Now we shall treat of desirable conduct - the
performance of righteous actions, refinement of (character)
speech and manners, association with men of learning
and piety, and love of all true knowledge, etc. - and
undesirable conduct - the reverse of all these
should always bear in mind that whatsoever is done by
learned men - good and true, - who are free form inordinate
affection and hatred, or whatsoever is known to be true
by the testimony of the inner monitor is the true
conduct of life." MANU 2: 1.
this world, neither inordinate desire nor its total
absence is conducive to a man's happiness, because it
would be impossible either to lead a virtuous life as
enjoined by the Veda or to acquire true (Vedic)
knowledge without desiring the same." MANU 2:2.
is impossible for any man to be altogether free from
desire, because all our actions - philanthrophic works,
truthfulness in speech, the practice of Yamas*
and Niyamas,** and other duties - proceed from
desire for the same.
* Yamas are five:- (1) kindness
to all, (2) truthfulness in word, deed and thought, (3)
honesty in dealings, (4) chastity, (5) freedom from selfishness.
**Niyamas are also five:- (1)Purity
of mind and body, (2) mental tranquility, (3) strict devotion
to duty, (4) study of the Vedas and other true Shaastraas
and contemplation of the Deity, (5)Resignation to the
Will of God. - Tr.
the most insignificant action (e.g., nictitation) in
this world is impossible without a desireeon the part
of the doer. Therefore, whatever a man does (e.g., the
movements of his hand, feet, eyes, and menta. Activity)
is the outcome of his will." MANU 2: 4.
a man regulatehis conduct according to what is sanctioned
by the Vedas taught by Smritis and other books of
the Rishis - seers of the Veda -, practiced by
all men - good and true and approved by his own soul."
MANU 2: 6.
other words, let him perform such actions in the doing
of which no such feelings, as fear, distrust and shame,
arise in the soul. Behold, when a man desires to tell
a lie or steal anything, his soul is filled with feelings
of fear, shame and doubt, it is, therefore, a proof
of the fact that it is wrong to do such an act.
a man, therefore, carefully view all these - the Veda,
the teachiigs of the Vedic seers, practices of good
men and true, and the approval of his own soul - with
the eyes of wisdom, and do his duty in obedience to
what is sanctioned by the Veda and approved by his own
soul." MANU 2: 8>
tha man, who follows rules of the righteous conduct
as taught by Veda and by the Smritis in conformity with
Veda, shall acquire fame in this life and the highest
bliss in the next.." MANU 2: 9.
Veda is called the shruti and the system of conduct
of life as taught by the Vedic seers and teachers is
embodied in the Smriti. It is by the help of
these that the true conduct of life as well as the false
is ascertained. He who holds them- the Vedas and the
works of true
in conformity with the Veda - to contempt should be
excluded from all good society, as an atheist and a
slanderer of the Veda.
the Veda, the Smriti, the practice of good men and the
approval of one's soul - these are undoubtedly the four
criteria of the True conduct of life. In other words,
it is by these alone that the true religion is ascertained."
MANU 2: 12.
is only those who stand aloof from the headlong pursuit
of both - wealth and carnal desires - that can ever
attain a knowledge of true religion. It is the duty
of everyone, who aspires to gain this object, to determine
what true religion is by the help of the Veda, for,
a clear and perfect ascertainment of true religion is
not attained without help of the Veda." MANU 2:13.
it behoves all men to practise all those righteous deeds
that are enjoined by the Veda.
Dwijaas - Braahmans, Kshatriyaas and Vaishyaas
- should perform all Sanskaars* for their own good as
well as for that of their children. They lead to purity
(mental and corporeal) in this life as well as in the
next." MANU 2: 16.
the Tonsure Sanskar be performed in the sixteenth year
of a Braahman, in the twenty-second of a Kshatriya,
in the twenty-fourth of a Vaishya." MANU 2: 65. (In
other words, it should not be delayed beyond those periods).
Thereafter they should keep a tuft of hair on the top
of the head
*A sanskar is anything done to
improve, refine and purify the body and the soul. Ther
are altogether sixteen sanskars: the first one is the
sexual intercourse with the object of producing good children,
as has been described in the beginning of the second Chapter
of this book. -Tr.
always cut or shave the hair of the head, moustache
and beard. That is to say, they should never grow them
afterwards. In a very cold climate they can please themselves
as to cutting the hair or allowing it to grow. On the
other hand, in very hot climate they shold have all
their hair, not even barring the tuft of hair on the
top of the head, cut or shaved; because too much hair
on the head is productive of heat which causes dulness
of intellect. The moustache and beard cause inconvenience
in eating and drinking; because the particles of food
adhere to them.
"As a skilful driver keeps his horses well under control
and directs them in the right path, so should a man
strive to keep his senses - that are apt to lead one's
mind to the pursuit of wicked objects and temptations
- under thorough control, restrain them from the path
of sin and temptation, and always guide them in the
path of righteousness. This alone is the true conduct
of life." MANU 2:88.
that man alone can achieve his heart's who is master
of his senses and directs them in the path of righteousness.
But he who allows them to get engrossed in sensual gratification
and sin, and thus becomes their slave, soon contracts
evil habits, loses his character and suffers the evil
consequences thereof." MANU 2:93.
desires are never fully gratified if they are indulged.
They are only inflamed still more fiercely like fire
which blazes more vehemenly when fuel ( and butter)
are added to it. Let a man, therefore, never indulge
in sensual gratification." MANU 2:94.
man who is the slave of his passions can never succeed
in acquiring knowledge of the Veda, in keeping up his
vows of chastity, truthfulness and the like, nor in
fulfilling his duties towards man and God, practising
righteousness and doing good works. They are only attainable
to the good and pious man who is the master of his senses."
MANU 2: 97.
a man, therefore, have thorough control over his five
organs of sense and five organs of action and the eleventh
organ of thought, - the mind, - protect his body by
proper dieting and by observing the laws of health,
and, thereby achieve the object of his life." MANU 2:
is verily the master of his senses who rejoices not
when applauded, nor grieves when censured, is neither
by sensation of nice soft things (such as soft comfortable
bed and clothes), nor displeased by that of hard and
coarse things, neither delighted with the sight of beautiful
things nor vexed with that of ugly hideous things, neither
pleased with a good dinner nor angered with a bad one,
neither gladdened with the smell of perfumes, nor disgusted
with that of disagreeable odours." MANU 2: 98.
a wise man never speak unless spoken to, nor answer
a question when unjustly and hypocritically asked. Among
hypocrites let him remain as if he were dumb; but to
the honest truth-seeker let him preach even though unasked."
MANU 2: 110.
"Wealth, nobility of blood, age, professional skill,
and honesty industry (or character) and true knowledge,
these are five things to be respected but the one following
more than the one preceding it. In other words, a man
of noble lineage or one's relation ought to command
more respect than a man, who is only wealthy, and aged
man should be respected more than the first two, a man
possessing some professional skill or good character
more than the first three; again true knowledge and
wisdom ( the wealth of mind) should command more respect
than professional skill or character." MANU 2:136
ignorant man destitute of true knowledge, four hundred
years old though he be, is in truth a child; whilst
a teacher of secular knowledge and of spiritual science,
though he be a child, should be respected as an old
man; because all the Shaatraas and wise sages have declared
an ignorant man to be like a child and a learned man
like unto a father." MANU 2:153.
man does not become old (aged) by years, nor by grey
hair, nor by wealth, nor by powerful kindreds and friends.
The wise and holy sages have declared, - 'He among us
is old (great) who is most learned in knowledge - material
and spiritual." MANU 2:154.
Brahman is entitled to distinction according
to the extent of his knowledge; a Kshaatriya
is judged by his physical power, a Vaishya by
material wealth in his possession, and a Shoodraby
years." MANU 2:155.
man is not, therefore, old (venerable), because his
head is grey, but he, who has acquired wisdom though
tender in years, is considered old (venerable) by the
wise." MANU 2:156.
an elephant made of wood or as a deer made of leather,
so is a man destitute of knowledge. He is a man only
in name." MANU 2:157.
a man therefore, gain knowledge and acquire wisdom,
lead a virtuous life, bear makice to none and hsow all
men the path that leads to true happiness. Let his speech
be sweet and kindly." MANU 2:159.
are they who always preach the truth and thereby promote
righteousness and destroy sin and wickedness.
a man always take bath regularly, keep his clothes clean,
his food and drink clean and pure, the his house clean
and tidy. The cleanliness and purity of these things
lead to health and purity of mind, which in their turn
increase strength and capacity for work.
Cleanliness should be sufficient to remove all traces
of dirt and disagreeable odours.
practice of such virtues as veracity, and the doing
of good works verily constitute the true conduct of
life enjjoined by the Veda and taught by the
Smritis." MANU 1: 108.
"The service of father, mother, tutor and atithis, i.e.,
the altruistic teachers of humanity, is called devapujaa
or the worship of godly persons." YAJUR VEDA 14:15 -ATHARVA
VEDA 11:15,17 -TAITREYA UPANISHAD 7: 11
to whatever promotes the good of the world as well as
abstinence from all harmful acts are the chief duties
of man. Let a man never associate with those who are
atheists, and liars, nor with those who are indolent,
guilty of breach of faith, hypocritical, selfish and
deceitful. Let him always move in the society ofmen
who are learned, truthful, pious and have public good
at heart. This, in truth, constitutes good conduct.
Is not the character of the people of Aryavarta (India)
lost by going a broad?
No, it is not; because a man can retain a good character
and is not polluted, no matter wher he goes, as long
as he is pure in mind and body and practises such virtues
as truthfulness. Whoever is addicted to a sinful life
and immoral practices, even though he lives in India,
loses his character and is polluted. Had it not been
so, why should the ancients have travelled abroad.
Aryas of Europe and the Americas.
Mark what is written in the Mahaabhaarat. "Once
upon a time the sage Vyaasa lived in Paataala
(America) with his son and pupil Shuka. The son
asked his father if spiritual science was only what
he had him or something more. Vyaasa intentionally
did not answer that question. He had lectured on tthat
subject before. So in order to have his teaching confirmed
by the testimony of another man, he addressed Shuka
thus, 'O my son, you go to Mithipapuri and ask
this very question of King Janak. He would give
you the right answer.'
heard what his father said, Shuka left America
for Mithalpuri. He first visited the continent that
lay to the North and North-West of the Himalayas and
was called Harivarsha* ( now called Europe),
then the countries of the Jews called Hoon (Asia
Minor, etc.), thence he came to China, from China he
proceeded towards the Himalayas and thence to Mithilapuri
(in India). It is recorded in the same
*Hari a monkey, Varsha an abode.
Hari-Varsha therefore literally means abode of monkeys,
so-called because its inhabitants have red lips and brown
eyes like those of monkeys.
that Krishna and Arjuna went to America
in an Ashwatari vessel (i.e., one propelled by
electricity) and brought the sage Uddalaka back
with them on the occasion of the Rajasuya Yajna
of Emperor Yudhishthira. Again Prince Dhritraashtra
was married to a princess of Gandhaar (Kandhaar).
Madri, the wife of King Paandu was the
daughter of the King of Iran (Persia), Prince Arjuna
was married to Princess Ulopi of Paataala
(America). Now how could they have done all those things
if they had not gone abroad?*
ther is mention of a tac in the Manu Smriti which was
levied on all vessels leaving Indian ports.
Emperor Yudhishthira performed his Rajasuya Yajna
(coronation), he sent his brothers, prince Bhima,
prince Arjuna, prince Nakula and prince
Sahadeva with invitations to all the kings of
the four quarters of the globe to join the Yajna. Had
they considered it debasing to one's character to travel
abroad, they would not have done all those things.
ancient Indians used to go abroad to all parts of the
world for the purposes of trade, travel, or on political
business. The present day bug-bear of loss of one's
character and faith through travelling abroad is simply
due to the false teachings of the ignorant people and
the growoth of dense ignnorance. Those who do not hesitate
to go abroad, and thereby associate with peoples of
various foreign countries, study their customs and manners
of the foreigners, and rejecting their faults and evil
habits, and bad manners, O ye foolish people!
character and faith are not lost by having sexual intercourse
with a low, despicable prostitute, but you consider
it harmful and debasing to associate with good men of
other countries! What is it, if not foolishness? It
is true though that those who live on flesh-diet and
take intoxication drinks, have their bodies, bodily
organs and secretions ( as reproductive element) saturated
with the fine particles of those malodorous substances.
The Aryas (natives of India) should, therefore,
becareful that they do not get infected with these evel
habits. But there can
*Literally to different contries,
peninsulas and islands. -Tr.
no harm or sin in learniing trade, arts and other good
qualities from the foreigners. When these foolish people
considerit a sin even to see or touch them, they can
never fight against them, as they must see and touch
them in fight.
all good men remember that good conduct consists only
in the avoidance of untruthfulness, injustice, inordinate
affection or hatred and other evel habits, and in the
practice of love and kindness towards all, in the cultivation
of gentle disposition and in the promotion of public
good, etc. Let them also understand that religion has
reference to one's soul and good life. When we live
righteous lives, foreign travel can do us no harm.
evil consequences flow wonly from the commission of
sins. It is right though that we should thoroughly understand
what the true Vedic religion is, and also learn to refute
false religions so that no onemay be able to mislead
us. Can a country ever make any progress unless its
people trade with or extend their rule over other countries?
What can you expect but misery and poverty, when the
people of acountry trade only among themselves, whilst
the foreigners control their trade and rule over them?
hypocrites - the so-called priests and other religious
teachers perfectly understand that if they educate the
people, and let them travel abroad, they would get enlightened,
and consquently would no longer be ensnared in net of
fraud and hypocrisy spread by them. They would thus
lose their livelihood and respect. This is the reason
that they make so much fuss in the matter of eating
and drinking. Their object is to prvent people from
going abroad. It is quite true though that not even
by mistake should they ever use meat or drink.
all sensible men not ascertained that in time of war
the cooking of food and its eating, or drinking (milk
or water, etc.) under such absurd restrictions as those
of Chaukaa* by soldiers have invariably been
the cause of their defeat? The duty of a soldier - whether
on foot, mounted on a horse or on an elephant, or seated
in a car - consists (if necessary) in eating and drinking
with one hand whilsst fighting the enemy with the other,
and in winning the battle; whilwit is wrong on his part
to let himself be defeated. By observing such absurd
restrictions as of Caukaa is the matter of
*The kitchen should be plastered
with a thin coating of mud mixed with a bit of cow-dung.
The food should be cooked by no one else but a high caste
and then served by the same within a marked area, etc.-Tr.
and drinking, and other foolish practices. These stupid
people have lost all independence, happiness, wealth,
political power, learning and activity, in short, everything.
Now they are sitting idle with empty hands, praying
for someone to come and relieve their distress, and
give them something in charity wherewith they could
get some food and ease the pangs of hunger. But that
help is never forthcoming. They have thus completely
ruined Aryavarta (India). It is quite true though
that no pains should be spared in washing, plastering,
sweeping, cleaning and tidying up the kitchen. It should
never be allowed, to get dirty like that of the Mohammedans
and preparation of food.
O. What are Sakharee and Nikharee?
The food that is cooked in water is called Sakharee,
while what is cooked in milk or fried in butter is called
Nikharee (i.e., nice). This is another fraud
invented by these rogues. The food cooked in milk and
butter is always pleasing to the taste; they have originated
these fraudulent practices (in the matter of food) in
order to fill their stomachs with delicious, greasy
articles of food, otherwise, whatever has been ripened
by heat and time is called ripe (another name for nikharee)
and whatever has not been cooked or ripened is called
raw (another name for sakharee). Even the permissibility
of all ripe or cooked food and the prohibition of raw
food is not applicable to all cases, for instance, fried
grams and other cereals, though un-cooked, are still
eaten and their use is not forbidden.
Should the Dwijaas (twice-born) cook their food with
their own hands or is it permissible to eat food cooked
by the Shoodraas (low-casted)?
They can eat what has been cooked by the Shoodraas;
because it is the duty of Dwijas - Brahmans, Khatriyas
and Vaishyas both men and women) to devote themselves
to the dissemination of knowledge, the service of the
state, the breeding of cattle, and to agriculture, trade
and arts ( and not to waste their time in cooking, etc.)
But they should not eat or drink out of a <
b>utensils or what has been cooked in his own house
except in case
*In India the kitchens of the
Mohamedans and Christians are not generally kept clean.
Among the European residents in India it is chiefly due
to the fact that the kitchens are entirely left in the
hands of low caste Indian servants who do not possess
and great sense of cleanliness.-Tr.
emergency. Here is an authority for this statement :-
" In the houses of the twice-born, Shoodraas - i.e.,
ignorant men and women incapable of following any higher
pursuit - should do the cooking and other domestic service."
APASTAMBH II.ii, 2,4. But they should keep their bodies
and clothes, etc., clean. While engaged in cooking in
the houses of the Aryas - the twice-born - they
should have their mouths covered ( with a piece of cloth)
so that their beath may not contaminate the food, and
their saliva may not fall into it; they should wash
before cooking. They should take their food after the
Aryas have been served.
How can it be permissible to eat food cooked by a Shoodraa
when it is held to be wrong to partake of food even
touched by him?
It is a mere fabrication, and therefore, absolutely
wrong. Bear you well in mind that whosoever has partaken
of sugar (brown or white), butter, milk, flour, vegetables,
fruits and roots has in fact eaten what has been prepared
by men of all sorts and conditions, and their leavings.
When the < b>, leather-workers,* scavengers,
and Mohammedans, Christians and others gather sugarcanes
for the fields, peel them, and press juice out of them,
they handle them with their soiled hands, as they do
not wash them even after micturating or defecating.
suck one-half of a cane, and shove the remaining half
into the press, fill a jug out of a vessel containing
cane juice, drink as much as they can, and pour the
remainder back into it. While evaporating the juice
they sometimes make cakes in the same pan and never
clean it afterwards. In the manufacture of white sugar,
they rub the brown sugar with their shoes, the soles
of which are soiled with all kinds of dirt, offal, and
dust. Milkmen adulterate milk with water kept in their
dirty cans, and keep butter in the same. Similarly,
in the manufacture of flour they - the laborers - handle
it with their dirty hands, and even their perspiration
trickles sown into it.
same kind of undesirable practices are to be seen in
the careless handling of fruits, roots and tubers. Whoever
has, therefore, eaten these things has in fact eaten
of the hands of men of all sorts and conditions.
*Leather-workers in India are
of very dirty habits. -Tr.
There is nothing wrong in partaking of foods and drinks
that have even been prepared and handled behind your
back, such as fruits, roots and tubers, etc. (by undesirable
Indeed ! what else would you have eaten? Dust or ashes?
Sugar is sweet, milk and butter are nourishing, you
could not forego the use of these articles. No wonder,
therefore, that you extremely selfish people have invented
such false doctrines and practices. Well, if there be
no harm in eating or drinking what ahs not been prepared
before your eyes by some undesirable person, would you
eat food out of the hands of a scavenger or a Mohammedan*
who cooked it with his own hands in some place out of
your sight. It is true that in eating and drinking out
of the hands of flesh-eaters and wine-drinkers, such
as the Mohammedans and the Christians, there is some
danger of even the Aryas - followers of the Veda
- contracting these evil habits, e.g., eating flesh
and drinking intoxicants.
ther can be no harm if the Aryas dine together.
It is extremely difficult for people to make any progress
as long as their religion and their interests are not
the same. Again they cannot progress when they do not
rejoice in each other's joys, nor sympathize in each
other's afflictions. But mer dining together can never
lead to any real progress. As long as they do not avoid
evil things - manners, customs, etc. - and embrace good
things, instead of making any progress they will go
form bad to worse.
causes of foreign rule in India are:- mutual feud, differences
in religion, want of purity in life, lack of education,
child-marriage, marriage in which the contracting parties
have no voice in the selection of their life-partners,
indulgence in carnal gratification, untruthfulness and
other evil habits, the neglect of the study of the Veda,
and other mal-practices.
is only when brothers fight among themselves that an
outsider poses as an arbiter. Have you people even forgotten
the practices that were in vogue at the time of the
Mahaabhaarat War, a little over five thousand
years ago? In the war they - the soldiers - ate and
drank even while riding or driving in cars. Mutual feud
ruined the Kauravas, the Paandavas and
*The Puraniks do not partake of
food touched by a Mohammedan or a Christian. - Tr.
in the past. The same fatal disease is still clinging
to us. None knows whether this dreadful fiend will ever
leave us, or rob us of all our happiness and plunge
us in the depths of misery. The Aryas are still
treading the wicked path of the despicable low Duryodhana,
the destroyer of his race and enemy of his country.
May God through His mercy rid us, Aryas, of this
DIET - PERMISSIBLE and FORBIDDEN
Permissibility or prohibition in diet is based on two
factors - one determined by the Science of morals and
religion, and the other by the Science of Health.
twice-born -Braahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas -
must not eat such vegetables, fruits and roots as are
raised in night soil and other kinds of refuse." MANU
should abstain from flesh diet and intoxicants", MANU
2: 177, such as wine, Ganja, Cannabis Indica, and opium,
them never use those articles that are prejudicial to
the growth of the intellect." SHARANGDHAR 4:21.
should also avoid the use of all those articles of food
that are decomposed, fermented, unclean or foul smelling,
etc., and those that are not properly cooked as well
as those prepared and handled by such men as live on
flesh - diet and intoxicating drinks whose very bodies
are saturated with the fine particles of meat and alcohol.
Aryas should neither themselves kill such useful
animals as cows, nor let other do the same. One cow
in one generation benefits 475,000 people through her
milk, butter and offspring - male and female. Thus,
some cows give thirty-two pints of milk, other not more
than three pints daily, say for twelve months ( some
give mild for eighteen months, other for six, hence
we have taken the mean of the two). Calculating on this
basis, we find that 24,960 persons can be fed at one
meal with the milk given by one cow in her whole life-time.
On an average a cow calves about twelve times during
her whole life. Supposing two of them die, of the
ten calves, say, there are five males and five females.
The latter during their lives will together give enough
milk to satisfy 124,800 persons at one meal. The remaining
five male calves can produce at least 180 tons of corn,*
and supposing we allow 11/2 lb. of corn per head, 180
tons will do on a rough estimate for 250,000 persons
as food for one meal. Putting milk and corn together
a cow in one generation can supply one good meal to
if we go on calculating the amount of corn and milk
yielded by one cow in all her generations, it will be
found that they would be sufficient to feed millions
upon millions of people. Besides bullocks are very useful
to man for tilling the ground, riding, pulling carts
and wagons, and carrying heavy loads, etc., but the
chief use of cows is that they yield good milk.
milk is not so useful in promoting the growth of the
intellect as a cow's. Therefore, it is that the Aryas
have always regarded the xow as the most useful animal.
Other enlightened people will do the same. One goat
yields, enough milk to satisfy 25,920 people at one
meal. Similarly, horses, elephants, camels, donkeys
and sheep are of great service to man in various ways.
Those who slaughter these animals should be looked upon
as enemies of the whole human race.
the Aryas were in power, these most useful animals
were never allowed to be killed. Consequently, man and
other living beings lived in great peace and happiness.
Because , milk and butter, and such animals as bullocks
being plentiful, there was abundance of food and drink
( as milk, etc.). But since the meat-eating, and wine-drinking
foreigners - the slayers of kind and other animals -
have come into this country and become the ruling power,
the troubles and suffering s of the Aryas have
ever been on the increase; because, it is said, "How
can you get fruits and flowers of a tree when its root
is cut off?" VRIDHA CHAANAKYA 10:13.
Were all people to live on non-flesh diet, lions and
other carnivorous animals would multiply in such large
number that they will kill all such useful animals as
cows. Your attempt to prevent their slaughter would
come to nothing.
*Bullocks ar used in India for
tilling the ground and other agricultural purposes.-Tr.
It is the business of the State to punish or even kill
all those men and animals that are injurious (to the
Should their flesh, i.e., (of the animals thus killed)
be thrown away?
It would do no harm to the world whether it be thrown
away, given to dogs or such other carnivorous animals,
cremated or even eaten by some meat-eater. But if eaten
by man, it will tend to change his disposition and make
use of all such food and drinks as are obtained through
injuring or killing others or through theft, dishonesty,
breach of faith, fraud or hypocrisy is forbidden, in
other words they al come under the heading of forbidden
articles of diet; while the acquisition of foods and
drinks through righteous means without injuring or killing
any living creature falls in the category of permissible
articles, of diet.
also includes all those articles that give health, and
strength, destroy disease, promote intellectual power
and energy and prolong life, such as rice, wheat, sugar,
milk, butter, fruits, tubers and roots, when properly
mixed in due proportion and cooked, and eaten in moderation
at proper meal times.
from the use of all those things that do not agree with
one's constitution and are apt to produce disease or
other evil effects, and the use of those that are prescribed
for one (by his medical attendant) also constitute adherence
to what is called the permissible diet.
Is there any harm in eating together, i.e., out of the
Yes, it is harmful, because people differ in their nature
and constitutions, etc., from each other. Just as one
is eating out of the same dish with a leper is apt to
catch disease, likewise eating with other people is
always liable to produce evil results. It can never
do any good. Therefore it is said in the Manu Smriti:-
"Let no man give the leaving of his food to another,
nor eat out of the same dish with another, nor eat too
much, nor after finishing his meal leave his seat without
washing his hands and rinsing out his mouth." MANU 2:
How will you then interpret the text "Let a pupil eat
Uchhistha (the leaving of ) his preceptor"?
It means that a pupil should serve his tutor first and
after he ahs finished his meal, let the pupil himself
eat of what is left - behind not as leavings but what
has not been used by the teacher and is still kept separately.
This is only implies that the teacher should have his
meal before his pupil.
If the use of all kinds of leavings is forbidden, honey
- the leaving of bees, milk - the leavings of calves,
and one's own leavings - the food left after one had
taken one morsel out of it - should also be forbidden.
Honey comes under this description only nominally. It
is really the essence of many a medicinal plant, hence
it is acceptable. The calf can only drink the milk that
comes out of the teats of its mother, but not what is
inside. Therefore the milk, that is obtained by milking
a cow after the calf has sucked it off the teats cannot
be called leavings. But it is proper that the udder
and teats should be carefully washed and cleansed with
pure water after the calf has had its share, before
the cow is milked, and the milking vessel should also
be dept perfectly clean.
own leavings can do no harm to oneself. Even nature
clearly teaches us that it is wrong to eat another man's
leavings. No one feels any great repugnance in touching
the secretions from one's own nose, mouth, ears and
organs of reproduction, micturition and defecation,,
but one does so in the case of others. It proves, therefore,
that this practice is not against the laws of nature.
No one, therefore, should eat the leavings of or in
the same dish with another.
Should not even husband and wife eat each other's leavings?
No, even their natures and constitutions differ?
Well, Sir! What harm is there in eating what has been
prepared by any one as long as he is a man; because
the bodies of all men, from a Braahman to the lowest
of human beings, are made of flesh and bones? The same
blood runs in the veins of all.
Yes, there is harm. A Braahman and Braahmani are fed
on the very best of foods, hence their bodies are formed
out of the reproductive elements, that are free from
impurities and other deleteruous elements, which is
not true of the bodies of the extremely
men and women that are simply laden with dirt and other
foul matter. It is, therefore, right that we should
eat and drink with Braahmans and other higher
classes and not with scavengers and workers in leather.
Now what would you say if you were asked "Would you
look upon all other women, such as your mother, sister,
mother-in-law, sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, with
the same eyes as your wife, because all of them are
made of the same kind of flesh and blood?" You will
simply be filled with shame and make no answer. Again,
as good, clean food is eaten with hands and the mouth,
so can the bad, unclean and decomposed food be eaten,
would you then eat dirt, etc. ? Can this ever be right?
Q. As you plaster the kitchen floor with cow-dung
(and mud), why do you not then also use human excrement
for the same purpose? Why is not the kitchen polluted
when the dung is used in it?
The dung is not so foul-smelling as the human excrement.
The cow-dung being greasy does not so easily come off
the floor, nor does it soil the dress, nor does it look
dirty. Dirt does not come off the dry dung so easily
as off the mud. The place that has been plastered with
a thin coating of mud and dung properly mixed together
looks nice. If the kitchen, wherein food is cooked and
sometimes also eaten, the naturally therefore particles
of food, such as bread-crumbs, sugar and butter, drop
sown on the floor which being thus made dirty attracts
flies, insects and other such creatures be not swept,
plastered and properly cleaned every day, it would be
as dirt as a privy.
kitchen, therefore, should be properly plastered with
mud and dung, swept and kept thoroughly clean. This
applies to the floor that is made of bricks and mud
or of the latter only. But if it is cemented, it should
be kept clean by washing it thoroughly with water. The
kitchen should never be allowed to get dirty and untidy
like that of a Mohammedan wherein there is a pile of
charcoal in one place, a heap of ashes in another, and
a bundle of sticks in the third, here a broken kettle,
and there an unwashed plate, here some bones there some
joints, and as about flies their number is legion!!!
That place is, as a rule, so dirty that if a respectable
man were to go and sit there
a little while, it would soon possibly bring up his
food. It looks more like a latrine.* Well, if you think
that plastering with mud and dung pollutes your kitchen,
why do you plaster the walls of the rest of your house
with them? Why do you burn dried cow-dung in your fire-place
and use that fire to light your pipe (hubble-bubble)?
Do not these things pollute you kitchen? What nonsense!
Should one take his meals in the Chaukaa or outside
One may take his meals wherever the place is clean and
tidy. But in times of war and other cases of emergency
it is quite proper to eat and drink in all positions
and places - sitting on horse-back, driving cars, or
O. Should one eat only what has been cooked by one's
own hands and not that which has been done by another?
Among the Aryas as food has been prepared in
a clean manner, not matter who has done it, there is
no harm in eating it in company with other Aryas.
If Braahmans (men and women) and persons of other
higher Classes were to devote their time to cooking,
washing utensils, sweeping and dusting, and observing
such embarrassing restrictions as that of the Chaukaa,
who would then attend to higher pursuits, such as the
advancement of science and arts.
On the occasion of the Rajasuya Yajna of Emperor
Yudhishthira, kings and princes, sages and wise
teachers had gathered from all parts of the world. They
all ate and drank together. It is only since the Mohammedan,
the Christians taken to eating beef and drinking wine
that these troublesome restrictions in eating and drinking
have come into vogue in this country.
kings, princes and other Aryas of ancient India
had even marriage relations with the foreigners, as
we read in the Mahaabhaarata that Ghaandhaaree<
Maadri, Ulopi and other princesses, of Gaandhaar
(Kandhaar), Persia, America and Europe were married
to some of the Indian princes. Shakuni and others
dined with the Kauravas and the Paandavas.
they never quarreled with each other, because then only
one religion prevailed in the whole
*Which is generally kept extremely
dirty especially among the poor.-Tr.
And that was Vedic. They all firmly believed
in it. They looked upon other's sorrows and joys, gains
and losses as if they were their own. It was only then
that peace and happiness reigned throughout the whole
world. But alas ! Now it is different. The religions
are various and are their followers. Their mutual hatred
and strife have greatly increased, and consequently
their sufferings an sorrows have immensely multiplied.
is the duty of all wise men to do away with all these
evils and relieve their suffering. May the Omniscient
Ruler of all sow the seed of true religion in all hearts,
whereby all false religions and false doctrines may
soon perish. Let all wise men ponder over it impartially,
leave off all mutual hatred and malice, and promote
the happiness of all.
have briefly discoursed in this chapter on Conduct -
desirable and undesirable, and on Diet - permissible