Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 17 - Shloka (Verse) 10

व्याख्या -- यातयामम् -- पकनेके लिये जिनको पूरा समय प्राप्त नहीं हुआ है? ऐसे अधपके या उचित समयसे ज्यादा पके हुए अथवा जिनका समय बीत गया है? ऐसे बिना ऋतुके पैदा किये हुए एवं ऋतु चली जानेपर फ्रिज आदिकी सहायतासे रखे हुए साग? फल आदि भोजनके पदार्थ।गतरसम् -- धूप आदिसे जिनका स्वाभाविक रस सूख गया है अथवा मशीन आदिसे जिनका सार खींच लिया गया है? ऐसे दूध? फल आदि।पूति -- सड़नसे पैदा की गयी मदिरा (टिप्पणी प0 842) और स्वाभाविक दुर्गन्धवाले प्याज? लहसुन आदि।पर्युषितम् -- जल और नमक मिलाकर बनाये हुए साग? रोटी आदि पदार्थ रात बीतनेपर बासी कहलाते हैं। परन्तु केवल शुद्ध दूध? घी? चीनी आदिसे बने हुए अथवा अग्निपर पकाये हुए पेड़ा? जलेबी? लड्डू आदि जो पदार्थ हैं? उनमें जबतक विकृति नहीं आती? तबतक वे बासी नहीं माने जाते। ज्यादा समय रहनेपर उनमें विकृति (दुर्गन्ध आदि) पैदा होनेसे वे भी बासी कहे जायँगे।उच्छिष्टम् -- भुक्तावशेष अर्थात् भोजनके बाद पात्रमें बचा हुआ अथवा जूठा हाथ लगा हुआ और जिसको गाय? बिल्ली? कुत्ता? कौआ आदि पशुपक्षी देख ले? सूँघ ले या खा ले -- वह सब जूठन माना जाता है।अमेध्यम् -- रजवीर्यसे पैदा हुए मांस? मछली? अंडा आदि महान् अपवित्र पदार्थ? जो मुर्दा हैं और जिनको छूनेमात्रसे स्नान करना पड़ता है (टिप्पणी प0 843.1)।अपि च -- इन अव्ययोंके प्रयोगसे उन सब पदार्थोंको ले लेना चाहिये? जो शास्त्रनिषिद्ध हैं। जिस वर्ण? आश्रमके लिये जिनजिन पदार्थोंका निषेध है? उस वर्णआश्रमके लिये उनउन पदार्थोंको निषिद्ध माना गया है जैसे मसूर? गाजर? शलगम आदि।भोजनं तामसप्रियम् -- ऐसा भोजन तामस मनुष्यको प्रिय लगता है। इससे उसकी निष्ठाकी पहचान हो जाती है।उपर्युक्त भोजनोंमेंसे सात्त्विक भोजन भी अगर रागपूर्वक खाया जाय? तो वह राजस हो जाता है और लोलुपतावश अधिक खाया जाय? (जिससे अजीर्ण आदि हो जाय) तो वह तामस हो जाता है। ऐसे ही भिक्षुकको विधिसे प्राप्त भिक्षा आदिमें रूखा? सूखा? तीखा और बासी भोजन प्राप्त हो जाय? जो कि राजसतामस है? पर वह उसको भगवान्के भोग लगाकर भगवन्नाम लेते हुए स्वल्पमात्रामें (टिप्पणी प0 843.2) खाये? तो वह भोजन भी भाव और त्यागकी दृष्टिसे सात्त्विक हो जाता है।प्रकरणसम्बन्धी विशेष बात चार श्लोकोंके इस प्रकरणमें तीन तरहके -- सात्त्विक? राजस और तामस आहारका वर्णन दीखता है परन्तु वास्तवमें यहाँ आहारका प्रसङ्ग नहीं है? प्रत्युत आहारी की रुचिका प्रसङ्ग है। इसलिये यहाँ आहारी की रुचिका ही वर्णन हुआ है -- इसमें निम्नलिखित युक्तियाँ दी जी सकती हैं --(1) सोलहवें अध्यायके तेईसवें श्लोकमें आये यः शास्त्रविधिमुत्सृज्य वर्तते कामकारतः पदोंको लेकर अर्जुनने प्रश्न किया कि मनमाने ढंगसे श्रद्धापूर्वक काम करनेवालेकी निष्ठाकी पहचान कैसे हो तो भगवान्ने इस,अध्यायके दूसरे श्लोकमें श्रद्धाके तीन भेद बताकर तीसरे श्लोकमें सर्वस्य पदसे मनुष्यमात्रकी अन्तःकरणके अनुरूप श्रद्धा बतायी? और चौथे श्लोकमें पूज्यके अनुसार पूजककी निष्ठाकी पहचान बतायी। सातवें श्लोकमें उसी सर्वस्य पदका प्रयोग करके भगवान् यह बताते हैं कि मनुष्यमात्रको अपनीअपनी रुचके अनुसार तीन तरहका भोजन प्रिय होता है -- आहारस्त्वपि सर्वस्य त्रिविधो भवति प्रियः। उस प्रियतासे ही मनुष्यकी निष्ठा(स्थिति) की पहचान हो जायगी।प्रियः शब्द केवल सातवें श्लोकमें ही नहीं आया है? प्रत्युत आठवें श्लोकमें सात्त्विकप्रियाः नवें श्लोकमें,राजसस्येष्टाः और दसवें श्लोकमें तामसप्रियम् में भी प्रियः और इष्ट शब्द आये हैं? जो रुचिके वाचक हैं। यदि यहाँ आहारका ही वर्णन होता तो भगवान् प्रिय और इष्ट शब्दोंका प्रयोग न करके ये सात्त्विक आहार हैं? ये राजस आहार हैं? ये तामस आहार हैं -- ऐसे पदोंका प्रयोग करते।(2) दूसरी प्रबल युक्ति यह है कि सात्त्विक आहारमें पहले आयुः सत्त्वबलारोग्यसुखप्रीतिविवर्धनाः पदोंसे भोजनका फल बताकर बादमें भोजनके पदार्थोंका वर्णन किया। कारण कि सात्त्विक मनुष्य भोजन करने आदि किसी भी कार्यमें विचारपूर्वक प्रवृत्त होता है? तो उसकी दृष्टि सबसे पहले उसके परिणामपर जाती है।रागी होनेसे राजस मनुष्यकी दृष्टि सबसे पहले भोजनपर ही जाती है? इसलिये राजस आहारके वर्णनमें पहले भोजनके पदार्थोंका वर्णन करके बादमें दुःखशोकामयप्रदाः पदसे उसका फल बताया है। तात्पर्य यह कि राजस मनुष्य अगर आरम्भमें ही भोजनके परिणामपर विचार करेगा? तो फिर उसे राजस भोजन करनेमें हिचकिचाहट होगी क्योंकि परिणाममें मुझे दुःख? शोक और रोग हो जायँ -- ऐसा कोई मनुष्य नहीं चाहता। परन्तु राग होनेके कारण राजस पुरुष परिणामपर विचार करता ही नहीं।सात्त्विक भोजनका फल पहले और राजस भोजनका फल पीछे बताया गया परन्तु तामस भोजनका फल बताया ही नहीं गया। कारण कि मूढ़ता होनेके कारण तामस मनुष्य भोजन और उसके परिणामपर विचार करता ही नहीं। भोजन न्याययुक्त है या नहीं? उसमें हमारा अधिकार है या नहीं? शास्त्रोंकी आज्ञा है या नहीं और परिणाममें हमारे मनबुद्धिके बलको बढ़ानेमें हेतु है या नहीं -- इन बातोंका कुछ भी विचार न करके तामस मनुष्य पशुकी तरह खानेमें प्रवृत्त होते हैं। तात्पर्य है कि सात्त्विक भोजन करनेवाला तो दैवीसम्पत्तिवाला होता है और राजस तथा तामस भोजन करनेवाला आसुरीसम्पत्तिवाला होता है।(3) यदि भगवान्को यहाँ आहारका ही वर्णन करना होता? तो वे आहारकी विधिका और उसके लिये कर्मोंकी शुद्धिअशुद्धिका वर्णन करते जैसे -- शुद्ध कमाईके पैसोंसे अनाज आदि पवित्र खाद्य पदार्थ खरीदे जायँ रसोईमें चौका देकर और स्वच्छ वस्त्र पहनकर पवित्रतापूर्वक भोजन बनाया जाय भोजनको भगवान्के अर्पण किया जाय और भगवान्का चिन्तन तथा उनके नामका जप करते हुए प्रसादबुद्धिसे भोजन ग्रहण किया जाय -- ऐसा भोजन सात्त्विक होता है।स्वार्थ और अभिमानकी मुख्यताको लेकर सत्यअसत्यका कोई विचार न करते हुए पैसे कमाये जायँ स्वाद? शरीरकी पुष्टि? भोग भोगनेकी सामर्थ्य बढ़ाने आदिका उद्देश्य रखकर भोजनके पदार्थ खरीदे जायँ जिह्वाको स्वादिष्ट लगें और दीखनेमें भी सुन्दर दीखें -- इस दृष्टिसे? रीतिसे उनको बनाया जाय और आसक्तिपूर्वक खाया जाय -- ऐसा भोजन राजस होता है।झूठकपट? चोरी? डकैती? धोखेबाजी आदि किसी तरहसे पैसे कमाये जायँ अशुद्धिशुद्धिका कुछ भी विचार न करके मांस? अंडे आदि पदार्थ खरीदे जायँ विधिविधानका कोई खयाल न करके भोजन बनाया जाय,और बिना हाथपैर धोये एवं चप्पलजूती पहनकर ही अशुद्ध वायुमण्डलमें उसे खाया जाय -- ऐसा भोजन तामस होता है।परन्तु भगवान्ने यहाँ केवल सात्त्विक? राजस और तामस पुरुषोंको प्रिय लगनेवाले खाद्य पदार्थोंका वर्णन किया है? जिससे उनकी रुचिकी पहचान हो जाय।(4) इसके सिवाय गीतामें जहाँजहाँ आहारकी बात आयी है? वहाँवहाँ आहारीका ही वर्णन हुआ है जैसे -- नियताहाराः (4। 30) पदमें नियमित आहार करनेवालेका? नात्यश्नतस्तु और युक्ताहारविहारस्य (6। 16 -- 17) पदोंमें अधिक खानेवाले और नियत खानेवालोंका यदश्नासि (9। 27) पदमें भोजनके पदार्थको भगवान्के अर्पण करनेवालेका? और लघ्वाशी (18। 52) पदमें अल्प भोजन करनेवालोंका वर्णन हुआ है।इसी प्रकार इस अध्यायमें सातवें श्लोकमें यज्ञस्तपस्तथा दानम् पदोंमें आया तथा (वैसे ही) पद यह कह रहा है कि जो मनुष्य यज्ञ? तप? दान आदि कार्य करते हैं? वे भी अपनीअपनी (सात्त्विक? राजस अथवा तामस) रुचिके अनुसार ही कार्य करते हैं। आगे ग्यारहवेंसे बाईसवें श्लोकतकका जो प्रकरण है? उसमें भी यज्ञ? तप और दान करनेवालोंके स्वभावका ही वर्णन हुआ है।भोजनके लिये आवश्यक विचारउपनिषदोंमें आता है कि जैसा अन्न होता है? वैसा ही मन बनता है -- अन्नमयं ही सोम्य मनः। (छान्दोग्य0 6। 5। 4) अर्थात् अन्नका असर मनपर प़ड़ता है। अन्नके सूक्ष्म सारभागसे मन (अन्तःकरण) बनता है? दूसरे नम्बरके भागसे वीर्य? तीसरे नम्बरके भागसे रक्त आदि और चौथे नम्बरके स्थूल भागसे मल बनता है? जो कि बाहर निकल जाता है। अतः मनको शुद्ध बनानेके लिये भोजन शुद्ध? पवित्र होना चाहिये। भोजनकी शुद्धिसे मन(अन्तःकरण)की शुद्धि होती है -- आहारशुद्धौ सत्त्वशुद्धिः (छान्दोग्य0 2। 26। 2)। जहाँ भोजन करते हैं? वहाँका स्थान? वायुमण्डल? दृश्य तथा जिसपर बैठकर भोजन करते हैं? वह आसन भी शुद्ध? पवित्र होना चाहिये। कारण कि भोजन करते समय प्राण जब अन्न ग्रहण करते हैं? तब वे शरीरके सभी रोमकूपोंसे आसपासके परमाणुओंको भी खींचते -- ग्रहण करते हैं। अतः वहाँका स्थान? वायुमण्डल आदि जैसे होंगे? प्राण वैसे ही परमाणु खींचेंगे और उन्हींके अनुसार मन बनेगा। भोजन बनानेवालेके भाव? विचार भी शुद्ध सात्त्विक हों।भोजनके पहले दोनों हाथ? दोनों पैर और मुख -- ये पाँचों शुद्ध? पवित्र जलसे धो ले। फिर पूर्व या उत्तरकी ओर मुख करके शुद्ध आसनपर बैठकर भोजनकी सब चीजोंको पत्रं पुष्पं फलं तोयं यो मे भक्त्या प्रयच्छति। तदहं भक्त्युपहृतमश्नामि प्रयतात्मनः।।(गीता 9। 26) -- यह श्लोक पढ़कर भगवान्के अर्पण कर दे। अर्पणके बाद दायें हाथमें जल लेकर ब्रह्मार्पणं ब्रह्म हविर्ब्रह्माग्नौ ब्रह्मणा हुतम्। ब्रह्मैव तेन गन्तव्यं ब्रह्मकर्मसमाधिना।। (गीता 4। 24) -- यह श्लोक पढ़कर आचमन करे और भोजनका पहला ग्रास भगवान्का नाम लेकर ही मुखमें डाले। प्रत्येक ग्रासको चबाते समय हरे राम हरे राम राम राम हरे हरे। हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे।। -- इस मन्त्रको मनसे दो बार पढ़ते हुए या अपने इष्टका नाम लेते हुए ग्रासको चबाये और निगले। इस मन्त्रमें कुल सोलह नाम हैं और दो बार मन्त्र पढ़नेसे बत्तीस नाम हो जाते हैं। हमारे मुखमें भी बत्तीस ही दाँत हैं। अतः (मन्त्रके प्रत्येक नामके साथ) बत्तीस बार चबानेसे वह भोजन सुपाच्य और आरोग्यदायक होता है एवं थोड़े अन्नसे ही तृप्ति हो जाती है तथा उसका रस भी अच्छा बनता है और इसके साथ ही भोजन भी भजन बन जाता है।भोजन करते समय ग्रासग्रासमें भगन्नामजप करते रहनेसे अन्नदोष भी दूर हो जाता है (टिप्पणी प0 845.1)।जो लोग ईर्ष्या? भय और क्रोधसे युक्त हैं तथा लोभी हैं? और रोग तथा दीनतासे पीड़ित और द्वेषयुक्त हैं? वे जिस भोजनको करते हैं? वह अच्छी तरह पचता नहीं अर्थात् उससे अजीर्ण हो जाता है (टिप्पणी प0 845.2)। इसलिये मनुष्यको चाहिये कि वह भोजन करते समय मनको शान्त तथा प्रसन्न रखे। मनमें काम? क्रोध? लोभ? मोह आदि दोषोंकी वृत्तियोंको न आने दे। यदि कभी आ जायँ तो उस समय भोजन न करे क्योंकि वृत्तियोंका असर भोजनपर पड़ता है और उसीके अनुसार अन्तःकरण बनता है। ऐसा भी सुननेमें आया है कि फौजी लोग जब गायको दुहते हैं? तब दुहनेसे पहले बछ़ड़ा छोड़ते हैं और उस बछड़ेके पीछे कुत्ता छोड़ते हैं। अपने बछ़ड़ेके पीछे कुत्तेको देखकर जब गाय गुस्सेमें आ जाती है? तब बछड़ेको लाकर बाँध देते हैं और फिर गायको दुहते हैं। वह दूध फौजियोंको पिलाते हैं? जिससे वे लोग खूँखार बनते हैं।ऐसे ही दूधका भी असर प्राणियोंपर पड़ता है। एक बार किसीने परीक्षाके लिये कुछ घोड़ोंको भैंसका दूध और कुछ घोड़ोंको गायका दूध पिलाकर उन्हें तैयार किया। एक दिन सभी घोड़े कहीं जा रहे थे। रास्तेमें नदीका जल था। भैंसका दूध पीनेवाले घोड़े उस जलमें बैठ गये और गायका दूध पीनेवाले घोड़े उस जलको पार कर गये। इसी प्रकार बैल और भैंसेका परस्पर युद्ध कराया जाय? तो भैंसा बैलको मार देगा परन्तु यदि दोनोंको गाड़ीमें जोता जाय? तो भैंसा धूपमें जीभ निकाल देगा? जबकि बैल धूपमें भी चलता रहेगा। कारण कि भैंसके दूधमें सात्त्विक बल नहीं होता? जबकि गायके दूधमें सात्त्विक बल होता है।जैसे प्राणियोंकी वृत्तियोंका पदार्थोंपर असर पड़ता है? ऐसे ही प्राणियोंकी दृष्टिका भी असर पड़ता है। बुरे व्यक्तिकी अथवा भूखे कुत्तेकी दृष्टि भोजनपर पड़ जाती है? तो वह भोजन अपवित्र हो जाता है। अब वह भोजन पवित्र कैसे हो भोजनपर उसकी दृष्टि पड़ जाय? तो उसे देखकर मनमें प्रसन्न हो जाना चाहिये कि भगवान् पधारे हैं अतः उसको सबसे पहले थोड़ा अन्न देकर भोजन करा दे। उसको देनेके बाद बचे हुए शुद्ध अन्नको स्वयं ग्रहण करे? तो दृष्टिदोष मिट जानेसे वह अन्न पवित्र हो जाता है।दूसरी बात? लोग बछ़ड़ेको पेटभर दूध न पिलाकर सारा दूध स्वयं दुह लेते हैं। वह दूध पवित्र नहीं होता क्योंकि उसमें बछड़ेका हक आ जाता है। बछड़ेको पेटभर दूध पिला दे और इसके बाद जो दूध निकले? वह चाहे पावभर ही क्यों न हो? बहुत पवित्र होता है।भोजन करनेवाले और करानेवालेके भावका भी भोजनपर असर पड़ता है जैसे -- (1) भोजन करनेवालेकी अपेक्षा भोजन करानेवालेकी जितनी अधिक प्रसन्नता होगी? वह भोजन उतने ही उत्तम दर्जेका माना जायगा। (2) भोजन करानेवाला तो बड़ी प्रसन्नतासे भोजन कराता है परन्तु भोजन करनेवाला मुफ्तमें भोजन मिल गया अपने इतने पैसे बच गये इससे मेरेमें बल आ जायगा आदि स्वार्थका भाव रख लेता है? तो वह भोजन मध्यम दर्जेका हो जाता है? और (3) भोजन करानेवालेका यह भाव है कि यह घरपर आ गया? तो खर्चा करना पड़ेगा? भोजन बनाना पड़ेगा? भोजन कराना ही पड़ेगा आदि और भोजन करनेवालेमें भी स्वार्थभाव है? तो वह भोजन निकृष्ट दर्जेका हो जायगा।इस विषयमें गीताने सिद्धान्तरूपसे कह दिया है -- सर्वभूतहिते रताः (5। 25? 12। 4)। तात्पर्य यह है कि जिसका सम्पूर्ण प्राणियोंके हितका भाव जितना अधिक होगा? उसके पदार्थ? क्रियाएँ आदि उतनी ही पवित्र हो जायँगी।भोजनके अन्तमें आचमनके बाद ये श्लोक पढ़ने चाहिये -- अन्नाद्भवन्ति भूतानि पर्जन्यादन्नसंभवः। यज्ञाद्भवति पर्जन्यो यज्ञः कर्मसमुद्भवः।। कर्म ब्रह्मोद्भं विद्धि ब्रह्माक्षरसमुद्भवम्। तस्मात्सर्वगतं ब्रह्म नित्यं यज्ञे प्रतिष्ठितम्।।(गीता 3। 14 -- 15)फिर भोजनके पाचनके लिये अहं वैश्वानरो भूत्वा0 (गीता 15। 14) श्लोक पढ़ते हुए मध्यमा अङ्गुलीसे नाभिको धीरेधीरे घुमाना चाहिये। सम्बन्ध -- पहले यजनपूजन और भोजनके द्वारा जो श्रद्धा बतायी? उससे शास्त्रविधिका अज्ञतापूर्वक त्याग करनेवालोंकी स्वाभाविक निष्ठा -- रुचिकी तो पहचान हो जाती है परन्तु जो मनुष्य व्यापार? खेती आदि जीविकाके कार्य करते हैं अथवा शास्त्रविहित यज्ञादि शुभकर्म करते हैं? उनकी स्वाभाविक रुचिकी पहचान कैसे हो -- यह बतानेके लिये यज्ञ? तप और दानके तीनतीन भेदोंका प्रकरण आरम्भ करते हैं।

यातयाम -- अधपका? गतरस -- रसरहित? पूति -- दुर्गन्धयुक्त और बासी अर्थात् जिसको पके हुए एक रात बीत गयी हो? तथा उच्छिष्ट -- खानेके पश्चात् बचा हुआ और अमेध्य -- जो यज्ञके योग्य न हो? ऐसा भोजन तामसी मनुष्योंको प्रिय होता है। यहाँ? यातयामका अर्थ अधपका किया गया है क्योंकि निर्वीर्य ( सारहीन भोजनको गतरस शब्दसे कहा गया है।

He illustrates the food dear to the Tamasic person—"Yatayamam," etc.

Objection: Is "Yatayamam" called "Nirviryam" (impotent/essence-less) and not "Sami-pakvam" (half-cooked)? Answer: No (it does not mean half-cooked), for he (Shankaracharya) explains "Nirviryasya" (stating that the quality of being essence-less is covered by the term 'Gatarasa').

He illustrates the food that is the object of the Tamasic person's fondness. "Yatayamam"—(Some interpret as) slowly cooked/half-cooked, because "Nirvirya" (loss of potency) is covered by the term "Gatarasa." (However, the literal meaning is)—"That cooked rice etc. of which a 'Yama' (watch of three hours) has passed" is Yatayamam. But here, it is called Yatayamam not merely by the passing of a watch, but by the food attaining "Nirviryata" (loss of essence/potency) due to the lapse of some time after cooking. It is with this intention—that 'Ayatayamatvam' (freshness/potency) fits as an adjective even for the Vedas—that the Acharyas (Shankaracharya) did not explain it (otherwise/narrowly).

"Gatarasam"—Dehydrated/Tasteless. "Nirviryam" (implied meaning)—Rice etc. that has become impotent. "Puti"—Bad smelling, like garlic, onions, etc. "Paryushitam"—Cooked food kept overnight. "Na cha" (And not explained by Acharyas?)—Thinking of the Yajnavalkya Smriti verse "Stale food is edible if mixed with oil/ghee and kept for a long time," which establishes that even stale food mixed with fat is edible, the Acharyas did not explain it (as strictly prohibited in all cases or did not elaborate).

"Uchhishta"—Leftover of oneself or another; this also includes "Apathya" (unwholesome food) mentioned in medical science. "Amedhyam"—Impure, unfit for sacrifice, such as meat of animals killed by poisoned arrows (Kalanja) or certain idols (Linga? or prohibited flesh). Such food is "Priya" (dear) to the Tamasic person. Those fond of such food should be known as Tamasic; and Tamasic food should be abandoned by those desiring welfare, this is the meaning. The faults arising from Tamasic food are not stated because they are well-known and innumerable.

'Yatayamam'—Prepared before a watch (three hours ago), meaning that which has become cold. The Commentary (Bhashya) states that "Yatayamam" does not mean "half-cooked" because the quality of being "Nirvirya" (impotent/essence-less) is already expressed by "Gatarasa."

"Gatarasam"—Devoid of taste/juice. "Puti"—Foul smelling. "Paryushitam"—Cooked food that has passed a night (stale). "Uchhishta"—Leftover from eating. "Amedhyam"—Unfit for sacrifice. (Such) "Bhojanam"—food—is dear to the Tamasic person.

'Yatayamam'—Kept for a long time. 'Gatarasam'—That which has lost its natural taste. 'Puti'—Possessed of foul smell. 'Paryushitam'—That which has attained a different taste (fermented/sour) due to the lapse of time. 'Uchhishta'—Leftover of others excluding Gurus etc. 'Amedhyam'—Unfit for sacrifice, meaning that which is not the remnant of a sacrifice (Yajna-shishta). Such Tamas-filled food is dear to the Tamasic person.

'Bhujyate' (That which is eaten/enjoyed)—by this derivation, 'Bhojana' is indeed 'Ahara' (Food). And this (food) further increases Tamas.

Therefore, well-wishers (of themselves) should consume only Sattvic food for the increase of Sattva.

Similarly, 'Yatayamam'—That cooked rice etc. of which a 'yama' (watch of three hours) has passed is 'Yatayamam'; meaning that which has attained a cold state.

'Gatarasam'—That from which the essence has been extracted. 'Puti'—Foul-smelling. 'Paryushitam'—Cooked on another day (stale). 'Uchhishtam'—Leftover from what was eaten by another. 'Amedhyam'—Inedible, such as Kalanja (flesh of an animal killed with a poisoned arrow) etc.

Food of this kind is dear to the Tamasic person.

Even in the statement of the qualities and effects of Sattvic and Rajasic food, in the Tamasic (food) only the quality is stated, because its effect is similar to the Rajasic one without much difference; (and) since there is no fault in all foods merely by the passing of a Yama (three hours), he states the intention regarding the specific duration by which defect arises in those respective substances — with 'Yatayamam' (meaning) kept for a long time. 'Yama' means the best part; as some say 'like the scum/essence beyond ghee, very subtle'. By that (passing of Yama), 'loss of potency' is stated. That is also established by implication through 'kept for a long time'.

Since in watery and earthy foods, even with different cooking methods, there is never a loss of 'all taste', the change into another taste due to the loss of the specific taste prescribed by the nature of those respective substances is intended here by the word 'Gatarasa', he says — 'Tyaktasvabhavikarasam' (Which has lost its natural taste). By this, since 'loss of potency' is expressed by the word 'Gatarasa', the interpretation of 'Yatayamam' as 'half-cooked/under-cooked' is refuted.

Although the word 'Puti' (putrid) is used even for substances like Karanja etc. established in the Lord's scriptures as non-Sattvic, still, due to the absence of context for taking specific substances here, and due to the context of implying all foods through qualities etc., he states the intention of the quality well-known in the world and Shastra as rejectable by the word 'Puti' — 'Durgandhopetam' (Endowed with bad odor). Since mere lapse of time is grasped by the word 'Yatayamam', and loss of taste is stated by 'Gatarasam'; regarding those in which there is defect upon lapse of time — like milk etc. turning into another taste due to curdling etc. — the state of attaining another taste merely by the lapse of time is intended here, he says — 'Kalatipattayarasantarapannam' (Attained another taste due to lapse of time). This is an implied indication for other rejectable transformations etc. Therefore, the rejection of even cooked but unspoiled water etc. which has passed a night (is prescribed). By this, it is shown that the word 'Yatayamam' here refers to objects defective merely by lapse of time without change of taste.

Since specific 'Ucchishta' (leavings) are permitted by Shastra, and the teacher's leavings are accepted even as holy for expiation of specific sins, the word 'Ucchishta' here refers to other than that; he says — 'Gurvadibhyo'nyesham' (Of others than the Guru etc.). By the word 'Adi' in 'Guru etc.', the father, elder brother, and in the case of a wife, the husband are included. As for the statement 'Aditi, desiring a son, cooked Brahmaudana for the Sadhya gods. They gave her the leavings. She ate it. She conceived', etc., where eating of leavings is mentioned in scripture; that is different because it is for the injunction of Brahmaudana etc. Even if it refers to the rice remaining in the cooking pot after eating, it is not contradictory. Even accepting it as an injunction since it is not otherwise obtained, it is only regarding the specific interaction between Aditi and Sadhya gods. By that, there is no application for people of today; even if applied, it is restricted to such specific rites. And there is no injunction here nor room for imagining one, so it is indeed non-applicable.

And regarding what was said by Lord Narada, the rememberer of past births, following the practice of his ancient Shudra birth — 'Once I ate the leavings approved by the Brahmins, by that my sins were destroyed' [Bhagavata 1.5.25] etc.; that too applies only to such persons, since in that birth Narada was their disciple and a Shudra, not to others. Only then is there no contradiction with other sentences. And when there is contradiction with explicit texts, practice cannot be assumed merely by seeing an indicatory mark (Linga). For it prohibits the leavings even of the teacher's son etc. — 'Conduct towards the teacher's son is like that towards the teacher, except eating the leavings' [Apastamba Dharma Sutra 1.2.7.30] etc. What to say of others?

For a devotee (Bhagavata), severe expiations are prescribed even for eating all leavings other than the teacher's. As cited in Sanatkumara Samhita, and quoted by Lord Yamunacharya in Agama Pramanya — 'Having eaten the remnants of offering (Nirmalya) and thus the leavings of one who is not a Guru; having observed the milk-vow for a month, always chanting the eight-syllabled mantra; then drinking Brahmakurca' etc.

And in the Bhashya, that the word 'Guru' here refers to the Acharya or the father is incorrect? Because there is no scripture for accepting the leavings of Upadhyaya etc. who are the meanings of the word Guru. Nor is there Acharyahood merely by some teaching; because it is defined by 'The twice-born who, having initiated the disciple, teaches him the Veda along with Kalpa and Rahasya (Upanishads), him they call Acharya' [Manu 2.140] etc.; and because usage elsewhere is possible even by metaphor.

And the initiator who stops after teaching only the Pranava etc.; and he who teaches only the knowledge which is the means to liberation designated by the word 'Rahasya' through the respective Shrutis; their Acharyahood etc. is accepted on the strength of texts. And the definition of Guru etc. is stated by Lord Yajnavalkya — 'He is the Guru who, having performed the rites, gives the Veda to him. But having initiated, he (who teaches) that Veda is called Acharya. Upadhyaya is one who (teaches) a portion' [1.34, 35].

As for 'He who disrespects the Acharya who gives the single syllable (Om)...' [Atri Smriti 10] etc.; that is said merely from the view of treating him as Acharya for the purpose of preventing disrespect etc., not that all things applicable to Acharyahood fall upon him by that much. Although the word Acharya, according to etymology etc., and by the boldness of usage regarding teachers of weapons like Drona, Kripa etc., might be accepted by some as primary everywhere according to usage; still, the Acharyahood which is the cause for permission to eat leavings belongs only to the instructor of Supreme Knowledge preceded by the triad of Pranava etc.; because of the restriction by Shastras and the conduct of the disciplined (Shishtachara) being exactly so.

But the conduct contrary to direct Shruti etc., even of those who are deluded or transgressing scripture with a different intention, is not Shishtachara. And as for what is recited by some — 'For one exclusively devoted to Narayana, whatever activity is worship; whatever talk is Japa; whatever look is meditation. The water of his feet is peerless holy water; his leavings are supremely purifying. His mere speech is the best of mantras; everything touched by him is pure'.

This too is for the praise of the one exclusively devoted to Narayana; not prescribing by itself. For the praise here is only of what is obtained from elsewhere. There, the first verse translates what is obtained by nature and by implication; and what is obtained by Shastra. But it does not refer to what is prohibited by other Shastras. Indeed, because the subject is established by valid means, there is enthusiasm in the adjectives 'peerless, supremely purifying, best, all'. Since the water of a Brahmin's feet is generally obtained as purifying by 'Brahmins are pure from the feet' etc., in the state of being a devotee (Bhagavata) it is qualified as 'peerless holy water'.

Similarly, even for one who is not exclusive (anekantin), since the leavings of the initiator etc. are obtained as purifying, in the state of his exclusive devotion to Narayana, 'supreme purity' is ordained. Similarly, since the praises etc. composed by great souls are established as most auspicious, by 'his mere speech is the best of mantras', the causality of fruit etc. like the best of mantras is propounded even for verses, songs etc. composed by one exclusive to the Lord.

Thus, when the pure ones require a purifier, just like washing etc., the touch of great souls is also obtained as a purifier by will due to special greatness; by 'everything touched by him is pure', it is stated that the touch of a devotee can be one purifier for all substances even though they have different purifiers ordained separately. Otherwise, by the devotee accepting impure things like dog-eater, garlic, carrot etc. touched by chance etc., there would be the contingency of non-duality of touchable-untouchable, edible-inedible etc., like the non-tainted foot (of the sun?).

By this, the vernacular verse (Tamil Pashur?) of the most trustworthy Bhaktanghrirenu (Tondaradippodi Alvar?) is also explained. Thus indeed it would be transformed into Sanskrit — 'If they speak of the One whose glories are unknowable by divines; if they say He has the lovely Tulasi and Honey; even if they are of deficient rites, causing others to do so; if they give what is left after eating, surely that is pure'. That this too is for the praise of Sankirtana is clear from the context and the natural flow of his own sentence.

And the word 'Bhuktashesha' (remnant of eating) is not contradictory even if it refers to what is in the cooking pot; just as in 'What should be done with the Annashesha', it means 'remaining'. But the 'Bhuktashishta' (leavings after eating/tasted) is indeed to be rejected even if in the cooking pot. This counter-exception (pratiprasava) is to avoid that. Otherwise also, to avoid contradiction with other evidences, it would refer only to the leavings of Acharya etc. To explain — The knowers of the secret scriptures mention four types of deficient devotees due to the gradation of bad deeds: 'Una' (deficient), 'Hina' (inferior), 'Parisrasta' (fallen), 'Nashta' (lost). There, in the state of deficiency etc., the impurity of the Acharya's leavings is contingent; there, if there is Sankirtana manifesting the firmness of exclusive devotion, then his leavings do not become impure. For in the breach of exclusive devotion, the total abandonment of even the Acharya is ordained there itself; so enough of elaboration.

Since the word 'Amedhya' is used even for what is opposed to Medha (intelligence/sacrifice), and since that culminates only in seen adverse effects; to indicate a greater defect than that, 'Medha' here is Sacrifice (Yajna); what is fit for that is 'Medhya'; the opposite is 'Amedhya'; he says — 'Ayajnarham' (Unfit for sacrifice). Objection: Even substances fit for sacrifice are said to be inedible by Manu etc., like — 'Useless Krisara, Samyava, Payasa and Apupa; and meat not sprinkled; and food of gods and oblations' [Manu 5.7]. To that he says — 'Ayajnashishtam ityarthah' (Meaning not the remnant of sacrifice). By this, 'One should not eat anything without offering to Hari; but (offered) is pure' etc. in Sattvata scriptures etc. is also kept in view here.

'Ahriyante' (are taken/brought) so 'Aharah' — the respective substances are understood. And the statement of being 'Yatayama' etc. does not connect with the mere act of eating; nor is implied meaning (lakshana) just when the primary meaning is possible. Therefore, according to [Ashtadhyayi 3.3.113] 'Krityalyuto bahulam', he states the 'Lyut' ending in the sense of the object (Karma) — 'Bhujyate' (That which is eaten).

'Punashca tamaso vardhanamiti' (And again increasing Tamas) — as before. He states the intention of mentioning the threefold nature of food — with 'Atah' (Therefore). The idea is: like taking the wholesome in the statement of division of wholesome and unwholesome. Exactly thus, the intention should be grasped ultimately in the statement of the threefold nature of sacrifice etc. as well.

यातयाम कालगणना की प्राचीन पद्धति के अनुसार एक दिन को आठ यामों में विभाजित किया जाता है। प्रति याम तीन घंटे का होता है। इसलिए तीन घंटे पूर्व पकाया गया अन्न यातयाम कहलाता है? जो भोजन के योग्य नहीं समझा जाता। वैसे इस शब्द का अर्थ बासी अन्न हो सकता है? परन्तु इसी श्लोक में पर्युषित अर्थात् बासी अन्न का स्वतन्त्र उल्लेख किया गया है अत यहाँ इसका दूसरा अर्थ अर्धपक्व अन्न समझना चाहिए।गतरस अधिक समय बीत जाने पर अन्न का रस समाप्त हो जाता है? परन्तु तामसी लोगों को यही अन्न रुचिकर लगता है। दक्षिण भारत में चावल को पकाकर रातभर जल में भिगोकर रखते हैं और दूसरे दिन उसे खाते हैं। यद्यपि अनेक लोगों को वह अन्न रुचिकर लगता है? परन्तु वह बासी और रसहीन होने से तामस भोजन ही कहलायेगा। सम्भवत उत्तर भारत में? बासी रोटी खायी,जाती हो।पूति तमोगुणी लोगों को दुर्गन्धयुक्त आहार स्वादिष्ट लगता है? जबकि अन्य लोगों को वह दुर्गन्ध असह्य होती है।पर्युषित (बासी) रात भर का रखा हुआ अन्न बासी कहलाता है। इसमें हम मादक द्रव्यों को भी समाविष्ट कर सकते हैं। तामसी लोगों को मद्यपानादि प्रिय होता है। अत्यन्त अज्ञानी और निम्न संस्कृति के घृणित व्यक्तियों को अशुद्ध? अपवित्र तथा उच्छिष्ट (जूठा? त्यागा हुआ) भोजन प्रिय होता है। अब? त्रिविध यज्ञों का वर्णन करते हैं

Food is also threefold due to the distinctions of Sattva etc., like faith; so too are sacrifice, austerity, and charity.

That is stated from 'Ahara' up to 'Tamasapriyam' (end of verse 10).

(Yatayamam means)—That of which the 'Yamas' (watches) have passed.

'Yatayamam'—Half-cooked (according to Shankara's Bhashya), because the quality of being 'Nirvirya' (impotent/essence-less) is already expressed by the term 'Gatarasa.' (Others say): 'Yatayamam'—Cooked rice etc. separated by a watch (three hours) or more, which has attained coldness. 'Gatarasam'—That which has become tasteless/dry; or (according to others) from which the essence has been extracted, like churned milk etc. 'Puti'—Foul-smelling. 'Paryushitam'—Cooked food kept overnight. Substances that cause immediate intoxication of the mind, like Datura etc., which are well-known for their harmful nature, are also included. 'Uchhishtam'—Leftover from eating. 'Amedhyam'—Unfit for sacrifice, impure, meat etc. 'Apicha' (Moreover)—Unwholesome food (Apathya) mentioned in medical science is also included. Such food is dear to the Tamasic person; it should be disregarded from a great distance by Sattvic people, this is the meaning. Since it is well-known that such food causes pain, sorrow, and disease, it is not explicitly stated.

Here, the three groups of food mentioned in order—Rasya etc. being Sattvic, Katu etc. being Rajasic, and Yatayama etc. being Tamasic—show that the latter two groups are opposed to the Sattvic group.

For instance, being excessively bitter opposes being juicy (Rasya); being dry (Ruksha) opposes being unctuous (Snigdha) due to being untasteable; being sharp (Tikshna) and burning (Vidahi) opposes being stable/nourishing (Sthira) because they oppose the nourishment of tissues; being excessively hot opposes being pleasing to the heart (Hridya); giving disease opposes longevity, sattva, strength, and health; giving pain and sorrow opposes happiness and delight. Thus, the opposition to the Sattvic group is clear in the Rajasic group.

Similarly in the Tamasic group: being tasteless, stale (Yatayama), and kept overnight opposes being juicy, unctuous, and stable, as applicable. Being foul-smelling, leftover, and impure opposes being pleasing to the heart. The opposition to longevity, sattva, etc., is indeed evident. In the Rajasic group, there is only visible opposition (harm); in the Tamasic group, there is both visible and invisible opposition, which is the excess (distinction).

Now He describes the Tamasic food—'Yatayamam,' etc. 'Yatayamam'—Cooked food like Krishara (dish of rice and sesame/peas) etc. of which a 'yama' (watch) has passed; meaning that which has become unfit for eating due to coldness etc.

'Gatarasam'—Dry (Shushkam). 'Puti'—Foul-smelling. 'Paryushitam'—That which has passed a night. 'Uchhishtam'—Leftover eaten by another. 'Amedhyam'—Kalinga, radish (Mulaka), Bimba fruit, etc.

Such food is dear to Tamasic people. Mentioning its fruit is unnecessary because it is inherently bad. One fond of such food should be known as Tamasic.

By this description, it is also indicated that for those who consume food beyond the Gunas (Nirguna) and eat My (the Lord's) remnants (Prasad), the previously mentioned three types of non-food (unfit food) and those who eat them are to be rejected.

'Yatayamam'—Slowly cooked (or half-cooked/underdone); because the quality of being 'Nirvirya' (impotent/essence-less) is already expressed by the word 'Gatarasa.'

'Gatarasam'—Deprived of juice/taste. 'Puti'—Foul-smelling. 'Paryushitam'—That which, having been cooked, has been kept overnight. 'Uchhishtam'—Remnant of eating (leftover). 'Amedhyam'—Unfit for sacrifice. Such food is dear to the Tamasic person.

Now, sacrifice is described as threefold...

'Yatayamam,' etc. That which has been kept for a long time is dear to the Tamasic person.

यातयामम् state? गतरसम् tasteless? पूति putrid? पर्युषितम् rotten? च and? यत् which? उच्छिष्टम् refuse? अपि also? च and? अमेध्यम् impure? भोजनम् food? तामसप्रियम् liked by the Tamasic.Commentary Cannabis indica (Ganja)? Bhang? opium? cocaine? Charas? Chandoo? all stale and putrid articles? are Tamasic.Yatayamam Stale? literally means cooked three hours ago. Yatayamam and Gatarasam mean the same thing.Paryushitam Rotten The cooked food which has been kept overnight.Uchchishtam What is left on the plate after a meal.The man whose taste is of a Tamasic nature will eat food in the afternoon that has been cooked on the previous day. He also likes that which is halfcooked or burnt to a cinder. He and all the members of his family sit together and eat from the same dish or plate? food that has been mixed into a mess by his children.The food eaten by Tamasic people is stale? dry? without juice? unripe or overcooked. They do not relish it? till it begins to rot and ferment. They take prohibited foods and drinks. They take liors? fermented toddy? etc. They are horrible people with devilish tendencies.

Bhojanam, food; which is yata-yamam, not properly cooked [Yata-yamam lit. means 'crooked three hours ago', that which has lost its essence; but here it is translated as 'not properly cooked to avoid tautology, for the next word gata-rasam, too, means lacking in essence.-Tr.] (-because food that has lost its essence is referred to by the word gatarasam-); gata-rasam, lacking in essence; puti, putrid; and paryusitam, stale, cooked on the previous day and kept over-night; and even ucchistam, ort, remnants of a meal; and amedhyam, that which is unfit for sacrifice;- this kind of food is tamasa-priyam, dear to one possessed of tamas.
Now then, sacrifices of three kinds are being stated:

Stale (Yatayamam) means that food which has lost its original state, being kept for a long time. Tasteless (Gatarasam) means that which has lost its natural taste. Putrid (Puti) means emitting a bad smell. Decayed (Paryusitam) means aciring a rancidity by lapse of time. Refuse (Ucchistam) means the food that has remained over after being partaken by persons other than Gurus, etc. Unclean (Amedhyam) is that which is not fit for offering in sacrifice or worship. The meaning is that, being unfit for offering in worship, they cannot become the sacrificial remainder. Foods of this kind which promote the growth of Tamas are dear to those who are characterised by Tamas. Food (Bhojana) means that which is eaten. Tamasik food promotes further increase of Tamas. Hence, those persons who care for their own welfare by the growth of Sattva, should eat food charaterised by Sattva.