Guest guest Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Hello everyone, Can anyone please tell me what are the gunas of eggs as per dravyagunavigyana or any other standard authority on Ayurveda? are there any negative effects of eggs on health as per ayurveda? thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 EGGS Eggs are less Tamasic (inert creating) than meat and fish as they do not require the killing of a live animal. By strict standards, however, they are still thought to be karmically impure. Eggs are sweet and warm. They decrease Vata but increase Pitta and Kapha. They are tonic, nutritive, demulcent and aphrodisiac. They give vigor, promote fertility and are good for convalescence and sexual debility. Some people find them heavy and hard to digest. The egg white has more cooling properties and is better for Pitta. The egg yolk is hotter and can aggravate toxic blood conditions. Other animal eggs can be useful. Quail eggs are thought to be powerful aphrodisiacs and tonics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Noel ! As per ur post , Eggs does not contain any life ( Eggs do not reuire killing of live animal ) . I think , chicken born with the rupture of the egg ! So u mean to say that Chicken in the egg which is in Avyakta Rupa ( unseen manner ) does not have life before born ? If yes , then foetus in the womb does not have life at all ! Will u agree on this ? ______________ Eggs are less Tamasic (inert creating) than meat and fish as they do not require the killing of a live animal. By strict standards, however, they are still thought to be karmically impure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Dear Dr. Gandhi, We usually are not aware of the physiology of Poultry animals as such. Egg would definitely be produced by the female bird whether it is kept with the male bird and having intercourse or even if kept alone. So the egg can be fertilised if the bird is having intercourse or unfertilised if otherwise. Just as in all human females, the egg (ovum) is released in a monthly cycle, whether she is having any sexual relations or not. So either the ovum is fertilised by the sperm and implanted in the uterus or is wasted based on several other factors. The difference in poultry birds and humans is that, in poultry, the fertilsation is done inside the body of the organism and the egg is released out for hatching and in humans, the entire process is done inside the body and a mature baby is finally born. So, definitely Not All Eggs Have Life ! Unfertilised have only nutritive material and fertilised ones have both " Avyakt life and nutritive material " It is only fertilised eggs that are hatched and result in chicks emerging out as a normal phenomenon. Regards, Dr. Sanjay Sharma ___________ As per ur post , Eggs does not contain any life ( Eggs do not reuire killing of live animal ) . I think , chicken born with the rupture of the egg ! So u mean to say that Chicken in the egg which is in Avyakta Rupa ( unseen manner ) does not have life before born ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 There will always be controversy of this, and what I believe does not matter. But for the sake of this conversation I believe that when the egg has been fertilized then there is life… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 In village folks there is a question whether the egg came first or the chicken? In my personal experience egg's qualities resembles like that of meat. In fungal infections one has to avoid , fish , meat , egg too .as these food encourage fast growth of fungus; of course milk is also a animal product but it does not encourage the fast growth of fungus. it is not a matter of killing animals; all life is depending up on another life for survival .big fish swallows small fish. tiger eats deer; all vegetarian foods are from living plants; so one life is depending on another life. watch keenly. sounds new Darwinism?vidhyasagar ______________________ I think , chicken born with the rupture of the egg ! So u mean to say that Chicken in the egg which is in Avyakta Rupa ( unseen manner ) does not have life before born ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Dear Dr . Sanjay Sharma ! I think , this is not the forum where we have to discuss this. But I have some more querries regarding your answer. According to you, fertilisation is done inside the body of the organism & hatching ( coming out of the egg ) is done ouside . The fertilisation itself is injecting male fertile product ( here is it sperm ) into female fertile product ( here it is an egg ) . It is the formation of Embryo . And I think , there is generation of life into it as soon as it becomes fertilised . Then the hatching can be inside or outside of the body . It doesn't matter . It is a live animal . We cant say it does not have life ! Regards !! ______________ So, definitely Not All Eggs Have Life ! Unfertilised have only nutritive material and fertilised ones have both " Avyakt life and nutritive material " It is only fertilised eggs that are hatched and result in chicks emerging out as a normal phenomenon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Dear Dr. Gandhi, That is precisely what I intended to convey. " Only fertilised eggs can be said to have life " Regards, Dr. Sanjay Sharma _________________ And I think , there is generation of life into it as soon as it becomes fertilised . Then the hatching can be inside or outside of the body . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Avoiding eggs has also other important factors: Chickens are kept these days in tiny boxes where they have less space than an A4 sheet. Their wings are without feathers, their picks are cut, and they never see sun light, never get to walk on ground. The eggs are hatched in hatching machines and the chicken are processed by machines. Modern day chiken farms are inhumane, horrible hells on earth. http://www.oikeuttaelaimille.net/ttnet/images/stories/kanalat/k-laitila-2006-3/1\ ..jpg http://www.oikeuttaelaimille.net/ttnet/images/stories/kanalat/k-laitila-2006-3/2\ ..jpg http://www.oikeuttaelaimille.net/ttnet/images/stories/kanalat/k-oripaa-2006-7/1.\ jpg This kind of treatment of living beings should be made illegal. The people who keep animals like this should be put behind bars in tiny metal boxes, as they have done for these poor animals. ..Omkaar __________ That is precisely what I intended to convey. " Only fertilised eggs can be said to have life " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 > That is precisely what I intended to convey. " Only fertilised eggs can be said to have life " We are a bundle of nearly 100 trilion cells(Post# 5886). Each cell needs nutrition, performs certain known function and produces waste matter just as we do as a whole body. Cells communicate. Cannot they be thought of as " life " ? While fertilised egg can be said to have life, what about the cells from which the egg was made? They were not having any life when they used oxygen, used nutrients and stayed with each other to produce the entity called egg? The conception is believed to be a phenomenon, where a sperms swims to the ovum, enters and fertilizes it. Now sperm had energy to swim, was moving, was it not having life? as long as we have life, we possess electromagnetic aura(field) and in some time after death, the filed vanishes, as seen by scientific scans. Should we not link life to electromagnetic field rather than the idea that if a cell can divide and multiply, then only it is said to have life. Even the egg is believed to attract the sperm by electromagnetic potential, and keep it alternating to produce male or femaile embryo. Egg too then qualifies for life! why and how sperms and ovum are attracted to each other, how sperms find the ovum through an arduous journey lasting only few inches is explained at: http://www.paediatricsoncall.com/forpatients/share/myth.asp Science is not fixed, it needs to change to accomodate new ideas. The definition of life itself is loose in science. we have had some discussion on this on one more occasion earlier(Post#11497). Just as property " life " is distrbuted over all the cells of the body, so is the property " mind " is equally distributed. Cellular intelligence is atributed to all cells. Question remains, science cannot differentiate the cells which possess " mind " , and cells which can together be called " spirit " . Regards Dr Bhate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 To answer Dr.Sachin's question, hens produce eggs whether they are fertilised (i.e. had intercourse with male) or not. Therefore some eggs hatch and some don't - that is my understanding anyway. Whether an unfertilised ovum is considered " life " has not really been defined. With regard to taking life, and whether it is violent, tamasic, or " bad karma " , I believe this is subject to much personal opinion and moralising. The taking of life has been going on since the beginning of life on earth, and in all human traditions which have had great spiritual understanding . Interestingly, I have found many people who eat " sattvic " foods, wear " sattvic " colours and do " sattvic " activities like praying etc., who preach, argue, and consider themselves morally superior - isn't this a form of violence on those whom they consider " tamasic " and " rajasic " ? In the Baghavad Gita, Krishna told Arjuna that there is a place and time for taking life. Further on he says, we must rise beyond " sattvic " mind because it too can be a trap. The Buddha said he didn't mind a bit of meat as long as he didn't have to kill it. In my understanding ayurvedic writers like Charaka did not make moral judgements about foods - every food serves a different purpose because of its different qualities. In his description of foods he says, " Eggs of swans, chakora, hens, peacocks, and sparrows are useful in diminished semen, cough, heart disease and injuries. They are sweet, not causing burning sensation, and immediately strength-promoting. " (Charaka Samhita, Sutrasthana, 63-64) Interesting that he says eggs are good for the heart - flying in the face of modern medical " wisdom " that eggs raise cholesterol and thus cause heart disease! Yet, this medical myth, which has been accepted the world over for the last 50 years, is also being shown to be false. When I was young, we ate the eggs of jungle fowl, which were rich and nutritious; and bore little resemblance to the pale, watery globs you find in the western supermarkets these days. Therefore if one is to eat eggs, one should be mindful of their source, and choose the best quality available. I hope the above quote from Charaka answers Arya_dev's original question. As per these gunas, they may have negative effects in excess Kapha conditions. Best regards, Gerald Lopez Auckland, New Zealand www.ScienceOfLife.co.nz <http://scienceoflife.co.nz> _____________ And I think , there is generation of life into it as soon as it becomes fertilised . Then the hatching can be inside or outside of the body . It doesn't matter . It is a live animal . We cant say it does not have life ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 Dear Dr. Bhate, If this explanation is taken, may be all the vegetables that we eat should also be included in the live category as well. The debate is endless! Warm Regards, Dr. Sanjay Sharma ____________ We are a bundle of nearly 100 trilion cells(Post# 5886). Each cell needs nutrition, performs certain known function and produces waste matter just as we do as a whole body. Cells communicate. Cannot they be thought of as " life " ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 > If this explanation is taken, may be all the vegetables that we >eat should also be included in the live category as well. You are perfectly correct. It is the scientific truth which fetched Nobel prize to India! The following post emphasizes your throughts and answers some thoughts expressed by Gerald, in post# 15412 ayurveda/message/7176 above post from this author has one flaw regarding the statement " you are what you eat " . Author will point it out in another post at a later date. Regards Dr Bhate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 It would seem to me that it would be more correct to say, " You are what you digest " . GB _____________ ayurveda/message/7176 above post from this author has one flaw regarding the statement " you are what you eat " . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 Dear Dr . Sanjay Sharma . U r right . When something is growing or developing , it must have life . It can be a tree , fungus , small insects etc . As u posted , vegetables have life is a genuine truth . But there r certain categories of each living being ( may be Animal or Vegetable ) described in many sciences . eg Shrub , Herb , Small tree , Big tree etc . Everything depends upon some basic concepts . The subject can be discussed much more . But a centrepoint should exist somewhere , so that , there can be some outcome of the discussion . The question was - Does life exists in any type of egg or not ? And in my firm opinion , there is life in any type of egg!! __________ If this explanation is taken, may be all the vegetables that we eat should also be included in the live category as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Dear Yashendra, Thank you for your clear and excellent post, I agree with most of your reasoning. I would love to discuss your subtle arguments, but fear we will go way out of topic, and our good moderator will stop us! However there are some points that I feel are still unclear, which for the benefit of this forum, I will discuss. I did not say the Buddha recommended meat or Tamasic foods to others. I can only say that he is attributed to have said he would eat meat, as long as he didn't have to kill and prepare it himself. This has sparked many debates on what he meant! You have not defined Sattvic (or Satvik) food, and what effect it has on a person. Following your reasoning that food does indeed influence the mind, I would make a preliminary definition of Sattvic food as " food promoting clear and subtle thought " - please correct me if I'm wrong. Following from that, I would give a tentative definition of tamasic food as " food promoting dullness of mind " , and Rajasic food as " food promoting stimulation of mind and aggressiveness " . Some people also interpret Rajasic as " promoting sexual energy " . The other matter that is unclear is: what factors result in Sattvic or Rajasic or Tamasic food? Have these factors been clearly explained anywhere - and are they objective factors, rather than cultural preferences? Are you saying that such-and-such food is Tamasic or Rajasic or Sattvic because it is objectively so, or because someone told you it is so? You have asserted that eggs increase Tamo guna, leading to " stupefying consciousness " and " downfall " . How is this so? What authority says this, apart from some religious gurus? As we know, gurus have some very good things to say, but also can voice purely personal opinions. You have further implied that meat is Tamasic. What is the criterion? That some people don't like killing a creature that moves? And why not? Isn't this part of the cycle of life on earth? And does eating meat, by your reasoning, stupefy consciousness? In my experience, I have met many egg- and meat-eating people with very sharp minds, clear intellect, and subtle awareness; who appeared far from the downfall you speak of. Contrary to what you say, Charaka and other ancient ayurvedic writers have not said anything about Tamasic or Rajasic food. Charaka says this, " Vayu (vata), Pitta and Kapha are the bodily doshas (disturbances) and Rajas and Tamas are the mental ones. The former are treated by divine and rational measures; while the latter ones are treated with knowledge, restraint, memory and concentration. " (Charaka Samhita, Sutrasthana 1, 57-58) Where is the mention of foods to treat Rajas and Tamas? " Eggs of swans, chakora, hens, peacocks, and sparrows are useful in diminished semen, cough, heart disease and injuries. They are sweet, not causing burning sensation, and immediately strength-promoting. " (Charaka Samhita, Sutrasthana 27, 63-64) If you are right in saying that eggs were meant to be used only in disease, I do not see evidence of this in the texts. In fact Charaka talks about these foods in a chapter on " Foods " not " Medicines " . I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in food reads this particular chapter. Looking at the given qualities of eggs - even the unfertilised ones - they are naturally meant to promote and nourish life. Otherwise, if unfertilised, isn't it a waste of nourishment if uneaten? I cannot see how the promotion of life can be considered Tamasic. Furthermore, according to Charaka, eggs nourish vital parts of the body - heart and reproductive organs. They are therefore Ojas-promoting, and this seems to me a very subtle, Sattvic quality. Looking at foods from different points of view changes their apparent gunas, so how can this be objective assessment, and how can people make such strong pronouncements on foods? Yes, Yashendra, everything has consciousness. As we take consciousness into our bodies in the form of food of any kind, let us be conscious and give thanks, so that we may do our work and play our Earthly part in this grand evolution of Consciousness. Let us eat in comfort, in peace, and with quiet pleasure; that we may best welcome the consciousness of our food into our bodies and our minds. Best regards, Gerald Auckland, New Zealand www.ScienceOfLife.co.nz <http://scienceoflife.co.nz> ____________ > 1. As per Vedic scriptures, including Ayruveda, there is NO Non-Living thing in creation. Everything has consciousness. The degree of awakened consciousness varies though. And, that why we find so many beings or things........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Very well said Gerald! Perhaps all the critics need to read puranas where in clear mention is available about offering flesh of various animals even for Shraadh karm, with mention of the period of satiation of the pitras with various kinds of flesh. If I am not wrong, it was Brahmins, like today, who used to be given the offerings with religious rites for the satiation of the Pitras. So, clearly, even the Brahmins used to accept the non vegetarian food. I wish I could recollect the referece to quote here. Dr. Sanjay Sharma ________________ However there are some points that I feel are still unclear, which for the benefit of this forum, I will discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Dear Gerald The most important thing to keep in mind is - " You are what you eat ! " If one is eating rajasik or tamasik foods , it will make him likewise . The important aspect of eating Satvik food is to get a Satvik mind in all aspects . The Satvik mind have the ability to help the needy without any expectation in any field . It can live happily & without hurting anybody else comparatively more than Rajasik & Tamasik people . When we all r living on earth , it should be noted that one should not provide any harm or difficulty to other living members either human beings or animals . Satvik foods have this original quality . This quality is necessary as we are a single family on earth . We can take an example for this . A simple example of a Tiger & a Deer . A Tigre always eat other animals as its food . It will never eat Grass ( vegetables ) . So what is its approach if any human being or any animal will come in its way ? He will certainly attack the human being ( Many will say if he is not hungry , he wont do that ! ) or the animal & cause harm . It is its original instinct to attack any live animal or human being . It is due to its tamasik food . Not a single person will dare to go in front of a Tiger for this reason . Even animals know this too . Comparatively for Deer , it always eat grass , vegetables which is Satvik food . We wont find any Deer attacking on any type of living individual . People always like to go nearer to Deers for touching them or to feed them without any problem . We can understand the qualities of living from this example . The people eating more rajasik or tamasik food , always have more anger , envy etc than people eating Satvik food . Have U seen any sanyasi or monk attacking on people ? You must have read or heard about terrorists who eat all types of meat & drink alcohol . Why this is the difference ? Specific communities which eat rajasik & tamasik food always want to fight at any place at any cost ! You must have heard about the people who always eat tamasik food ( here non veg food ) have much more anger & fighting attitude . Then what is the reason behind this ? The main thing to be reminded is how do a person himself want to live in his life ! There are certain rules for each thing to be done . These rules are made by some researchers who found something wrong in the path of their life with those things ! It came from the experience of their own ! Today what we know is not the total science . Much part of the science have vanished or got burned or unable to get ! It is the attitude , which makes ur personal life likewise & it always makes the difference in ur life . _______________ .... You have not defined Sattvic (or Satvik) food, and what effect it has on a person. Following your reasoning that food does indeed influence the mind, I would make a preliminary definition of Sattvic food as " food promoting clear and subtle thought " - please correct me if I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 > A Tigre always eat other animals as its food . It will > never eat Grass ( vegetables ) . So what is its approach if any > human being or any animal will come in its way ? He will certainly > attack the human being ( Many will say if he is not hungry , he wont > do that ! ) or the animal & cause harm . It is its original instinct > to attack any live animal or human being . It is due to its tamasik > food . Not a single person will dare to go in front of a Tiger for > this reason . Even animals know this too . > > Comparatively for Deer , it always eat grass , vegetables which > is Satvik food . We wont find any Deer attacking on any type of > living individual . People always like to go nearer to Deers for > touching them or to feed them without any problem . The most amazing effect of food and environment on the Tiger can be read in a heart churning real life story. Please follow the link: ayurveda/message/7242 What is not emphasized in this story is, finally the tiger changed the tiger-hunter into a human with vibrating satvik mind. Though some of the qualities of the mind are with us since birth, the environment around us can change it, as brought out by another member in above link. Also, the tigress, even though she took goat meat, she did not turn aggressive, except when a stranger was trying to walk into house, a quality she shared with her cannine family. She used to roar, but not kill anyone. The satvik, rajasik, tamasik properties of the food cant be established in scientific Labs. The closest scientific measure, as proposed by many, and experienced by some patients of this author: the non-satvik foods cause a pulse surge more than 5 beats per minute, 30 minutes after the food intake(Post# 4511). Indian cow milk with or without sugar, products made therefrom were noted to be satvik by this test. Thus pulse difference before and 30 minutes after food intake can be proposed as a guide for measuring non-satvik quality. It is possible that a food which is satvik for one, may get disqualified to be satvik for another person. That is the individuality theory (Prakruti) of ayurveda. One interesting observation just one patient had: She was allergic to milk in USA, but while in India, Indian cow milk she could take without pulse shooting up beyond 5 beats. She kept taking it as long as she could get. There is nothing like a generic milk. It differs from cow to cow, animal to animal. People consuming satvik food, if they start looking upon those who consume non-satvik food as inferior race, they should not be assumed satvik, as the superior-inferior complex itself is Rajas. Dr Bhate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 often elephants attack villagers near by,similarly bulls too attack , The bufellow of the forest is a dangerous attacker. All of them are eating grass. Is grass is rajasic food? This letter sounds vegetarians are good people and non vegetarians are tough people. it is certainly wrong to generalize such statement. Many scientists made great discoveries and most of them took non veg food. are they thamasic or inferior people? one cannot become superior by eating. but one can imagine himself superior because of eating. R.Vidhyasagar ______________ If one is eating rajasik or tamasik foods , it will make him likewise . The important aspect of eating Satvik food is to get a Satvik mind in all aspects . The Satvik mind have the ability to help the needy without any expectation in any field . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 We are all born with innate abilities, desires, and attitudes (or in one word " samskaras " ) and they do not go away that easily. Also, sattvik food unless consumed regularly for an extended period of time does not yield noticeable changes in a person or being. It also depends on how much of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas one is born with. That is why you will find many vegetarians who have non-sattvic tendencies, while non-vegetarians displaying sattvic attributes. Another thing to keep in mind is that we all are a mixed breed of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. Very few of us can claim to be totally sattvic in nature. So, on some occasions the same person may display a sattvic behavior while displaying rajasic or tamasic behavior on other occasions. All these observations should not undermine the role of sattvic diet in our lives though. People or animals do change, though the relationship between the degree of change and intake of sattvic food depends on other factors like the ones mentioned above. _____________ often elephants attack villagers near by,similarly bulls too attack , The bufellow of the forest is a dangerous attacker. All of them are eating grass.. Is grass is rajasic food? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 Thanks Matthew for your great input! Also, we should remember, that the five elements (earth, water, fire, air and ether) are formed from sattva, rajo and tamoguna, in different proportions. And further, all in this universe is formed of five elements. Our body is formed of five elements. And the three biological energies, the three doshas in our body, vata, pitta and kapha are formed of five elements. Based on that, we as individuals have different intrisinct proportions of tamas, rajas and sattva in our constitution. That already explains different personality traits. -Omkaarnath ________________ It also depends on how much of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas one is born with. That is why you will find many vegetarians who have non-sattvic tendencies, while non-vegetarians displaying sattvic attributes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 Dear Vaidyas, The subject which was debated here is taking some turn . This is not the issue for superiority or inferiority as raised in some posts. Nor like the pure vegetarians are superior than non vegetarians . What I wanted to tell was the qualities of food & the general experience u get from that . Vagbhata, one of the most respected ancient Vaidya stated a very special sutra ( statement ) . It is as follows : " Vruddhi Samanae Sarvesham Viparitae Viparyaya ! " The meaning of this sutra is : - Everything ( Dravya , Guna or Karma ) increases with the same quality of themselves . It means that , Rakta Dhatu ( Blood ) increases with blood , Mansa Dhatu increases with Mansa , Black pepper increases the Agni etc ! The same law is applied for the Tridosha - Saptadhatu - Trimala . It is applicable to the Manas Guna too !! Satva will increase Satva , Tamas will increase Tamas etc . If this law is stated thousands of years back by a very well known Vaidya , then i think , it is the baseline for us today . To verify the authenticity of above statement in modern time, one simple experiment will suffice. Eat only Satvik food 3 times a day for 30 days regularly . And eat Tamasik food 3 times a day for 30 days regularly . You will see the changes in ur daily habitat & mentality for sure . ___________ often elephants attack villagers near by,similarly bulls too attack , The bufellow of the forest is a dangerous attacker. All of them are eating grass. Is grass rajasic food? This letter sounds vegetarians are good people and non vegetarians are tough people. it is certainly wrong to generalize such statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 The reference to eggs is available in Charaka Samhita as well as Ashtang Sangraha in chapters describing meats under the topic of foods. However the description in Charaka is more detailed. In Ashtang Sangraha it is stated that eggs are guru i.e heavy to digest/ highly nutritious. In Charaka, it is mentioned that eggs are madhur (sweet), avidaahi (not causing heat in stomach), sadyo-balakar (providing instant strength/energy), and are useful in people suffering from oligospermia (reduced sperm count), cough, heart diseases and injury/wounds. Dr.Muzumdar M.D.Ayurveda-Medicine 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.