Meat and meat soup (mamsa, mamsarasa)

Fish and the meat of goats, sheep and cattle are listed among the causes of pitta aggravation.

A great text is quoted as saying that meat cooked with fat, milk products, sour grain gruel, sour fruits and pungents, with ghee, is strengthening, appetising and nourishing; the text itself attributes this effect to the combination.

Meat is said to have no taste of its own: it is not salty, since it has to be eaten combined with salt; not sour, since it digests the body's sour, that is, is opposed to sour; not pungent, bitter or astringent, being fit for special seasoning; and not sweet, since sweet is very opposed to salt, with which meat is used.

The great text is quoted for meat-paka: meat processed with oil, milk products, grain-sour (dhanyamla), fruit-sour and pungents, together with ghee, is strengthening, appetising and nourishing; the translation replies that other substances too gain strengthening, appetising and nourishing qualities by special processing, so it is wrong to call meat better than them.

Since meat lacks the marks of a medicine that bears fruit, no rule of time and measure can be made for it: had it been acceptable, the teachers would have stated its dose and the time to take it, as they did for other substances.

The editor says the closing sentence of the work shows that Ugrādityācārya himself expounded its last section in the assembly of Śrī Nṛpatuṅgavallabhendra in order to prove that meat is of no use in medicine.

The editor says that in the final section of the work the ācārya proved by reasoning and authority that taking condemnable things such as wine and meat, whether in the name of medicine or of food, is not proper.

Seeing many meat-eaters, by the fault of the times physicians too became meat-eaters, the translation says, and out of self-interest pushed meat, which is outside the root text, into the sections on food and drink and on vegetables.

Meat, with honey and liquor, is said to have been mixed into this science of Ayurveda later by people greedy of the tongue.

The introduction says meat, like wine and honey, is used in no medicinal formula of the Kalyāṇakāraka, because obtaining it involves killing living beings and its renunciation is needed to uphold non-violence.

The hitahita chapter argues that meat is not food, being very incompatible with milk, and goes on to deny that it is a medicine or a rasayana.

Meat is said not to be a medicine: it is not taken in the chapter on collecting medicinal substances nor among the miscellaneous medicines, which are of two kinds, pacifying and purifying; it is not purifying, lacking the power to purify upward, downward or both ways, and not pacifying, having no particular taste of its own.

None of the ten times for taking medicine is fixed for meat, and the sections on collecting substances, on the proper place and time for collecting them and on acquiring them do not take it up; where it is not mentioned even by name, the translation asks, how can it be a medicine?

Meat is said not to be a rasayana either: it is not read in the rasayana chapter, it is opposed to milk, and the diet rule says milk, ghee and food are to be taken after the meat is digested.

Through many reasons and examples the account of meat is called self-contradictory, very painful, most low, disgusting, a breeding place of worms and destructive of the root text, and so it is refuted.

Meat and food (anna) are said to be alike bodies of living beings, yet one (food) is to be eaten and the other (meat) not, just as of sister and wife, both called woman, one is to be approached and the other not.