Guest guest Posted November 7, 2006 Report Share Posted November 7, 2006 Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama: To Eat or Not to Eat The other day my friend, a true Bhaagavata, brought me some "Prasaadam" ("Pongal", to be precise) from the nearby Srinivasan Sannidhi. All of us at home accepted it with gratitude and consumed it with relish, as it was delightful fare. Incidentally, have you ever noticed how prasaadams from the temple "madaippalli" (kitchen) taste somehow more delightful than food cooked at home, even though we might prepare the latter with the choicest and highest quality ingredients? For instance, my mother is considered an expert at making "Sarkkarai Pongal": however, the same delicacy from Sri Parthasarathy Sannidhi is somehow more delectable and its taste lingers on the palate for days together. The Tirupati Laddu is another delicious example-you can never hope to imitate at home its taste, fragrance and longevity, whatever be the ingredients you may use. The obvious reason is that anything prepared solely for the Lord at duly consecrated places of worship and consumed by Him, becomes tastier and healthier too, ipso facto. However, an acquaintance of mine belonging to a different sect, who was present at the time the prasaadam was brought home, was horrified at our ready acceptance and consumption of the same. According to him, there were specific prohibitions against use of food which had been offered first to the Lord. Though he couldn't lay his finger on the specific texts which proscribed consumption of prasaadam, he said he would consult Shivaachaaryas and let me know. I do not know whom he consulted, but he did come up with a few credible scriptural texts, which apparently forbade reuse by us of food and other items offered to Emperuman. The first and foremost argument against consumption of divine prasaadam was that it represented "left overs" or "ecchil" ("Ucchisshttam" in Sanskrit), which we have been taught time and again from childhood to eschew. We might have bitten from the same mango as our friend during childhood in ignorance, but after upanayanam especially, the standards of "ecchil" and "theettu" have been so ingrained in us that we would be horrified to partake of anything that has already been partly consumed by someone else. However high and mighty the person who has consumed the food first, the fact remains that the left over is indeed "ecchil" and as such unfit for consumption by another. Even if the Lord is the person to whom the food has been offered first, it remains a left over and how can we even think of its consumption, leave alone relish and revere it? These were the questions raised by the scriptural texts furnished by my acquaintance. I was puzzled. This had never occurred to me before and with good reason too, for we have been following from time immemorial the practice of eating only food offered first to the Lord and it has been a hallowed tradition with Sri Vaishnavas to consume only Bhagavat Prasaadam. Though I put the vexing question on the back burner, it continued to trouble me, till I happened to peruse the "Sat Charitra Raksha" of Swami Desikan. It should have occurred to me much earlier that whatever be the question, if it dealt with subtle points of Shastram, then an answer would surely be found in the works of Swami Desikan, the Master Teacher who left nothing to doubt. The very question which had been put to me, I found, was dealt with elaborately by the Acharya, with scores of scriptural texts adduced in support. The work dealt not only with my problem, but with several other connected issues where doubts could arise in the minds of the uninformed like me. As the matter occupied the entire third chapter of the work, I presumed that even in those days there must have been people opposed to consumption of Bhagavat Prasaadam. And since Swami Desikan had cited portions of Sri Alavandar's Aagama Praamaanyam and Varadaraja Pandita's Sanmaarga Deepikaa, the question must indeed have lingered for more than a thousand years. There are indeed some apparent objections in the Dharma Shastras to food first offered to the Lord being consumed by us. Maharshi Manu, while listing items of food which are to be avoided, includes food offered first to the Lord-"anupakrita maamsam cha devaannani haveemshi cha". Another Smriti tells us that if one happens to eat food left over after offering to Gods, we should perform atonement in the form of "Chaandraayanam"-"nirmalyam cha nivedyam cha bhuktva chaandrayanam charet". Since there is a general prohibition of food left over after consumption ("ecchil"), it would apply to Lord's left overs too. It can't be said that just as the left overs of the husband can be consumed by the wife and those of the father by his children, "ecchil" of the Lord too is admissible food for us, who are but His children-for, here, the father-child relationship is indirect, flowing from the fact that the Lord is the root-cause of all universe and not our direct father. If we were to admit this, then the left overs of Brahmaa, who is touted to be actual creator of all beings, should also, by the same token, be acceptable to Sri Vaishnavas. Though Shastras permit consumption of one's father's left over, they extend no such concession in respect of food consumed by one's mother. And since Shastras tell us that the Lord, apart from being the Universal Father, is a common mother too to all of us-"Mata pita bhraata nivaasa: sharanam suhrit". By this token, since the Lord is our mother too, His left over should not be consumed by us. Some Paancharatra texts like the Sanatkumara Samhita tell us that such left overs-not only food, but also flowers and fruits-- of the Lord are to be avoided with effort- "Niveditam to yat dravyam pushpam phalam athaapi vaa tat Nirmaalyam iti proktam tat prayatnena varjayet" And strict atonement or praayaschittam is prescribed for eating such food offered to the Lord-that of drinking only milk for a whole month, the whole time reciting the holy Ashtaakshara mantra, for regaining purity lost due to the intake of prasaadam- "Nirmaalyam bhakshayitvaa evam ucchishttam agururorapi maasam payovratee bhootvaa ashtaaksharam japan sadaa Brahma koorcha: tato peetvaa shuddhi: bhavati maanava:" "Nirmaalyaani cha na asneeyaat na jighret na cha langhayet" Not only should such food and flowers offered to the Lord not be partaken of, they should not even be smelt or stepped over. However, against these negative texts, there are a thousand other quotes from the scripture which categorically lay down that it is only bhagavat prasaadam that is to be consumed by us. For instance, the Mahopanishad tells us that we should eat and drink only that food which has been offered to the Lord, smell only that which He has worn-"Vishnunaa attam asnanti, Vishnu peetam pibanti, Vishnunaa ghraatam jighranti, Vishnu rasitam rasayanti, tasmat vidvaamso Vishnu uphritam bhakshayeyu:". The Lord Himself tells us in the Gita that whatever we eat or drink should first be dedicated to Him- "Yat karoshi yat asnaasi yat juhoshi dadaasi yat Yat pasyasi Kounteya! Tat kurushva mat arpanam" Every morsel of food unoffered to God that we partake represents a great morsel of sin that we contract, says the Bhagavat Gita Such is the insistence of Shastras on the prior offering of food to Lord, that even items of food which have not been offered to the Lord, but which were received only at the time of the meal, are supposed to be offered to the Lord at least mentally, before being partaken of by us. The Paarameswara Samhita tells us that such bhagavat prasadam should not only be consumed as a matter of course, but is to be partaken of for ridding oneself of all sin- "Tatastu Bhagavat bhuktam praasneeyaat niyata; svayam. Kshayaaya sarva paapaanaam koshtta siddhyayepi cha" Such prasaadam, which is the holiest of holies, is not only to be consumed by us, but also to be shared with all bhaagavatas and bhaktas and with the entire family- "Dattam bhaagavata shreshttai: Vishnave prabhavishnave tat pavitram pavitraanaam pavanaanaam cha paavanam daatavyam dvijaateenam bhaktaanaam paavanaaya cha" If the mere touch of the prasaadam purifies us beyond measure and makes us sacred and eligible for all karmas, should we say anything about eating and drinking bhagavat prasadam?+ "Svayam chaapi tat asneeyat sarva papa visuddhaye Tasya samsparsanat bhojanaat dhaaranaat sadaa Suchi: bhavati Viprendra! Sarva karmasu sammata:" The Paadma Samhita tells us that partaking of bhagavat prasadam, which is the most sacred of foods, is a must and failure to do so would be sinful and lead to our down fall. While food offered to the Lord, His Consorts, Garuda, Sudarsana and other Ayudhas is to be accepted and consumed with eagerness, that offered to Brahma, Rudra, et al is to be avoided at all cost and not even to be touched- "Brahma Eesaanaadi devaanaam naiva bhojyam niveditam na sprisyam no langhaneeyam chandaadeenaam tathaiva cha Deveenaam tu Sriyaadeenaam Vinata nandasya cha Chakradeenaam Ayudhaanaam vastu yat yat niveditam Bhoktavyam eva sarvesham vipradeenaam asankitam Vishno: niveditam sarvam paavanaanaam cha paavanam Praapanam durlabham bhojyam na tyaajyam syaat kadaachana Bhunjaanaanaam edhate Sree:tyajataam pariheeyate Vrata upavaasa tulitam asanam tasya paavanam" Just as young men covet the "taamboolam" that has been sweetened by the saliva of their sweet hearts, bhaktas and Rishis long for bhagavat prasadam- "Sesha bhuktim prasamsanti Munyaya: tattva darsina: yuvaana:khalu vaanchanti taamboolam tarunee mukhaat" Eating is akin to a Yagam-it is known as Anuyaagam. And the mantras used in this yaagam are, "praanaaya svaaha, apaanaaya svaahaa" etc., to the accompaniment of which food is to be taken with the middle finger, etc. Srimad Ramayanam tells us that Sri Rama took prasaadam offered first to Sriman Narayana, on the night prior to His coronation- "Mahate daivataaya aajyam juhaava jvalitenale sesham cha havishastasya praasyaat aatmana: priyam dhyaayan Narayanam devam" Though several Pancharatra Samhitas have been quoted above to the effect that food offered to the Lord is to be partaken of as prasadam, Smritis are clear that such prasaadam should not be given to those ineligible for it- "Apaatraanaam abhaktaanaam naastikaanaam duraatmanaam mantrapootam cha naivedyam nishiddhanaam cha dadaati ya: siddhopi yaati paatityam aarurukushustu kim puna: Prasaadam is to be preserved with effort from such ineligible people, as also from dogs, cats, monkeys, birds and rats. In case such prasaadam happens to be partaken of by such people or animals, one should perform praayaschittam by reciting the Ashtaaksharam a 108 times with concentration. We are indeed puzzled-there is a host of texts prescribing compulsory consumption of food offered to the Lord, while there appear to be many others proscribing the same. Swami Desikan tells us that such apparent dichotomy among the Smirits can be reconciled, if only we realize that both prescription and proscription of bhagavat prasaadam are true, but relate to food offered to different deities. While those offered to the Lord are indeed sacred and are to be partaken of with eagerness, those offered to other devatas like Brahma and Rudra are to be avoided at all cost, says the Brahma Puranam- "Vishno: niveditam shuddham munibhi: bhojyam uchyate anyat nivedyam nirmaalyam bhuktvaa chaandraayanam charet Thus, Nirmaalyam/Nivedyam or left over, refers only to fruits, flowers and food offered to other deities like Rudra and it is to such food that the scriptural texts advocating avoidance should be attributed, says Swami Desikan. Food or other items set apart for offering to the Lord is known as "Devaannam" and should not be used by us prior to such offering. If this is done, we attract sin, which is washed away only by due atonement, says Sri Poushkara Samhita- "Praak saadhitam cha yaagaartham devataanaam prayatnata: Tat samarpana paryantam yaavat devaannam uchyate Anyatha bhakshanam tasya yadi mohaat kritam Dvija! Praayaschitta shatai: cheernai: succhi: bhavati maanava:" Manu's strong advice to avoid Devannam (that which is set apart for offering to the Lord), indicates that food should not be used by us prior to being offered to Emperuman. After offering, it becomes prasaadam and it is perfectly in order for us to partake of the same. Decrying or disregarding such prasaadam, whether it be food offered to the Lord, sandal paste, flowers, etc., is sure to make us rot in hell, as is pointed out by Sri Rudra to Skanda, in Ishwara Samhita. The same Samhita tells us whatever has come off the Lord's divine body-Kumkumam, Chandanam, Tulasi, flowers, fragrant powder, etc.-are extremely sacred and one who applies the same to his forehead reaps the fruits of having performed a hundred Ashwamedha yaagas. This should teach us not to leave kumukumam, Manjal kaappu etc. which we receive in temples, either smeared on the pillars or on shelves in the temple. "Kumkumam chandanam chaiva karpooram cha anulepanam Vishnu deha paraamrishtam tat vai paavana paavanam" If such is the greatness of food, etc. offered to the Lord, what about water used to wash His holy feet? Sacred water from the Lord's feet is capable of washing away all sins and confers merits to be obtained from bathing in all the holy rivers of the land- "Prithivyaam yaani teertthaani teshu snaanena yat phalam Vishno: paadodakam moordhnaa dhaarayet sarvam aapnuyaat" The Bhaagavata Puranam tells us that Sri Sankara has full realization of the holiness of water from the Lord's feet, for it is he who bears the Ganga on his head, the Ganga which originated from the Lord's tiruvadi during Trivikramaavataaram- "Paadodakasya maahaatmyam jaanaati eva hi Sankara: Vishnu paadodbhavaam Gangaaam shirasa adhaarayat hi sa: Defining a Vaishnava, Bhaagavatam tells us that he is one who has Sriman Narayana's glorious form etched deep in his heart, the Lord's name on his lips, food offered to the Lord in his stomach and the water from His feet on his head- "Hridi roopam mukhe naama naivedyam udare Hare: Paadodakam cha nirmaalyam yasya moordhni sa Vaishnava: Sri Paada Teerttham of Bhaagavaataas is as holy as sacred water from the Lord's feet and is capable of destroying all our sins, says Sri Sounaka- "Bhakta paadachutenaapi mat snaapita jalena vaa nara: paapaat pramuchyeta snaana paanaadi karmabhi:" Those who wear daily, garlands offered first to the Lord, are sure of a berth in paradise, says Sounaka again- "Maalaam ya: dhaarayet nityam Vaishnaveem bhaktim aashrita: sarva paapa vinirmukta: sa yaati paramaam gatim >From this, it appears to follow that when we are offered the Lord's garland at a sannidhi, we should not remove it from our necks immediately, but should remember its holiness and the fact that it has had the fortune to adorn the Lord's chest. All of us eat food which has first been offered to the Lord during Tiruvaaradhanam. What if some item is served in the middle of breakfast, which has not been offered to the Lord first? We should, prior to consuming the same, offer it mentally to the lord, says the Bharadvaaja Samhita. This applies to anything and everything that we use-flowers, new clothes, jewels, etc-everything should first be offered to the Lord and then appropriated for our use, as bhagavat prasaadam. This is what Sri Periazhwar lays down as the principal attribute of the Lord's devotees-they wear only what the Lord has worn and cast off, they adorn themselves with flowers and Tulasi which have first had the good fortune of association with Emperuman's divine body-"Uduttha kalainda nin peethaka aadai, udutthu kalattha thundu, thoduttha tuzhaai malar soodi kalaindana soodum it tondarkalom" The sacredness of bhagavat prasaadam can be gauged from the reverence with which Sri Vishvaksena is held. Though he is the Lord's Prime Minister, he is popularly known as one who consumes with relish the leftovers of the Lord-"Seshaasana:"-Tvadeeya bhukta ujjhita sesha bhoginaa"(Sri Alavandar). Swmi Desikan says the practice in some places, especially in Kerala, of not consuming bhagavat prasaadam, is clearly wrong, in view of the aforesaid. Another question that often troubles us is this--Does the Lord really eat what we place before Him during Tiruvaaradhanam? Since the quantum or variety of food that is offered doesn't diminish even a little even after the offering, is it not evident that the Lord does not partake of the food, with however much devotion and love it is offered and by however devoted a person? If such be the case, are we deluding ourselves that we are partaking of food offered to the Lord, as the Lord doesn't appear to accept the same? This calls into question the very basis of temple worship, for the huge quantities of food and other offerings to the Lord would apparently appear to be a waste, as the Lord doesn't care for them nor has any use for them. Not so, says the Saatvata Samhita. Food consists of two parts-the gross and subtle. The Lord accepts the subtle portion of the offering, when it is done with devotion. Thus, though there is no apparent reduction in the quantity of offering commensurate with the Lord's acceptance thereof, the essence of the food-Rasam-is indeed consumed by Emperuman- "Kapittasya phalam chaiva yathaa kunjara bhakshitam tasya saaram cha grinheeyaat tathaa havirasam Prabhu: When food is offered to other Devatas, is it proper to offer it first to the Lord and then to the former? For instance, while performing the annual ceremony (Pratyaabdhika shraaddham) for one's father, those who are to be propitiated are the Pitru Devatas. Since the ritual is performed principally for them, should not food be cooked separately, rather than our offering them the left overs of the Lord? The Paadma Samhita clearly lays down that only food that has been offered to the Lord should be submitted to other Devatas, including Pitru devatas- "Vishno: nivedita annena yashtavyam Devataantaram Pitrubhyascha tat deyam taccha aanantyaaya kalpate." Thus, in Shraaddham as well as in Vaisvadevam, it is food that has been offered first to the Lord that is to be used. Are you surprised that there is so much behind the prasaadam which we routinely accept and consume? Yes, indeed, and what I have indicated is only the barest outline. I would invite readers to have a feast by perusing the original works of Swami Desikan, each of which is an invaluable gem, capable of destroying darkness and ignorance with its luster and luminance. Srimate Sri Lakshmi Nrisimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama: dasan, sadagopan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 Dear Sadagopan Swami, An excellent article! ///The sacredness of bhagavat prasaadam can be gauged from the reverence with which Sri Vishvaksena is held. Though he is the Lord's Prime Minister, he is popularly known as one who consumes with relish the leftovers of the Lord-"Seshaasana: "-Tvadeeya bhukta ujjhita sesha bhoginaa"(Sri Alavandar)./// This is a thought that once struck me when I was watching the Tirumanjanam of Narasimha in Maddur. Since His mouth is wide open, the milk, curd, and other items used for His Tirumanjanam first flow through His mouth--and so, we who take the prasadam are indirectly getting the priviledge that is bestowed upon Sri Vishvaksenar. Malola Dasan, Balaji Narasimhan ~~~~~~~~~ Balaji Narasimhan Author & Editor http://www.balaji.ind.in/ ~~~~~~~~~ Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music./unlimited Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2006 Report Share Posted November 9, 2006 Dear Bhagavatas: It is NOT CORRECT to say that Sabari offered Sri Rama fruits bitten and soiled with her spittle. Does she not know that being a staunch devotee, it would be sacrilegious to offer spittle tainted fruits to the Lord? Neither the authentic Valmiki Ramayanam nor Kamba Ramayanam mentions this. Both say that she offered them (Rama and LakshaNam) DUE worship with water to wash their hands and feet and sip" and said "I have gathered some delicacies for you. I have seen to it myself that they are sweet and wholesome and I pray to grace it with your acceptance" (vide Sargam 74 of Aranya Khaandam) "Paadhyam aachamaneeyam cha sarvam pradaataa YATHAA VIDHI" says Valmiki (Slokam 7 ibid) and "mayaa tu vividham vanyam sanchitam purushrshabha" (Slokam17 ibid) Kamban says:"vENDiya koNarndu nalga virundu seidu irunda vElai" (Vide Paasuram 1185 in Savari Pirappu Neengu PaDalam) What she did was to pluck and taste one fruit from each tree to test whether it was sweet enough to be offered to the Lord. If found fit, she would leave all other fruits IN TACT. Some Pouranikas have twisted the story to misrepresent the facts and spread this blasphemous version and this is doing the rounds a-la the misinformation minister of Hitler. Dasoham Anbil Ramaswamy =================================================================== , kesavanta viraraghavan <kesavanta wrote: > > Swamins > It is worthwhile the consider the epic Ramayana where Sabari bites& tastes fruits and then gives it Rama to ensure that He takes only ripe fruits.Bhagavan himself tasting the Bhagavada's left over ! > Dasan > kesavan > > > > > > Find out what India is talking about on - Answers India > Send FREE SMS to your friend's mobile from Messenger Version 8. Get it NOW > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2006 Report Share Posted November 9, 2006 swamins namaskarams to all.North Indian Kirit bhaishri who does Mahabhagawatha sapthamgams said in one such sapthagams that Bhagawan smells the food thus he partakes our Bhog kept to him and we should eat that prasadam of bhagwan.we take the abhisheka theertham of salagram and moorthams as prasadam. we all know KOthai daily wore the mala before putting to Ranganatha swami even her father said it is papam and scolded her but swami appeared everyone and said that she will be known as choodikodutha kotai. my two cents words with namaskarams to all. and please pardon me for any mistakes meena sahasranaman kesavanta viraraghavan <kesavanta (AT) (DOT) co.in> 2006/11/09 07:00:12 Cc: Re: To Eat or Not to Eat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 2006 Report Share Posted November 11, 2006 Dear Bhagavatas: Lord Krishna demanding food from Draupadi was an exceptional case in which the Lord wanted to prove how he could accomplish a miracle through consuming a particle of spinach sticking to the cleaned up vessel of Draupadi, he could make the entire entourage of the Sage feel practically "fed up" and thus save the Pandavas from an embarassment designed by the evil minded DuryOdana. it may be noted that she DID NOT offer; The Lord commanded her to offer and that too for a specific purpose. The point at issue is whether Sabari offered spittle-tainted fruits to Sri Rama as popularly believed. I hope that I have clarified this issue with appropriate PramaaNams, being relevant to the posting of Sri kesavanta viraraghavan. Dasoham Anbil Ramaswamy ========================================================= Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2006 Report Share Posted November 13, 2006 Dear Swamins, There is a version which I have heard in Upanyasams. Sabari's bhakthi was so sincere and endearing that she plucked one fruit from a tree and tasted it and if she felt the taste was sweet enough to be offered to Sri Rama, it was from that tree that she plucked fruits and offered to the Lord.So it was not 'ecchil' fruit she gave. If the fruit from a tree was not tasteful, she discarded that tree and went in search of another. Thus it was choice tasty fruits she offered - K.Devanathan. >Ramanbil (AT) hotmail (DOT) com > > Re: To eat or not to eat >Sat, 11 Nov 2006 05:16:40 -0000 > >Dear Bhagavatas: > >Lord Krishna demanding food from Draupadi was an exceptional case in >which the Lord wanted to prove how he could accomplish a miracle >through consuming a particle of spinach sticking to the cleaned up >vessel of Draupadi, he could make the entire entourage of the Sage >feel practically "fed up" and thus save the Pandavas from an >embarassment designed by the evil minded DuryOdana. > >it may be noted that she DID NOT offer; The Lord commanded her to >offer and that too for a specific purpose. > >The point at issue is whether Sabari offered spittle-tainted fruits to >Sri Rama as popularly believed. I hope that I have clarified this >issue with appropriate PramaaNams, being relevant to the posting of >Sri kesavanta viraraghavan. >Dasoham >Anbil Ramaswamy >========================================================= > _______________ Connect with your friends who use Messenger with Voice. Click! http://www.msnspecials.in/wlm/index.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.