Is silk madi vasthram?

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

Of the different names for cloth or vasthram (in Tamil, vatthiram),

Thugil is the most common and is also the name which is defined as

having the term 'pattu' as one of its synonyms.

 

According to nigandu,

 

thugil = idaiyal, vEdhagam, yEdagam and pattu.

 

Idaiyal = very thin cloth.

 

vEdhagam = vEga vaiikkappatta pon, i.e., very thin sheet of gold made

malleable by heating.

 

yEdagam = cloth made of fibres drawn from yEdu, or leaf of some vegetation.

 

Pattu = nEthiram (same as Sanskrit nEthram) which is very soft as the

peacock feathers with the eye. That is, pattu is that cloth which is

very soft to touch and to see, as how the peacock feathers look like.

 

Pattu is again of two types according to Choodamani nigandu.

They are paaLidham and kOsigam.

 

paaLidham is a very soft cloth used to cover the top part of the

pandhal (vidhaana seelai)

 

It is kOsigam which has silk moth connection.

Kosigam is that which is derived from kOsakaaram.

kOsakaaram is an ancient Tamil word for silk moth.

 

Since kausheyam is the silk worm's pupa stage in Sanskrit, it is

understood that kOsigam is derived from the Sanskrit word. It is also

known as kausigam in Tamil. (I wonder whether any connection is there

to Kausika muni, Vishwamithra).

 

The following is how the respective terms for vasthram are used.

 

If someone says he is wearing kOsigam, it means he is wearing a cloth

made of silk derived from silk worm.

 

'kOdi' udutthudal means wearing a new vasthram. kOdi means new cloth.

 

Madi is also a tamil word for cloth or vasthram.

 

Madi means pure cloth, or a cloth made pure by maditthal.

 

Maditthal means 'azhitthal', or removal of impurity.

 

There are methods of making this madi mentioned in shastras.

The cloth must be washed in water and dried in vaayu, i.e., not under

the sun, but under a shade.

 

7 types of vaayu present in this Universe, (5 of which are in this

bhoomi and the 6th one is that leading one to pithruyaana and the 7th

one is that leading one to dEvayaana (brahma lokam)) will dry the

cloth making it fit for wearing for vedik purposes. If one has no time

to dry the cloth sufficiently, one can flutter the washed cloth 7

times in the air and it is then considered madi or purified for

wearing.

 

If one enquires about how the grand father or great grand father had

lived in this vasthram matter, it will be known that none of them wore

vasthram new or fresh from the weaver's place. They used to wash and

dry it before wearing even for the first time.

 

Even the strict vediks will not advise you to wear a factory fresh

vEshti but ask you to wash and dry it for wearing for any vedik

ceremony. It happens in marriages and it happens in upanayanam.

 

The purifying is done by washing and drying. What is the rationale of

this? Is not the cloth already pure as it is made hygienically from

factories and made under best possible pure conditions?

 

The following is what adiyEn understands by putting together the facts

known to adiyEn.

 

In those days vasthrams were made from vegetation, especially from cotton.

In ancient works in tamil, the term cloth is denoted by 'panju' or 'panji'.

 

There is a reference in a pura naanUru verse about the 'muttram' where

cotton (panju)is dried.

 

Another verse says about 'panji kaLaiyaa-p-puNNar', meaning 'like the

cloth (panji) on a wound, it hurts'

 

Cotton has been the source of cloth making.

 

What is this cotton?

It is a part of a live tree.

Any living thing has a discharge of energy or aura around it.

So too the cotton ball.

When it is plucked, that life energy or aura around it starts decaying.

 

It is like this.

 

It is a proven fact that all people possess aura. When a person dies,

this aura decays or something of a decaying nature must be setting in.

That is perhaps why death-theettu is removed by water (taking bath).

Even if a person is not related to the dead one, if that person

happens to be anywhere near a dead body, he has to purify himself by

bath. (The same logic fits in cleansing by water during and after

mensus, since it is about a change in the aural position of the woman

with a dead cell with all its subsidiary energy-items, which could

have otherwise become a living organism, getting washed out of the

body during mensus.)

 

Since every living organism has this aura, it is assumed that the

plucked cotton ball also has aura in some decayed or something still

sticking- to- it- nature. It then becomes logical to assume that

without removing this impurity, a vEdik would not like to wear it even

if it is a brand new vasthram.

 

Later with every wash the general purity of the vasthram is ensured.

 

That is why a madi vasthram is that which is washed and dried overnight.

 

But silk is considered a madi vasthram. How?

 

If we think on lines of logic as above, only then we can justify the

madi of silk.

 

Silk of kaushEyam is made from the secretions from the mouth of the silk worm.

The secretions have no aural connection!

 

It is similar to how honey is collected.

Honey is an important vasthu used in vedic kaaryams.

It is obtained from the spitting of it by the honey bees. Here again

there is no aural connection.

 

That is perhaps why elders in those days would have accepted silk from

silk worm, as there is no need to wash the cloth everytime and there

is no aural impurity in it. Remember, the silk cloth would not be

washed at all. It will be just preserved carefully.

 

But what is given a go-by was how this silk is derived.

 

There is no himsa in obtaining honey. The bees are chased away and the

honey is obtained.

 

But the way the silk worms wriggle and expel the saliva shows they are

undergoing some distress and agony.

 

That they are short lived is no justification for killing them.

 

If left undisturbed, they are going to live long after completing

their life cycle to be born as free silk moths.

 

The acceptance to silk as madi vasthram might have been given, perhaps

without knowing or seeing how it is derived. Otherwise, this sanatana

dharma, which considers ahimsa as parama dharmam can not accept it.

 

Let me stress again, in no vaideeka kaaryam, the man is allowed to

wear new cotton vasthram nor a silk vasthram derived from silk worms.

But somehow the woman (his patni) is allowed to wear the silk saree.

 

This might have been because of the one and only vachan in existence

telling that woman need not do anything manthra based.

 

The Manu smruthi vachan,

" naasthi sthreeNaam kriya manthraihi, ithi dharma vyavasthithi",

meaning,

there is no performance or kriya for women through chanting of manthras,

which has unfortunately or fortunately been interpreted as to reject

the woman the right to do vedadhyaayana or do vedik kriyas, might have

been the basis for allowing the woman sitting along with her husband

in a vedik kriya, wear this cloth, otherwise banned for the man in

such a kriya.

 

But how this smruthi vachan is an interpolation and has no supporting

verses anywhere is altogether another matter (Remember hanuman's

thought in Sundhara khandam how Sita looks like a smruthi vachan which

is confusing!!) which is outside the current topic. And so let me stop

here and wait for feed back.

 

With humble pranams,

Jayasree saranathan.