Silk (Refer Sri Mani's mail)

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

 

ramanuja, "Mani Varadarajan" <manimani wrote:

>

> The Lord and his retinue certainly do look majestic. It is, however,

> unfortunate

> that we please ourselves and think that the Lord is pleased by adorning Him

> with the product of the blood of thousands of silkworms. Somehow I doubt

> this

> is what the shaastras intended.

 

--

 

The Lord adorns sapeetha vasthram which is a vasthram made of golden

thread, and not silk.

 

The Lord wears peethambaram, the yellow vasthram, probably a

vasthram soaked in turmeric water.

 

For ordinary mortals like us, convenience and climate play a role in

determining the cloth to be worn. But when it comes to vedik rituals,

specifications have been given in shastras regarding every detail of

the ritual and this also includes the type of vasthram to be used. As

far as I have enquired or learnt from learned scholars, it has been

invariably mentioned at many places that the vasthram made of cotton

only has to be used in vedik ceremonies.

 

But the custom of using or gifting silk vEshti in marriage and

upanayanam has come into vogue, perhaps to flaunt the affluence and

affordability. If one digs up what the shastras say about most of the

ceremonies, it will be a shocking revelation that most of what is

being bought or gifted have not been mentioned by shastras and silk

has no shastric sanction.

 

One instance, where silk is popular is in the upanayanam ceremony,

where it is customary for the maternal grand father / maternal uncle

to bring / buy silk vasthrams. But there is absolutely no scope to

wear them during the ceremony. That is, nowhere it is mentioned that

the silk vasthram is to be used. The vasthram used is cotton, dyed

yellow by turmeric water.

 

The usage of the silk vEshti during Brhamopadesam is a later

development, but it is not without a flaw. If the rules were to be

strictly followed, the 2 metre Veshti (4 muzham) is not sufficient to

cover the Agni (homa kunda), the Brahma, the couple and the boy. But

people desirous of somehow using these silk vEshti cover only the

couple, at times the father and son only with the vaadhyaar peeping

inside. This is not as per shastras. It requires not less than 12 to

14 metres of cloth to cover the Brahmopadesam which is to be done in

secrecy. Since the silk veshti that is bought is not sufficient,

people skip homa kunda, Brahma and the mother too in their anxiety

(urge?) to somehow use the silk vEshti in the course of the ceremony.

 

Even otherwise, it is an irony of sorts, if the newly born

Brahmachari who has just then vowed to give up all luxuries and pomp,

is going to wear the silk vEshti after the ceremony. If rules of

shastras were to be strictly followed, all that now comes to the

Brahmacharin as gifts or belongings, will automatically be going to

his guru. An important shastric rule that is given a go-by in this

context is the use of rajada-p-paathram (silver vessel) as bhiksha

paathram. Since as per shastras, this will come under the possession

of the guru (in today's parlance Vaadhyaar) with whom the brahmacharin

will be going now, many do not buy this. But the vaadhyaar may not be

interested in using the silk vasthram of the vadu. So no problem in

buying the silk veshti, as it is assured that the vaadhayar will not

claim it!! In my opinion this is how the buying of silk vasthram has

come to stay in upanayanam ceremony.

 

Silk was an exclusive luxury of the rich and the Royals in those

days. It is generally opined that the usage of silk entered our

community, when such vasthrams were gifted by the Royalty to express

their pleasure at the paandithyam of the Brahmins. There is evidence

to show that silk has been worn by the royalty from times of yore,

much before it was said to have entered from China.

 

I came to know from Dr H.P.Devaki, Director of Oriental Research

Centre, Mysore that the use of 'kaushEya vaasam' (the vasthram made

from pupa) had been very much in vogue during Ramayana times, as there

is frequent mention of usage of this vasthram in Valmiki Ramayana. She

also opines that kalidasa's mention of "cheenamshuka eva" (the cloth

from Cheena) is a bit misleading, making us think that silk has

entered India from China. But mention of this in Ramayana makes us

conclude that silk is very much native to India and might have gone

from here to China. It might have been a forgotten thing during the

intermittent period, until it entered again from China as mentioned by

Kalidasa.

 

Now the question of ethics.

 

The last verse of Chandoghya upanishad says in clear terms that one

desirous of moksham is allowed to do only that 'himsa' as approved by

scriptures. This is interpreted by scholars and elders as approval

for animal sacrifice in yajnas only. Silk does not come under this

category. As far as I have heard and enquired, no text justifies or

stipulates the use of silk vasthrams. Even the silk offered in Purna

ahuthi in a homa is not silk but golden vasthram, vasthram made of

gold.

 

Secondly, if we extend the rationale of apportioning the sins of

eating non-vegetarian food as found in astrology texts, namely to be

shared by the one hunts the animal, the one who sells it and the one

who eats it, to wearing of silk, the wearer too shares the sin of

himsa.

 

But the mention of silk in Ramayana may perhaps indicate a cultural

habit, not necessarily approved by shastras.

 

As for another member's opinion,

 

>>>>>ramanuja, Sreenivasan Ramanujam

<sreenivasan wrote:

 That is a good point. But somehow Adiyen feel that those silkworms

have done more punyam than us since they adorn the supreme lord.

<<<<<<<<

 

No this can't be proper logic..

 

Our Bhagawan is one who will make those who die for Him and by Him as

His shanku or some eternal entities to be identified with Him always.

 

Even the vajra kita worms which were once devas die to become sacred

shalagrama to be worshipped as Him!

 

A similar fate does not await the silk worms. So using silk for

oneself and for the Lord must have been a man-made custom only.

 

With humble pranams,

Jayasree saranathan