Skip to content

Questionप्रश्न

On what grounds does the hitahita chapter say that meat is neither food, nor medicine, nor rasayana?

हिताहिताध्याय किन आधारों पर कहता है कि मांस न आहार है, न औषध, न रसायन?

Extracted from the textNew name from the text3 references

Names and synonyms

No alternate names recorded.

Answer

Study question (generated from the text)

Not food: Brahma and the others did not eat it, nourishment runs from milk to food, children are first given light food with milk at six months, and meat is very incompatible with milk. Not medicine: it is absent from the lists of drugs, it neither purifies nor, having no distinct taste of its own, pacifies, and no dose and none of the ten times for medicine is given for it. Not rasayana: it is absent from the rasayana section.

Detailed answer

The text also argues that eaten meat does not add to the flesh as flesh, since the body grows through the sequence of rasa and the other dhatus, that many people who eat no meat are stout and strong while some meat-eaters are thin and weak, and that the meat passages of other medical texts were added later by meat-loving authors. These are the chapter's own arguments, reported as written.

All references

Every page and verse of the source that this entry draws on.

Quick facts

Content type
Question
Source pages with records
3
Pages naming it
0
Extraction tasks
T29
Record id
qa_T29_07