Queries Answered - 1

I devote this post entirely to answer Cartooniac's queries ( am delighted that some of the queries are related to my future posts planned )

Q1. Assuming the ideology of aura idealistically by science, I've a doubt. If babies are born with full intensity of aura and the retention of aura in its original state is tangibly or intangibly achieved, would there be no death?

Retention of Prana permanently, as required for perfect body functioning, is impossible .

Reason: With every activity - with eating , walking, even thinking, some cells die and are recreated. After a period of this destruction and recreation - the system needs to be be overhauled (eg. like a vehicle is serviced ) . This can be done effectively with Pranic methods/ Pranic living. However there is a limit to this overhauling too. Prana will diminish ( however in a very slow/healthy pace if we live in tune with nature. )

Or does aura decline with age?

Right it does ; what we can call normal wear and tear

Why are we going against the lifecycle of nature in remedying the natural process of decline of aura? This fact can be disputed with "why we are succumbing to medicine when sick, if our ultimate stage of living is to die". But science always defies nature in one way or the other. And our scientific minds do not wish to accept the destiny of death no sooner than when it is inevitable. If it is argued that, remedying aura by natural methods is only done to undo the artificial harm caused by us on it, then it cannot be denied that aura remains stable unless we artificially rupture its presence. In that case, I retract to my earlier doubt: "would there be no death if aura is retained in its original form? "But aura being an entity compliant to the changes of Nature, why is there a lookout to restrict and better the aura form?

Please note that any disturbance to the Aura has a direct impact on the physical health . Conversely all ailments ; from the common cold to Cancer ; can be detected and corrected at the Aura level also.

>>>That there is a innate, hardwired, human longing to live & prolong life in a heatlhy, blissful way is also assumed in this blog<<<

Q2. Is aura a means of implicit external cover to nurture the life within, or is aura itself the life? How is aura related to the physical metabolism of the body?

Aura is the "visible" manifestation of Prana. And Prana is life itself. Aura also maintains connectivity to the Seven primary Chakras that lie along the Spinal cord and the millions of "nadis". More on these in coming posts.

Q3. I'm not personally disputing the aura theory, but is there a discernibly rational way in detecting the presence of aura and how its changes affect the physical body?

YES , there is. Details in coming posts as this will require a detailed explanation on the Chakras.

I do agree that naturopathy (if one calls it so) is a highly effective measure deriving nourishment and enrichment of food from Nature itself. But I don't perceive how aura is related to this

Food is essential(?) for living. And life is nothing but Prana. Hence for now , let that explain the connection :)

( However note the question mark above - coz' we are likely to have a post on "Is food really essential ?" )