Unholy Places

[dybmh]

I won't drink from my tap.


Interesting.

In Hinduism, we have sattvic foods and tamasic foods derived from Ayurveda, an ancient Indian medical system. Sattvic foods promote energy, calmness, and a clarity of mind, while tamasic foods promote laziness, lethargy, and apathy. Sattvic foods include things like certain vegetables and fruits, nuts, grains, beverages like water, tea, or juice, and dairy. Tamasic foods include meats, processed and fried foods, sugary foods, beverage like alcohol and soft drinks, and refined grains.

I'm not sure if this would equate to what is considered "holy" or "unholy." I suppose sattvic foods could be considered holy, while tamasic foods could be considered unholy.

I suppose in Hinduism, we're more concerned with what goes in our bodies than what comes out.

All food is a mixture in my view. Almost everything is a mixture.

 

[JustGeorge]

I won't drink from my tap.


Interesting.

In Hinduism, we have sattvic foods and tamasic foods derived from Ayurveda, an ancient Indian medical system. Sattvic foods promote energy, calmness, and a clarity of mind, while tamasic foods promote laziness, lethargy, and apathy. Sattvic foods include things like certain vegetables and fruits, nuts, grains, beverages like water, tea, or juice, and dairy. Tamasic foods include meats, processed and fried foods, sugary foods, beverage like alcohol and soft drinks, and refined grains.

I'm not sure if this would equate to what is considered "holy" or "unholy." I suppose sattvic foods could be considered holy, while tamasic foods could be considered unholy.

I suppose in Hinduism, we're more concerned with what goes in our bodies than what comes out.

Is that always true? I'd say we're more commonly concerned with what goes in, but I've seen some pretty detailed instructions on how to deal with what comes out(I feel @mangalavara has talked on some of this before).

I think they're great questions! I would take them seriously regardless of who is asking.

First, hopefully you noticed I was speaking generally about the "unholy". In particular, it's a case by case evaluation, and holy/mundane/unholy is a spiritual quality so, a person is looking for signs to indicate what it is. That's why I said "generally your excrement is unholy".

Regarding animals, insects, humans, plants, rocks, whomever, whatever, unholiness is not transferred in that way. A person doesn't become unholy, if they are in a situation where they need to consume something.. rotting, decomposing. There's stories of captured soldiers being tortured and being fed a "bitter meal". Not sure if the stories are true, but, this in no way makes the soldier unholy. The pet consuming its own feces does not make it unholy. The dog drinking from the toilet, the flies in the garbage... doesn't change them that way.

In general, animals, plants, insects are less sensitive than humans in a lot of ways. They are canabalistic, they have no qualms killing brutally. Plants will mercilessly take over a yard killing the other plants, and knock down a house by invading the foundation, etc. But they are also less sensitive to ecoli, and salmonella, and other harmful "stuff" than humans. So this insensitivity is not a flaw. It just is. And this doesn't in any way detract from their positive qualities. I love animals and plants. In a way, I think they are capable of love as well. I even love insects. I have an affinity for ants and ticks, believe it or not.

One of the ways they are insensitive is they are lacking an aversion to things that are unholy. Again, in general. This, imo, is by design. They are part of the cycle of life. When a fly is feeding off excrement, it is further seperating and sifting out the 'husks' 'shells' 'peels' of unholiness from the 'leavings'. In this way, true, the 'leavings' are not completely unholy when they 'leave' the human body. There is still something nutritious there which can be sifted further from the 'dross'. They are able to sift it and sort it further than a human as a result of their insensitivity. They are like nature's refineries.

And this is why it appears as if unholiness is relative. The vast majority, almost everything that exists is a mixture of holy/unholy. Again, it gets complicated. It's not that the excrement is unholy for us and not unholy for the animals, plants, insects, rocks, etc... it's that excrement is still a mixture of holy/unholy when it leaves the body, but it is much-much more unholy than holy. And the animals, plants, insects, rocks, etc are not naturally disinclined towards that high concentration so that they can fulfiill their function in the cycle of life.

Thanks for your description!

Good to meet a fellow ant enthusiast! My heart warms every spring when I see them crawling into the kitchen.

For some reason, ants make me ponder the mysteries.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Is that always true? I'd say we're more commonly concerned with what goes in, but I've seen some pretty detailed instructions on how to deal with what comes out(I feel @mangalavara has talked on some of this before).

I can't say for sure, which is why I left it at "I suppose." I certainly don't claim to know everything about Hinduism, and I haven't seen what @mangalavara has had to say about it.

But now you've piqued my curiosity.

 

[mangalavara]

Is that always true? I'd say we're more commonly concerned with what goes in, but I've seen some pretty detailed instructions on how to deal with what comes out(I feel @mangalavara has talked on some of this before).

I don’t remember what I had talked about before. What I can tell you is that I’ve seen in the Mahābhārata some instructions/recommendations/guidance regarding ‘what comes out’ and that it is common in both the Hindu and Muslim worlds. The Mahābhārata advises not to look at solid waste, and it says to eat only with the right hand. Only the right hand should be eaten with because the left hand is used for cleaning oneself while in the bathroom. The standard practice in much of the world is to use water.

 

[JustGeorge]

I don’t remember what I had talked about before. What I can tell you is that I’ve seen in the Mahābhārata some instructions/recommendations/guidance regarding ‘what comes out’ and that it is common in both the Hindu and Muslim worlds. The Mahābhārata advises not to look at solid waste, and it says to eat only with the right hand. Only the right hand should be eaten with because the left hand is used for cleaning oneself while in the bathroom. The standard practice in much of the world is to use water.

Its also possible I've remembered talking with the wrong person(my memory is poor).

 

[SalixIncendium]

I don’t remember what I had talked about before. What I can tell you is that I’ve seen in the Mahābhārata some instructions/recommendations/guidance regarding ‘what comes out’ and that it is common in both the Hindu and Muslim worlds. The Mahābhārata advises not to look at solid waste, and it says to eat only with the right hand. Only the right hand should be eaten with because the left hand is used for cleaning oneself while in the bathroom. The standard practice in much of the world is to use water.

Thanks. I did not know the part about not looking at it, though I was aware about the eating with the right and and wiping with the left. This was primarily done because toilet paper was not in use or available.

 

[JustGeorge]

I found this:

In the same chapter which is Chapter 4, there’s a paragraph on social interactions and on how to purify various physical objects. Let’s focus on these 3 pieces of contents:

• All those cavities of the body which lie above the navel are pure, but those which are below the navel are impure, as well as excretions that fall from the body.
• In order to cleans the organs by which urine and faeces are ejected, earth and water must be used, as they may be required, likewise in removing the remaining ones among twelve impurities of the body.
• He who desires to be pure must clean the penis by one application of earth and then water, the anus by applying earth and then water three times, the left hand alone by applying it ten times, and both hands by applying it seven times.

From above 3 pieces of contents, the information that we can sense are these:

• The toilet things are impure to the Hindus;
• The toilets should be far away from their homes;
• The Hindus use left hands to clean their butts by means of water and earth;

Seems its from the Manusmrti, which I understand aren't always considered valid for this yuga.

 

[mangalavara]

Its also possible I've remembered talking with the wrong person(my memory is poor).

The topic rings a bell in me, but that could be a false memory.

Thanks. I did not know the part about not looking at it, though I was aware about the eating with the right and and wiping with the left. This was primarily done because toilet paper was not in use or available.

One of the Brahmanas associates human things with the left hand, and divine things with the right hand. You can see this reflected in many cultures in the East.

 

[mangalavara]

Seems its from the Manusmrti, which I understand aren't always considered valid for this yuga.

Even if Manusmriti were entirely invalid in Kaliyuga, it is still good to clean oneself with water after answering the call of nature. This, in my opinion, is part of śaucha (cleanliness), itself a part of sāmānya dharma or general/common dharma. Many people in the Indian subcontinent use toilet mugs. Others have jets or ‘bum guns’ like in Middle Eastern countries. In Southeast Asia, people use what Filipinos call a tabò. I myself use a tabò.

 

[JustGeorge]

Even if Manusmriti were entirely invalid in Kaliyuga, it is still good to clean oneself with water after answering the call of nature. This, in my opinion, is part of śaucha (cleanliness), itself a part of sāmānya dharma or general/common dharma. Many people in the Indian subcontinent use toilet mugs. Others have jets or ‘bum guns’ like in Middle Eastern countries. In Southeast Asia, people use what Filipinos call a tabò. I myself use a tabò.

It recommends cleaning with water and earth...

I'm not sure how to clean up with earth. Well, other than doing what the pets do and dragging hindquarters on the ground....

 

[viole]

If you believe there are holy places, do you believe there are unholy places?

Why, what makes them so?

Unless all places are holy, then it is necessarily so that there are unholy places. Just by simple logic.

ciao

- viole

 

[mangalavara]

It recommends cleaning with water and earth...

I don’t know what is meant by ‘earth,’ or even what the Sanskrit is, but it is apparent to me that the writer believes in thoroughly cleaning oneself after answering the call of nature. It can be done today with water and additionally wet wipes or paper (water gets sometimes all and sometimes most of the job done). What exactly Manusmriti instructs or recommends is relevant if we live in Āryāvarta in a particular time in history and have a varna. Even then, some of us might not care too much about what’s written. People do what they want. Nonetheless, there is something in Manusmriti and other smritis that is relevant at all times and in all places—sāmānya dharma. Technology changes but virtues remain the same.

I'm not sure how to clean up with earth. Well, other than doing what the pets do and dragging hindquarters on the ground....

Give them tabòs.

 

[mangalavara]

As I see it, places, in and of themselves, are neutral.

It's people that color the place. People, or more accurately their behaviors and perspectives based on their individual egos, are what color a place "holy" or "unholy."

I like this. According to the Śiva Purana, a place becomes holy (whatever the Sanskrit term actually is) because a Śivayogin meditates there.

 

[mangalavara]

If you believe there are holy places, do you believe there are unholy places?

Why, what makes them so?

I believe there are holy sites, but I don’t believe there are unholy sites. From my perspective the ‘holy and unholy’ idea sounds too dualistic. So, I think that a place is either holy or neutral.

 

[sun rise]

In Islamic sufism, there's a word, barakah, which has a lot of different meanings. The one that fits with this thread is:

(Barakah) is a subtle spiritual energy which flows through everything, but is strongest within the human. The more purified the human becomes, the greater the flow of barakah. Overpowering barakah can be experienced in sacred places, in sacred art and in sanctified people, all of which are theophanies, revealing and manifesting the Divinity - here on earth.

This is of course not a materialist concept but a spiritual one and one that I accept as true. And just like there can be positive "subtle" energy attached to places, there can be negative energy as well attached to objects.

 

[dybmh]

The topic rings a bell in me, but that could be a false memory.



One of the Brahmanas associates human things with the left hand, and divine things with the right hand. You can see this reflected in many cultures in the East.

There's a left / right dichotomy in my tradition as well. Not the typical western occult LHP/RHP dynamic, though. (funny, 'cause we're talking about hands ) It's best described maybe as: the left is.. restricting, limiting. The right is the opposite. That fits with a human / divine dichotomy as well. Depending on how divine is considered, of course.

And all of this points to the human body as a microcosm in the "eyes" of the ancients. Do you have that as well in your tradition?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Completely irrelevant to the topic, but while we're on the subject of right/left dichotomy, there is also a masculine/feminine associated with this in Hinduism as well. Ardhanarishvara is the form of Shiva and Parvati combined, with Shiva associated with the right, and Parvati associated with the left. Something I picked up a few years back attending a Mahashivaratri stream.

I now return to your holy/unholy -ness.

 

[mangalavara]

There's a left / right dichotomy in my tradition as well. Not the typical western occult LHP/RHP dynamic, though. (funny, 'cause we're talking about hands ) It's best described maybe as: the left is.. restricting, limiting. The right is the opposite. That fits with a human / divine dichotomy as well. Depending on how divine is considered, of course.

And all of this points to the human body as a microcosm in the "eyes" of the ancients. Do you have that as well in your tradition?

Interesting! I don’t know much about the symbolism in Judaism, but I think I heard something before about putting one’s shoes on this way: right and then left, and removing one’s shoes like this: left and then right. I personally do it that way. I agree that the left hand symbolizing restriction and limitation while the right hand being the opposite reflects a human/divine dichotomy (in that order, of course). As human beings, we have our limitations whereas divinity does not. For example, we give little compared to how much God gives.

Regarding the human body as a microcosm, yes, this is in my tradition as well. The fundamental principles (tattvas) of the cosmos are also present in the human body.

 

[dybmh]

right and then left, and removing one’s shoes like this: left and then right. I personally do it that way.

In this context, it's significant that the the left one is tied first.. the left is tied, restricted.

So for me it's
right left left right
On on, tie tie

 

[mangalavara]

In this context, it's significant that the the left one is tied first.. the left is tied, restricted.

I like this. If I get another pair of shoes that has strings this time, I’ll tie them that way.