--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:
>
> The R.veda never says (far less quite clearly) it was a *leafy*
> plant. Neither leaves nor root nor seeds are mentioned -- only
> _am.s'รบ-_ 'stem; sprout'.
The ephedra plant has no leaves, though of course it
has roots, and at the right time of year, seeds. It's
significant that leaves are not mentioned, since when
trying to extract liquid from a plant, the leaves are
usually the juiciest part. However it's not significant
that roots and seeds are not mentioned, if they were not
used in the extraction process. Proponents of the mushroom
theory have to explain why the Zoroastrians still use
ephedra, which if a substitute for what was originally a
mushroom, in no way resembles one, and why S. Indian rituals
have substituted plants those closely resemble ephedra in
appearance.
David