Nonduality Salon (/ \)
The following is from The Teachings of Ramana Maharshi,
edited by Arthur Osborne. You will see that Ramana always links
food to the mind, supporting the use of food that allows the mind
to function optimally in the course of Self-enquiry: 'Who am I?'.
editor's note: Although in general attaching little importance to
physical aids to meditation, the Maharshi was insistent on the
advantages of limiting oneself to sattvic, that is vegatarian and
non-stimulating food.
Ramana: "Regulation of diet, restricting it to sattvic food,
taken in
moderate quantities, is the best of all rules of conduct and the
most
conducive to the development of sattvic (pure) qualities of mind.
These
in turn help one in the practice of Self-enquiry."
editor's note: The following is the conclusion of 'Self-enquiry',
the
first book that Ramana wrote:
"It is within our power to adopt a simple and nutritious
diet and, with
earnest and incessant endeavour, to eradicate the ego -- the
cause of
all misery -- by stopping all mental activity born of the ego.
Can
obsessing thoughts arise without the ego, or can there be
illusion apart
from such thoughts?"
editor's note: He confirmed this also when asked by devotees.
Devotee: "Are there any aids to concentration and casting
off
distractions?
Ramana: "Physically, the digestive and other organs are to
be kept free
from irritation. Therefore food is regulated both in quantity and
quality. Non-irritants are eaten, avoiding chillies, excess of
salt,
onions, wine, opium, etc. Avoid constipation, drowsiness and
excitement
and all foods which induce them. Mentally, take interest in one
thing
and fix the mind on it. Let that interest be self-absorbing and
to the
exclusion of everything else. This is dispassion (vairagya) and
concentration."
Mrs. Piggot returned from Madras for a further visit and asked
questions
concerning diet.
Mrs. P.: What diet is suitable for a person engaged in spiritual
practice?
Ramana: Sattvic food in moderate quantities.
Mrs. P.: What food is sattvic?
Ramana: Bread, fruit, vegetables, milk and such things.
Mrs. P.: Some people in the North eat fish. Is that permissable?
editor's note: To this question Bhagavan did not reply. He was
always
reluctant to criticize others and this question was inviting him
either
to do so or to change what he had said.
Mrs. P.: We Europeans are accustomed to a particular diet and
change of
diet affects the health and weakens the mind. Isn't it necessary
to keep
up physical health?
Ramana: Quite necessary. The weaker the body the stronger the
mind
grows.
Mrs. P.: In the absence of our usual diet our health suffers and
the
mind loses strength.
editor's note: It will be noticed that Bhagavan and Mrs. Piggot
were
using the term 'strength of mind' in different meanings. By
'strong'
Bhagavan was meaning 'ungovernable', whereas Mrs. Piggot was
meaning
'powerful'. Therefore the next question, which enabled her to put
her
poing of view.
Ramana: What do you mean by 'strength of mind'?
Mrs. P.: The power to eliminate worldly attachment.
Ramana: The quality of one's food influences the mind. The mind
feeds on
the food consumed.
Mrs. P.: Really! But how can Europeans accommodate themselves to
sattvic
food?
Ramana. (Turning to Mr. Evans-Wentz): You have been taking our
food.
Does it inconvenience you at all?
E.W.: No, because I am accustomed to it.
Ramana: Custom is only an adjustment to environment. It is the
mind that
matters. The fact is that the mind has been trained to find
certain
foods good and palatable. The necessary food value is obtainable
in
vegetarian as well as non-vegetarian food; only the mind desires
the
sort of food that it is used to and considers palatable.
Mrs. P.: Do these restrictions apply to the realized man also?
Ramana: He is stabilized and not influenced by the food he takes.
edtior's note: It was very characteristic of Bhagavan that,
although he
would answer questions about diet quite firmly when asked, he
would not
enjoin a vegetarian diet on any devotee who did not ask him. It
was also
characteristic that, under his silent influence, it would
sometimes
happen that one who did not ask would gradually begin to feel an
aversion to meat-food and an inclination to change over to a
purer diet.
Just as Bhagavan disapproved of all extremes, he disapproved of
fasting.
Devotee: Can fasting help towards Realization?
Ramana: Yes, but it is only a temporary help. It is mental
fasting that
is the real aid. Fasting is not an end in itself. There must be
spiritual development at the same time. Absolute fasting weakens
the
mind too and leaves you without sufficient strength for the
spiritual
quest. Therefore eat in moderation and continue the quest.
Devotee: They say that ten days after breaking a month's fast the
mind
becomes pure and steady and remains so forever.
Ramana: Yes, but only if the spiritual quest has been kept up
right
through the fast.
Petros:
I think it is important to keep any teaching in context.
Ramana was answering
the specific questions of a devotee on a level which he knew
would be
meaningful to her. Obviously much of Ramana's vegetarianism is
culturally
conditioned given his origins in South India. This is clear from
the woman's
question about fish (eaten in the North of India.) We shouldn't
fetishize
diet. Logic should show that even a very poor diet cannot bar one
from
realization, nor can a meat diet be so harmful as to interfere
with practice
all by itself. There are Realized beings from places like Tibet,
Thailand,
China and Japan, where meat-eating is quite common.
I was fed wonderful, all-vegetarian meals every day at
Ramanashram and
enjoyed them very much, and did not crave for meat. I've also
eaten with
Korean monks in Korea where practically every dish has meat in
it. The main
thing is to adopt a diet that does not disturb one's mind from
one's
sadhana.
Jan Barendrecht:
One of the most impressive books on health was about the
Hunzas, by a Swiss
MD, Ralph Bircher. Despite the absence of food composition
tables, the
Hunzas had a perfect health, never got ill, didn't have bulky
muscles but
were incredibly strong and never showed fatigue. Their diet was
mostly raw
and they had a period of fasting after the winter, because food
supplies
would run out by then. After becoming acquainted with the Western
lifestyle
and the desire for "more and better", kindled by
tourism, the Hunzas
abandoned their lifestyle (with the exception of folklore for
tourists),
only realizing "too late to change" when hooked to
"modern" life with
processed food..
A chief ( first name was Tuiavi) of one of the Southern Pacific
islands once
(somewhere in the 1930's) wrote a book of warning for his
tribesmen, not to
fall in the traps of the "papalagi" (whites), after
having visited Europe.
The chief was grateful for the gift of Christianity but remarked
that no
Westerner was living up to it... The islanders enjoyed perfect
health and
didn't know their birthday as age didn't matter...
Vegetarianism (ovo lacto) never gave the "health of the
Hunza" and neither
did "normal" veganism. Only a complete change to
fruitarianism/raw food
veganism did the trick as it did for many others. Since then, I
only laugh
at balancing diets, calculating protein-content and counting the
number of
vitamins. All I can say is that the proverbial health of a Hunza
is just
normal. For some, the price will be too high: giving up the
security of food
tables and for others, the yumminess of designed food.
Perhaps twenty years of engineering where only the result was
important had
an influence; with food the same attitude was followed. So I
would say if
long-term health is abundant (no illness whatsoever), the diet
has to be
balanced.
Harsha responds to Tim Gerchmez:
An inordinate focus on diet, longevity and physical health
signifies (to me) a
strong attachment and feeling of ownership of the physical body
(which, of
course, will die). So much attentional energy expended to prolong
the life
of the body for perhaps 10 years. Is it truly worth it? Are there
not
much more important areas to focus our awareness?
With Love,
Tim
Harsha: Perhaps some areas might be considered more important
than others to
focus awareness on. It depends on one's conditioning, culture,
background,
etc. But for the One abiding inherently in the Truth, why should
it matter
where awareness is focused? The awareness by its very nature will
usually be
focused somewhere or the other in the presence of stimuli
(internal or
external). The essential element is not where awareness is
focused but to be
aware of the quality of awareness itself. Awareness is always
self-aware by
its very nature. So whether it is focused or unfocused, its
essential nature
is unchanged. When awareness remains pure and unfocused (focused
on nothing
in particular and falling upon itself), the subtle duality
between awareness
and its Source is seen to be illusory. Here the witness
disappears, their
being nothing to witness. When awareness merges in its Source, It
Recognizes
It Self as the Source. It Sees that It has Always Been the
Source. That is
the Supreme Beauty of the Heart. This is why great sages like
Ramana never
tire of pointing out that, That Which is Real and Absolute Always
Exists and
is not absent even now.
Jan Barendrecht:
One's self, ego, me, or whatever name it is given, is a
contradiction in itself. If one identifies with the body, it
would be illogical
to harm it in any way. Yet the reverse is true.
Wrong diet is the cause for the majority of what are called
"diseases of civilization". There have been experiments
with animals, having to live on processed foods like humans do
and the animals got just as ill as humans. In practice, it is
quite impossible to convince someone of the fact that (s)he is
maltreating the body. The misinformation is transferred from
parent to child and I've known children who saw in a cow nothing
but the steak on their plate. An often heard argument is that the
body is considered to be a receptacle of pleasure; colds, flue
and other diseases are the price for pleasure the majority is
willing to pay.
One of the properties of Ahimsa is that it can't be forced; the
development goes from vegetarianism to veganism, worthy life for
animals to humanism or spiritual life. The proper start for
becoming conscious of this is at school; children are receptive
and could easily be educated to favor animal rights. According to
the rule, what you pet you can't kill to eat, the meat-eating
habit could be over in one generation. Another measure is
learning to meditate and acquiring knowledge how the mind works.
It can be an effective antidote for the "instant
gratification", offered by rampant consumerism.
It is easy to convince oneself of the fact that the human body
doesn't get in optimum condition by the consumption of processed
foods; just abandon them and detox the body by a fast of a week;
if one's tongue gets a whitish (sometimes greenish) color, the
body has stored toxins. Ahimsa has to start with one's body and
mind; this is the only "area" where one has autonomous
rights. One can only impress others by putting an example.
Nonduality Salon