pressures) treats museums and universities as places for the increase and diffusion of knowledge—not as instruments for “social justice,” “restorative history,” “decolonization,” or reframing the national story as one of systemic wickedness. When leadership explicitly describes history as “a prime tool of social justice,” commits to dismantling “traditional celebratory narratives,” trains staff with toolkits drawing on critical theory and Marcuse-style ideas, and orients exhibits around identity categories, migration as moral imperative, gender ideology, and national “horror and pain,” the institution has shifted from scholarship to activism.

This is not neutral expansion of the record. It is a substitution: the messy, progressive, often contradictory human story of invention, self-correction, rights expansion, and material improvement is subordinated to a moral pedagogy of guilt, grievance, and transformation. Visitors (including families and school groups) are treated less as citizens inheriting a complex republic and more as subjects to be re-educated. That is the opposite of humanism’s confidence in people’s capacity to judge for themselves when given accurate information.

Why this matters humanistically

• Agency and progress: Humanist traditions celebrate human capacity to overcome constraints—slavery, poverty, disease, tyranny—through reason, institutions, science, and moral argument. Narratives that treat the American experiment as defined by “white supremacy, slavery, conquest, exclusion…” while downplaying the unprecedented scale of liberty, prosperity, and self-critique flatten that agency into permanent structural sin. Neo-humanism rejects both triumphalist myth and permanent-victim mythology; it insists on the full empirical record, including achievement and failure.

• Universalism over balkanization: Extending humanism means affirming one human family capable of shared standards, not fragmenting it into identity silos whose primary relation is dominance and resistance. Exhibits and educational materials that center group grievance or redefine core categories (citizenship, s*x, historical figures) in activist terms undermine the universalist premise.

• Institutions as trusts, not weapons: Publicly funded cultural institutions exist to transmit knowledge across generations, not to “transform America.” When they adopt interpretive plans prioritizing “race and identity,” “gender and s*xuality,” “immigration,” and “economic inequality” as the core issues, and create centers for “restorative” or decolonizing work, they breach that trust. Taxpayers and citizens of every background are entitled to an honest, non-partisan accounting of the past, not a curated political instrument.

• Evidence over theory: The White House report and subsequent hearings document specific patterns—mission statements rewritten toward empowerment and justice rather than understanding; staff training in social-action toolkits; selective emphasis and omissions; partnerships and language that track contemporary progressive priorities. A neo-humanist response does not require denying real historical injustices; it requires rejecting the claim that those injustices exhaust or define the national story, and that museums must therefore become sites of ongoing ideological remediation.

Constructive neo-humanist stance

Restore the original charge: increase and diffuse knowledge. Prioritize primary sources, chronological and thematic balance, technological and political innovation, the expansion of rights as a human achievement, and the concrete lives of individuals over abstract systems of power. Allow complexity—including criticism of founders, the reality of slavery and conquest, immigration’s dual character, and cultural change—without subordinating everything to a presentist moral hierarchy. Demand transparency about interpretive frameworks and end the use of taxpayer-supported institutions for partisan or theoretical activism.

Humanism has always been a defense of the human against reduction—whether religious dogmatism, totalitarian ideology, or today’s identity-driven historicism. The radicalization documented at the Smithsonian is a clear instance of the latter. Reclaiming the institution for truth-seeking and shared inheritance is not reaction; it is the consistent application of neo-humanist principles.

If museums continue to refuse to reform themselves, Congress should cut their funding

07/31/2026

Prout’s Block-Level Planning

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

07/28/2026

https://youtube.com/-p9m3r?si=3sxWRnXoITpRcyK5

Videos on Applied Prout and Neo-Humanism

07/20/2026

382- Proutist Critique of the Article: “Democrats Embrace Gramsci’s Marxist Playbook for America”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/jul/14/democrats-embrace-gramscis-marxist-playbook-america/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialFlow&fbclid=IwZnRzaATGV6lwZG9mAWZkaWQWUKsCap27YzfVn9Y-Q_Tz23_rr5cIfGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR5aAagldGSl34zD6BasIg9trtZOENtvPwyDIxU2FYCFFFZdunGzJEXa3EgzFA_aem_ehsAeeKzGXiA962UxEvAmQ

The Washington Times piece (see link above) by Emilio T. Gonzalez frames contemporary Democratic Party shifts—cultural emphasis on DEI, education, media influence, border policies, and institutional infiltration—as a Gramscian strategy of cultural hegemony preceding political dominance.

It portrays this as a stealthy Marxist conquest of Western institutions, warning of an existential threat to the U.S. Constitution versus “The Communist Manifesto.”

From a Proutist (Progressive Utilization Theory) perspective, developed by Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, this analysis captures real dynamics of ideological and institutional capture but remains trapped in a binary capitalist-vs.-Marxist lens. MmIt misses Prout’s deeper diagnosis of socio-economic cycles, exploitation across systems, and the need for a holistic, humanistic alternative that integrates physical, mental, and spiritual progress.

Prout’s View of Marxism and Gramsci’s Innovations

Sarkar respected Marx as a thoughtful analyst of capitalism’s exploitative nature and internal contradictions but critiqued Marxism sharply.

Marx’s materialist dialectic and class struggle overlook spiritual dimensions, human consciousness evolution, and non-economic motivations.

Communism’s failures (e.g., centralized power in the USSR’s Gosplan) stemmed from defective ideas like proletarian dictatorship, classless society via state control, and suppression of individual merit—leading to oppression rather than liberation.

Gramsci refined Marxism by stressing cultural hegemony: dominant classes maintain power not just through economics or force but by shaping norms, institutions (education, media, civil society), and “common sense.”

This “war of position” (long-term cultural infiltration) over pure “war of maneuver” (direct revolution) explains why classical Marxism stalled in the West.

Proutists see value in Gramsci’s insight into cultural power but reject its materialist roots.

Culture isn’t merely a superstructure for class war; it must serve Neo-Humanism—universal love extending to all beings, transcending narrow sentiments (e.g., class, race, nationalism).

True hegemony should arise from sadvipras (enlightened, integrated leaders who are spiritual, intellectual, brave, and service-oriented), guiding society beyond exploitative cycles.

Strengths of the Article from a Proutist Lens

• Institutional capture is real: Prout echoes concerns about elites (intellectuals serving capitalists or ideologues) dominating education, media, and policy.

Sarkar’s social cycle theory describes how the vipra (intellectual) era can devolve into dogma and exploitation, followed by vaeshya (capitalist) dominance.

“Woke” cultural shifts can function as psycho-economic exploitation—using intellectual tools to divide people, erode cohesion, and centralize influence, much like how capitalists use money.

• Erosion of cohesion:

Policies undermining borders, family, religion, military readiness, and electoral integrity weaken collective welfare. Prout prioritizes maximum utilization of resources and rational distribution (guaranteeing minimum necessities to all, with incentives for merit, while preventing harmful accumulation). Fragmentation hinders this.

• Binary warning: The article’s Constitution vs. Manifesto framing highlights incompatibility.

Prout agrees neither pure capitalism (unlimited accumulation, profit-driven exploitation) nor communism (state overreach, suppression of diversity) works.

Proutist Deeper Critique

The article is partisan and reactive, defending a status quo that Prout also criticizes. It doesn’t address root causes:

1. Both systems exploit:

Capitalism concentrates wealth, leading to economic depression via “stoppages in the rolling of money.”

The article downplays how corporate power and consumerism already dominate culture (commercial hegemony).

Gramscian tactics on the left mirror vaeshya strategies on the right—both fail maximum utilization for all.

2. Missing spiritual and cyclical depth:

Prout’s Law of Social Cycle shows societies rotate through laborer → warrior → intellectual → capitalist eras, with revolution or evolution possible via conscious sadvipra leadership.

Cultural battles are symptoms; without spiritual base (meditation, ethics, Neo-Humanism), they breed new exploiters.

Marxism/Gramsci remain materialist, ignoring consciousness evolution toward universalism.

3. Decentralization and economic democracy:

Prout advocates socio-economic zones for self-sufficiency, cooperatives as the main sector (with key industries public and small enterprises private), and local control.

Neither Democratic cultural leftism nor Republican defenses of markets prioritize this.

True reform requires decentralizing economic power, not just cultural pushback.

4. Rational distribution over ideology:

Guarantee minimums (food, shelter, education, healthcare) to all; provide progressive amenities and incentives for merit (atiriktam—surplus to the capable).

Avoid uniformity (communism’s flaw) or unchecked greed (capitalism’s). DEI-like efforts can devolve into new dogmas if not grounded in merit, service, and universal welfare.

5. Positive path: Prout calls for cultural renaissance through education, inspiration, and spiritual practice—not fear or crocodiles, but constructive struggle.

Change consciousness via mass awakening, not elite institutional wars. Reject violence; build via cooperatives, ethical leadership, and progressive utilization varying by time, place, and person.

The article rightly alarms at cultural subversion risking further erosion of liberty and cohesion. However, a Proutist response goes beyond defending the Constitution or “pushing back hard” against one side.

It demands a third way: economic democracy via Prout, guided by sadvipras, fostering all-round (physical-mental-spiritual) development for the entire human family.

Neither Gramsci’s playbook nor unchecked capitalism serves humanity’s potential. The solution lies in progressive, decentralized structures rooted in universalism—utilizing resources rationally for collective welfare, not partisan conquest.

This avoids feeding “crocodiles” by transcending the cycle altogether toward a society of coordinated cooperation and spiritual humanism.

Italian communist philosopher Antonio Gramsci would be proud.

07/12/2026

381 -A Neo-Humanist Critique of Oregon’s latest actions to Help Students of Color

Oregon Governor Signs Bill Removing Reading, Writing, and Math Requirements for High School Graduation to Help ‘Students of Color’.

Gov. Tina Kotek has signed legislation eliminating core reading, writing, and math proficiency standards for high school diplomas.

She move aims to boost graduation rates for students of color but critics slam it as lowering standards and harming long-term success for all kids.

From a Neo-humanist perspective, this policy (and the broader pattern it represents) is a profound mistake that undermines human potential, truth-seeking, and genuine equity.

Neo-humanism, in the spirit of expanding humanism through reason, universal compassion, scientific understanding, and the pursuit of individual and collective flourishing, prioritizes the development of every person’s full cognitive, ethical, and creative capacities.

It rejects tribal divisions that assign different standards based on group identity, seeing all humans as part of one interconnected endeavor to understand and improve the universe.

Lowering measurable standards in foundational skills like reading, writing, and mathematics does the opposite:

it harms the very students it claims to help, erodes societal trust in education, and signals a retreat from rigorous truth-seeking.

The Core Issue: Competence Over Credentials

High school diplomas should certify a baseline of functional literacy and numeracy.

These are not arbitrary hurdles but gateways to autonomy, further learning, employment, and informed citizenship.

Reading enables access to knowledge; writing enables clear reasoning and expression; math builds logical thinking, problem-solving, and quantitative literacy essential for science, technology, economics, and daily life.

Removing proficiency
demonstrations (even if course credits remain) decouples the diploma from demonstrated mastery.

Empirically, Oregon’s academic outcomes have been concerning for years, with proficiency rates lagging post-pandemic and disparities persisting across groups.

Extending pauses on “Essential Skills” assessments (originally from SB 744 in 2021, extended through 2027-2028) was framed as addressing disproportionate impacts on “students of color,” English learners, and others.

Proponents argue it removes barriers and boosts graduation rates (which have risen).

Critics rightly note it masks failure to teach effectively rather than confronting root causes like instructional quality, family environments, curriculum choices, or early interventions.

Recent viral claims about Gov. Tina Kotek signing a brand-new bill appear overstated or satirical recirculations of the ongoing policy; the core approach of de-emphasizing standardized proficiency for graduation has been in place.

The intent—to help specific groups—does not excuse the outcome.

Neo-Humanist Critique:
Harm Disguised as Compassion

• Universal Human Dignity vs. Paternalistic Lowering of the Bar: Neo-humanism cultivates love and respect for all by fostering excellence and self-reliance, not by redefining success downward to fit group averages or past inequities.

Treating “students of color” (a broad, heterogeneous category) as a monolith needing permanently relaxed standards infantilizes them and implies inherent incapacity, which contradicts evidence of individual variation and the success of rigorous education in diverse populations worldwide.

It violates the principle of equal moral worth by applying different expectations, breeding resentment and undermining solidarity.

All students deserve high expectations because all are capable of growth through effort, good teaching, and support.

• Truth-Seeking and Evidence: Education must align with reality.

Cognitive skills are measurable and predictive of life outcomes (e.g., literacy for civic participation, math for technical fields).

Ignoring this in favor of “equity” metrics—such as graduation parity over competence—creates a illusion of progress.

Real disparities in outcomes often trace to earlier gaps in preparation, not the assessments themselves.

Effective humanism uses data to close gaps through better early reading instruction (e.g., phonics), targeted tutoring, cultural emphasis on achievement, and accountability—not by pretending the gaps don’t matter at diploma time.

Oregon’s approach risks signaling that basic skills are optional, devaluing the diploma for everyone, including high-achievers from all backgrounds.

• Long-Term Flourishing: Students graduate without verified skills face steeper challenges in college, trades, or jobs requiring literacy/numeracy.

Employers and higher education notice. This disproportionately harms the disadvantaged students it targets, trapping them in cycles of limited opportunity while wealthier families supplement with private tutoring or better schools.

It also weakens society’s overall capacity for innovation and problem-solving—core to understanding the universe.

Neo-humanism demands policies that expand human potential universally, not redistribute lowered expectations.

• Moral and Social Costs: Framing standards as racist or harmful to minorities echoes “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

It divides rather than unites, politicizes education, and erodes public confidence.

Teachers and schools should be empowered to deliver mastery, not excused from it.

Genuine compassion invests in fixing teaching, family support, and incentives for excellence from the earliest grades.

Better Path Forward

Neo-humanist education would prioritize:

• Rigorous, evidence-based instruction in core skills for all students early on.

• High, uniform standards with robust support (tutoring, mentoring, flexible pathways) to help everyone meet them.

• Accountability focused on outcomes and growth, not identity.

• Cultural celebration of intellectual achievement across all groups, rejecting narratives that equate standards with oppression.

Oregon’s policy, like similar efforts elsewhere, trades short-term optics for long-term harm.

It fails the test of compassion because true care equips every individual with the tools of freedom and understanding, not a hollow credential.

Human progress depends on raising capabilities, not redefining inadequacy as success. The focus should be on excellence for humanity’s shared future.

07/09/2026

380- Sarkar on Ecology: The Forest Must Be Saved


Led by the urge of self-interest, human beings are neglecting ecology at every step.

We have to remember that the sky, the air, birds, hills, wild animals, reptiles, insects and flies, fish, marine creatures and aquatic plants are all bound by an inalienable bond.

Human beings are only a part of that vast common society. No one can survive to the exclusion of others. Not even humanity.

By foolishly destroying the forest, wild animals, annihilating the fish and the birds, no possible human interest could be served.

Whoever is born on this earth dies. One only survives on this earth for the period allotted to one by nature.

As a result of human folly, many creatures and geological phenomena will not survive for that period.

Long before their natural end, they will be swallowed up by eternity. Humanity through its own madness has annihilated numerous creatures and objects and has thus prepared its own funeral pyre.

This act of sheer short-sightedness is intolerable. People will have to be alert henceforth. They must shape their thoughts, works and plans in accordance with the science of ecology. There is no other way left open to them.

Due to humanityʼs heedlessness, not only hilsa and mango fish but also many other creatures are about to disappear from this earth.

Human beings will have to undergo penance for this. I have said a little earlier that there is an inalienable bond among all beings created by nature, and each of those beings maintains natureʼs laws in one manner or another.

In my childhood days I used to hear that hilsa fish appear in greater numbers every third year, in still greater numbers in the tenth year, and in even greater numbers at an interval of every thirty years.

Since presently human beings are violating the laws of ecology, the entire natural order is not functioning properly.

The law governing the hilsa fish is also applicable to the mango [fruit]. To enhance the production of mangoes, people have adopted many unnatural methods. Hence that particular law of nature has also ceased to function. In our childhood we were told, “With mango comes the paddy, with tamarind the flood.”(1) Nowadays such patterns no longer occur.(2)

The root meaning of the word kot́arában is a forest where there are plenty of trees that have kot́ar [holes]. In common usage kot́arában indicates a forest of trees having less commercial value, or which are of limited use.

Trees that have holes hardly serve any useful purpose. They cannot be used for manufacturing quality furniture. Their wood is also cheap. As mentioned, in common usage kot́arában stands for a jungle of commercially non-valuable timber; the trees of the Sundarbans are mostly of this variety.

It is not that there are no good or valuable trees in the Sundarbans, but their number is very limited. However, the trees of the forests belonging to the Jalpaiguri region are mostly of good quality.

Of course, there are some trees of non-commercial variety as well. Most trees of the Bankura and western Ráŕh forest areas are of the sal [Shorea robusta] species.

The sal species are very valuable trees. Hence the annual financial return of a square kilometre area of forest in the Jalpaiguri region is eight to ten times that of an equivalent area in the Sundarbans.

Again, the yearly financial return of a square kilometer area of forest in the Ráŕh region is about one and a half to two times that of the Jalpaiguri forest region.

So long as the zamindary system was prevalent, the forests of the Ráŕh region were well-maintained and well-protected.

With the abolition of the zamindary system, the forests of the Ráŕh(3) region – what to speak of Ráŕh, all government-owned forests in the entire state of Bengal – are on the verge of being demolished.

The rainfall in the country is decreasing… floods are more frequent, and land erosion is increasing. The wealth of the forests is fast waning. With the dwindling number of birds and animals, the triangular balance and harmony among the trees, wild animals and human beings is about to be disrupted.

The air is becoming polluted as the ratio of oxygen in the air diminishes. Toxicity in the environment is spiralling, with a resulting higher incidence of cancer, brain diseases, heart ailments and eye problems. The water table is sinking, and the capacity of storage tanks, wells and water reservoirs has been curtailed.

Liveliness and emotional charm are gradually disappearing from human minds, and mental rudeness is magnified at a rapid pace.

Yes, let me come back to the main point. If human beings are to survive, if the animal world is to be saved, if the grace and beauty of nature are to be preserved, the forests must be protected. The longer forests remain covered with the abundance of nature, the greater the material benefits for human beings, animals and birds.(4)

Footnotes

[1] Áme dhán teṋtule ván. –Trans.

[2] The foregoing two paragraphs are from Varńa Vicitrá Part 2, Discourse 15.

[3] Ráŕh means a land of laterite soil in south western part of Bengal. –Trans.

[4] The foregoing three paragraphs are fr