Food for Thought

[Guest guest]

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

Food for Thought

 

All of us eat to live, the primary purpose of food being sustenance of life. It

is needless to expand on the importance of food, as the skipping of even a

single meal makes us feel the gnawing in the stomach. We hear of mahAtmAs who go

without food for days, months and years together, intent solely on communion

with the Ultimate. We hear of the impossible penance performed by Sri Dhruva,

barely out of infancy, and others elder to him, involving fasting for long

periods of time.

 

All these do not appeal to us, since they are associated with foregoing food,

for which we have developed a voracious appetite. We have become like the

Romans, who lived to eat, who were gourmets of the highest order and considered

savouring the innumerable culinary delicacies as the principal mission of their

lives. It is rumoured that they would gorge themselves with the finest the cook

had to offer for the day, till they could eat no more. However, undeterred by

the filled stomach rebelling against any more intake, they would forcibly vomit

whatever they had imbibed, to make room in their monstrous bellies for more

food.

 

Knowing full well that prescribing prolonged fasting as a means of cleansing the

physique and psyche would not be palatable to gluttons like us, Sri Tirumangai

Mannan generously concedes that we need not undertake continuous and

extraordinary fasting as did Sri Dhruva. In fact, he says that we need undergo

no form of arduous physical inconvenience, as the Lord doesn't expect it of us-

 

" oon vAda vAda uyir kAvalittu tAn vAda seyyum tavam seyya vENdA " .

 

(This of course doesn't mean that we can give up the occasional fasting ordained

on pitru dinam, Ekadasi etc.)

 

To people like us who cannot give up eating and that too in style, for long

periods of time, Sri Nammazhwar prescribes an easy way out--think of whatever

you eat or drink with gusto, as verily the Lord Himself- " uNNum sOru, parugum

neer, thinnum vettrilai yAvum KaNnan emperumAn endru " . (Though Azhwar's real

purport is that we should regard the Lord as the source of all sustenance,

enrichment and pleasure), this appears to us to be much easier, for when do fast

occasionally, the thought of our empty stomach and anticipation of the

break-fast precludes any thought of the Lord, for which purpose the entire

exercise is intended. The term " upavAsam " which signifies fasting, literally

means " to live near " , indicating that when we forego food, we are supposed to

substitute it by thoughts of the Paramatma and His auspicious attributes. Hence

when we fast, we are said to be mentally nearer to the Lord. What happens in

reality is quite the opposite: on days of fasting, some people gorge themselves

with different varieties of tiffin, avoiding rice religiously, while there are

some who eat nothing but all sorts of fruit, as " PhalAhAram " .

In such cases, " upavAsam " takes on a new (and unintended) meaning altogether, as

the person lives not near the Lord, but near food itself in various forms.

 

In reply to his son's query as to the nature of the Ultimate, VaruNa tells

Bhrigu Maharshi that Food is verily to be regarded as the Brahmam ( " annam Brahma

iti vyajAnAt " ). VaruNA adduces reasons for this tenet-it is from food that

beings acquire the ability to live, flourish and procreate. Thus the life cycle

of every being is dictated by availability of food, without which no existence

is possible. It is for this reason that the Upanishad enjoins upon us to earn as

much food as possible ( " annam bahu kurveeta " ), so that not only do we provide

for ourselves adequately, but are also able to offer succour to the poor and

needy.

 

" aham annAda: " says the same Upanishad, echoing the seeker's claim that he is

the one who partakes of food. The Shruti considers this so significant that it

repeats the statement twice more. We are unable to find anything profound about

a person calling himself the consumer of food, for, that is what we all do and

with regularity. However, the Food meant by the Shruti here is

an entirely different item, unlike any menu offered anywhere in the world.

 

It is to the Paramapurusha that the emancipated soul refers as Food, when he

calls himself the Eater ( " annAda: " ). We must remember that once the liberated

Atma reaches Paradise, it spends all its time in blissful enjoyment of the Lord

and His innumerable auspicious attributes. The Lord thus forms a fabulous

food-for the eyes, ears and for the other faculties of the MuktAtmA, who enjoys

the Lord endlessly and in myriad modes. And it is out of the ecstasy born out of

this unique experience that the Shruti repeats itelf- " aham annAdO aham annAdO

aham annAda: "

 

Azhwars too characterise the Lord as a delicacy of the highest order-amudam- "

en amudam " " ArAvamudam " " amizhdilum Attra inian " " enakku tEnE palE kannalE

amudE " etc. Thus it is the exalted resident of Srivaikuntam whom the Shruti

quotes, when it says " I am the consumer " and what he consumes is nothing but the

Lord and His auspicious attributes.

 

There is one more sentence in the same Upanishad, which confers a benediction

that the person becomes the possessor of food as well as its consumer- " annavAn

annAdO bhavati " . We are unable to discern anything profound in this, for anyone

who has a lot of food, would indeed consume it. Hence is it not enough for the

Shruti to bless us with food, leaving its disposal to those eminently trained

for the same, like us? Should it separately indicate that we would also become

consumers of food?

 

We have to remember that not a single syllable of the Shruti is redundant, nor

does it believe in tautology. We find in several cases extremely wealthy

persons, endowed with all that can be desired in the way of riches, pitifully

unable to indulge their palates, when it comes to food. Diabetis, heart disease,

ulcers of the stomach and numerous other ailments lie in wait to pounce upon the

rich and unwary, condemning them to a life-time diet of salt -less porridge

( " kanji " ) or sugarless coffee and tasteless meals, even though their servants

might be eating with gusto their own simple but tasty repast. Thus, it would

appear that it is not merely enough to possess a thing, but one has also to be

fortunate to consume and enjoy it. And this is what the Upanishad refers to when

it speaks of a person being " annavAn " as well as " annAda: " .

 

If we take the term " annam " to refer to the Parabrahmam, after the Shruti vakya

" annam BrahmEti vyajAnAt " , we would arrive at the formulation that one should

become the possessor of Brahmam and enjoy it too. The significance of this too

doesn't strike us at first, till we recollect the history of Sri VasudEva and

Sri DEvaki. Though this couple had the unimaginable good fortune of begetting

the Paramapurusha, they had to part with Him on the very night of His birth. It

is Sri Yasoda and Sri NandagOpa who derived the maximum pleasure and bliss from

the Divine Toddler, as the foster parents. Thus, though the former couple were

" annavAn " s, their fortune did not extend to being " annAda: " , prompting Devaki to

cry out in jealousy- " nandan pettranan nal vinai illA nangaL kOn VasudEvan

pettrilanE " . Hence the benediction of the Upanishad that one should not only be

the possessor of food, but also be healthy and fortunate enough to consume it.

 

When the Shruti blesses us to possess as well as consume food, when Sri Kalian

waives requirements of prolonged fasting, etc., do they mean, ipso facto, that

we can eat anything, any number of times, anywhere? Does it mean that there need

be absolutely no control over the quantum, content and frequency of our intake?

 

The same Shruti prescribes the number of meals per day for various classes of

beings- " TasmAt dvirahnO manushyEbhya: upahriyatE, prAtascha sAyamcha "

" Trirahna: pasava: preratE, prAta: sangavE sAyam " .

 

It is clearly enunciated here that human beings should confine their meals to

two, one in the morning and one in the evening/ night. This appears to rule out

the mid-day meal imbibed during " lunch " time, the tiffin taken in the evening,

as well as the innumerable cups of tea and coffee that are poured in during the

day. When we seek confirmation of this, we find that the same Shruti prescribes

" parishEchana mantra " only for two meals a day- " satyam tvartEna parishinchAmi

iti prAta: " in the morning and " RitantvA satyEna parishinchAmi iti sAyam

parishinchati " . It therefore appears to be pretty clear that only two meals per

day are the permissible quota, for human beings. The Shruti also tells us that

it is only animals, which are entitled to eat thrice a day (which doesn't speak

much of people like me).

 

The Upanishad also has a few vital tips about food. For one thing, it tells us

never to be critical of or to refuse food- " annam na nindyAt, tat vratam " . The

next time we say we don't like this item of food or that, we would do well to

remember this dictum. This would perhaps include wasting food too-the next time

we leave something uneaten on our plate, or force food upon our already satiated

guests or children with the mistaken impression that it constitutes hospitality,

we should think twice.

 

And on the days of the annual shraddham for one's late parents, one is supposed

to fast till its performance and also after consuming " pitru sEsham " .

Consumption of coffee or tea, not very desirable even on ordinary days, is

totally taboo on the day of the ceremony, either before or after the shrAddha.

On that day, the normal rule of two meals doesn't apply and one is supposed to

go without the normal night meal. Consumption of " bhakshaNam " in the night

doesn't appear to have the sanction of the Shastra. This is because the

bhAgavatas who bless us by officiating in the shrAddham as VisvEdEva, Pitru and

Sri MahAvishnu are exhorted by us to eat well, so that hunger doesn't affect

them in the night, necessitating another meal- " yathA rAtrou kshut na bhavEt,

tathA bhunktvA " .

When we expect that those who officiated in our karma should go without food

that night, is it fair for us to eat again? Considering that " ShrAddham " is

that performed with absolute dedication ( " shraddhayA kartavyam iti shrAddham " ),

non-adherence to the aforesaid simple rules might well vitiate the entire

proceedings and result in our forefathers made unhappy, while the entire

exercise is aimed at pleasing them.

 

Sri Kulasekhara Perumal says he would have no truck with those obsessed with

food, to the exclusion of everything else- " uNdiyE udayE ugandOdum im mandalam

tannodum kooduvadillai yAn " . He perhaps refers to those who indulge themselves

in excesses, as far as food is concerned-eating more frequently than is

prescribed, eating items which are specifically proscribed, eating on days or

parts of days on which fasting is recommended and eating before offering the

food to the Lord.

 

It is here that compendiums like Swami Desikan's " AhAra niyamam " come to our

rescue, laying down in detail what can and cannot form part of our menu. It is

compliance with these dicta regarding intake, which made our elders enjoy rude

good health even in their advanced years and it is the non-adherence to these

simple rules that is the cause of many an ailment in our generation. By our

elders' standards, most of what we eat today would probably come under the

category of " Junk Food " , affording nutrition to neither our physique nor our

soul. Recognising the importance of good nourishment and its capability to

prevent and cure disease, millenia before our present day doctors did, the

Upanishad terms Food a panacea for all ills- " tasmAt sarvoushadham uchyatE " . It

would therefore appear that while Food for thought is always welcome, the same

doesn't apply to food for the palate.

 

Srimate Sri LakshmINrsimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana

Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

Dasan, sadagopan