why monks don't use garlic

[Guest guest]

 

Garlic is suppose to be a wonder food/plant but do you know the

reason why monks don't take it?

[Guest guest]

ayurveda, "chotawa" <chotawa> wrote:

>

> Garlic is suppose to be a wonder food/plant but do you know the

> reason why monks don't take it?

 

Dear Chotawa,

 

Garlic and onion have aphrodiasical properties therefore some monks,

not all, avoid them. This is also the reason why conservate vegetarian

families in India avoid garlic and onion too. However I think cooking

the garlic and onion reduce their body heating qualities.

 

Regards,

Jagannath.

[Guest guest]

-Jagannath,

 

I feel you are right. but is one more point also relevant that garlic and onion,

irritate the glandular system, making meditation (which calls for a calm mind

and body) difficult?

 

-- In ayurveda, "jagchat01" <jagchat01>

wrote:

> Garlic and onion have aphrodiasical properties therefore some monks,

> not all, avoid them. This is also the reason why conservate

vegetarian

> families in India avoid garlic and onion too. However I think cooking

> the garlic and onion reduce their body heating qualities.

[Guest guest]

this is what i've have heard:

 

when the celestial beings desired everlasting immortality they decided

to churn the ocean of milk in heaven to render amrita (the divine

nectar)

 

the gods and the asuras (demons) worked together in this regard, each

group holding onto an end of the great serpent Vasuki, that was

fashioned around a mountain that was used as the churning staff

 

after a very long time of churning the god of Ayurveda, Dhanvantari

arose from the ocean of milk, carrying amrita in a vessel

when the asuras saw what it was they quickly grabbed it from him and

made off with it

 

as they held it in their possession, some of the asuras began to argue

over it, and in the ensuing tussle a little drop of amrita fell from

the pot and cascaded to earth, where it grew into a garlic plant - this

is why garlic is like amrita (divine nectar), but because it arose from

the demon's hands, it has a tamasic or rajasic quality

 

as for whether this story is at all reflective of reality, i am not too

sure, since its not actually found in the mahabharata

 

some people find that that garlic disturbs their meditation - others

have not found this to be the case

i think that garlic is a wonderful herb, and its regular consumption

has been consistently shown to exert an important benefit in so many

areas, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer

 

personally, if the indications for garlic exist, this should trump any

philosophical or spiritual reason for not consuming it

time and again ayurveda proves itself to be pragamatic, and allowances

should always be made to protect health and prevent disease

it might not always be in agreement with the chosen philosophy, but

Ayurveda values the importance of the body as the vehicle of the spirit

as Kabir says:

 

Do not go to the garden of flowers !

O Friend ! go not there;

In your body is the garden of flowers.

Take your seat on the thousand petals of the lotus, and there gaze on

the Infinite Beauty.

 

todd

 

On 26-Jun-05, at 5:51 AM, ayurveda wrote:

 

> "chotawa" <chotawa

> why monks don't use garlic

>

>

> Garlic is suppose to be a wonder food/plant but do you know the

> reason why monks don't take it?

[Guest guest]

ayurveda, Todd Caldecott <todd@t...>

wrote:

> personally, if the indications for garlic exist, this should trump

any

> philosophical or spiritual reason for not consuming it

: You forget physical too, as mind body and spirit are all part on

the whole being.

 

Though I am sure you would not suggest the Dalai Lama could eat garlic

or meat.

[Guest guest]

while i do pretend to know his day to day menu i am pretty sure that

his holiness the DL does eat meat, as do most tibetans - they are all

particularly fond of yak, since it is a traditional food; and, since

garlic is essentially native to the region, it is also widely consumed

- both foods are warming and so obviously important in such a cold

place

 

in actual fact, tibetan buddhism has little to do with the specific

observances of orthodox indian brahmanism or its more recent vegetarian

variant- to know this, you need to understand something about tibetan

culture, including the practices of the bon religion

 

apart from the specifics of their culture, tibetan buddhists certainly

believe that killing generates negative karma, and yet, meat remains an

important staple for the reasons already stated - tibetan monks and

buddhism distinguish between the act of killing an animal and eating

its flesh - in the latter case they believe no negative karma is

generated by eating it - this is why buddhists will eat meat, esp.

those who are true sannyasins because they do not have the luxury of

choosing their food, and will eat what is offered

 

anyway, food is pretty much a non-issue in most forms of buddhism

except certain forms of chinese buddhism (which arguably isn't really

buddhism at all), since food is simply a manifestation of the five

elements that are in essence, a function of maya (self-created

illusion)

 

in the buddhist jataka tales and other hindu literature there are

countless stories asuras, murderers, criminals etc. etc. who achieve

enlightenment after receiving a divine revelation - obviously the

inertia of their previous acts aren't enough to stop them from

realization in the here and now

 

in my opinion, the spirit transcends materiality, and obsessive

attention to materialistic issues, i.e. veg or non-veg, simply

distracts one from the truth that neither are important when it gets

right down to it, just like it doesn't really matter whether you wear a

white kurta or a polka-dot trousers, or hang a crucifix around your

neck or wear a bindi on your forehead - either can be a hindrance or a

facilitator of a deeper awareness - but because of the inflexible

nature of the human mind it usually ends up being the former, giving

rise to the notion of creed, race and religion that only separates each

of us from our shared human soul: indeed, from the absolute

 

i believe that more harm is caused to society when people adopt

inflexible rules based on nothing except cultural semantics instead of

listening to their heart and body, and responding in kind

 

as a practitioner, i have to ask why it is that ayurveda would bother

listing the attributes of almost every single food and medical item

known, if to be ignored?

 

everything has a use, and a time and place for using it - everything we

gratefully accept from our Mother, even if we don't know why

ultimately there is only one food, one medicine, and one spirit

Caldecott

todd

www.toddcaldecott.com

 

On 29-Jun-05, at 6:47 AM, ayurveda wrote:

> "chotawa" <chotawa

> Re: why monks don't use garlic

>

> Though I am sure you would not suggest the Dalai Lama could eat garlic

> or meat.

[Guest guest]

whoops! i meant to write -don't-

 

> while i do pretend to know his day to day menu i am pretty sure that

> his holiness the DL does eat meat, as do most tibetans

 

;-) todd

[Guest guest]

Dear Doctors/Friends,

wrote;

 

 

> while i do (not?) pretend to know his day to day menu i am pretty

sure that

> his holiness the DL does eat meat, as do most tibetans - they are

all

> particularly fond of yak, since it is a traditional food; and,

since

> garlic is essentially native to the region, it is also widely

consumed

> - both foods are warming and so obviously important in such a cold

> place

 

 

 

I agree with him, the Dalai Lama and other Tibetan Buddhist sects are

meat eaters. And yes, the traditional Bon culture has got its own

place in Tibetan Buddhism (you observe their deities/paintings/temple

decoration/festivals to know that). But the fact that the Dalai Lama

is a meat eater does not affect me in any way and I rever him.

 

India is a hot country therefore the advice to take simple and non

heating food. In cold countries it is difficult to survive without

hot, fatty food.

 

I feel we should not only be tolerant towards all humanity but

sympatheic too. Then only we can relieve suffering. After all

sympathy is the best "pathy". Again just my own opinion.

 

As Todd has also pointed out, moksha is not the prerogative of any

single caste/creed or sex. We are all God's children. As the

Adhyatmika Ramayana says, the devotion of Ravana towards Rama is at

par with that of Hanumana. While Hanumana favoured the dasya mode,

Ravana took up the shatru mode and achieved liberation at the hands

of Lord Rama himself. Who are we to judge the karma of others? As a

Swami of the Ramakrishna Mission preached recently, being dedh-kal

(one & a half kal)darshis we should not take up the attitude of the

trikal darshis.

 

Of course the list may point out my intolerance towards allopathy !!

I am sure with all your blessings I can get out of that mood soon.

 

Love & Regards,

Jagannath.