Single
most important principle in Buddhist Practice is its Dhana, the giving
away ones possessions, without expecting anything in return.
This is something of an antithesis to modern world, where, self, image and one’s possessions are dear and belonging.
How
it is practiced by Buddhist monks is discussed here briefly to make a
novice monk adopt to modern trends in a demanding world.
A
Buddhist monk ought to be light in baggage and belongings. A monk could
have only two cloths (Chivara), one for wearing and another for change.
How it should be made is also under strict and elaborate instructions.
The eating
habits are also under strict code of practice. I would discuss that in
detail here. When it comes to eating, if one ignores the morning meal,
which is very light indeed, a monk has to survive on a single meal, and
that has to be taken in the early evening not late as is modern day
practice.
You may wonder why I took some interest in this.
This examination is scientific in nature and if you need satire read American Pie elsewhere.
There are many reasons, and I would jot down only a few.
If a monk in
the west practices this according to the strict code, it is a severe
test for them, adopting this regime in the winter months.
Equally, I
have seen some monks who try to adhere to the regime regimentally and
religiously have ended up sick and malnourished. If one becomes a
Buddhist monk in adult life who had enjoyed somewhat a liberal life,
changing to a single meal is a severe restriction on their diurnal
habits.
Ones hormonal status, glycogen storage and status of the acid
secretion in the stomach are habituated by ones daily routine (life
style).
Changing this having become a monk should be done on a staggered
basis giving time for the body to adjust.
Additionally, many of them do not have an understating of what is a balance diet.
What I
stated above is obvious, but over years, I have seen many Buddhist monks
suffering from food related diseases, especially diabetes mellitus.
This is something not welcome and unexpected for my own consumption. I
have no intention of going into how one becomes a diabetic but for me
somebody on a single meal getting diabetes mellitus was something of an
enigma.
In this scenario, having thought a bit about it, I put the blame squarely on the layman.
Hope one is not amazed by this statement.
I would go
into this briefly. The upper and the higher middle class families are
the ones who get quota for the Dhana for the residential monks in the
city. Their, idea of a meal is a lavish one. Many of them are also
diabetic because of their over indulgence. The offer of Dhana is not
done on a regular basis. So on the day all the sugary, starchy, heavy
but nutritionally unbalanced is offered. These Dhana days also happen to
fall on weekends and holidays. The monk has no choice. They consume a
diet heavy in carbohydrates which stimulate their pancreas to the limits
on weekends and practically having an austerely meal rest of the week.
My theory of this up and down (erratic) stimulation of the insulin
status, make them prone to diabetes in middle age.
This may be
aggravated by lack of exercise and having sugary drinks (tea) to
counteract the late evening hypoglycemia.
It is the duty of the layman to look after their welfare on a regular basis instead of lavish feast once a month.
Medical
education is in its prime stage now especially on nutrition, the doctor
should advise the upper middle class families what is a balance single
diet for a monk who are practically at the mercy of the rich laymen who
impart their inherent diseases to the clergy.
I would give some advice later regarding what to be offered and what ought not to be but for now let me digress a little.
I wanted to test myself whether I can survive on a single diet.
(For the record, I have not taken a single rice meal over 10 years and it is my health secret!)
I am more than convinced that it is possible and healthy.
But it takes time and it cannot be practiced overnight.
Prehistoric Time -15,000 to 30, 000 ago
Having proved it to myself, I delved into
man’s prehistoric period and how man survived in adverse climatic
conditions and food scarcities.
Hunter gather never had three meals a
day.
At best he had only a single square meal never three meals. He
mainly survived on big games in a community life style. He was
omnivorous and supplemented his diet with fruits and nuts. They probably
did not suffer from diabetes mellitus and his teeth were strong, the
enamel was thin but the dentin was thick, hardly had caries. In times of
food shortages and diseases there were signs of enamel deficiency and
bone diseases. These changes are recorded in prehistoric fossils which
date back to 15,000 to 30,000 years. Until such time he became nomadic
man milk was in short supply. Only milk supply was maternal. The average
woman was thin, and she only had children once in four years or so. (It
is now believed that when a woman is thin -prehistoric women had to
work hard, almost equaling man’s efforts-like modern day women athletes
the ovulation does not occur. Additionally, prolong breast feeding
without weaning suppresses ovulation).
The man probably was sturdier and taller but comparatively thinner
since he had to work hard in hunting exercises. He probably lived a
shorter life than a woman (45 years), probably 35 years or so died not
of modern day diseases but by injuries sustained in hunting.
As far prehistoric man is concerned a single diet existence is not a fantasy but a fact.
Paleolithic Period- 5000 to 13 000 years
Why man became an agricultural man is a
mystery but available evidence suggests dramatic changes in climate at
the end of the ice age and population expansion. With the emergence of
the nomadic life and mans entry into agricultural endeavours, he entered
into a sedentary life style.
However, he never gave up game and hunting
until such time he domesticated adequate livestock.
I would like to figure out that he was never a pure vegetarian.
The Asian
wolf became associated with man around 13,000 years ago probably
scavenging around man’s domain. The dogs and wolf can live on a single
diet perhaps even longer and with the loss of mammoths and huge games,
wolf also found living difficult but drifted with the man for game. His
eating pattern, scavenging to begin with which our present day dogs
inherit and illustrate by scavenging city dumps, is a reminder that even
this period the man existed (present day practice of feeding a single
meal to a pedigree dog which I don’t agree with) on a single main diet.
Even though
the agricultural practices were extensive, failure of crops were common
phenomena, the demise of Maya Dynasty was a true example of catastrophe
in history. In spite of extensive agriculture, food was not plenty and
the food preparation from harvest to meal was labour extensive and man
continued to supplement meal on animal and animal sacrifices. In this
period population expanded probably because women becoming comparatively
fatter and fertile (it is interesting to note that when a woman is too
fat, like present day, fertility drops) and their body composition was
ideal for reproduction. But with success there was impending catastrophe
too. Famines were common due to reduction of crops, failure of rains or
floods.
The man became shorter and less sturdy due to sedentary life.
We may be able to surmise that even in
this period man ate a variable diet, characteristically a single meal
which was supplemented by animal, fish, shells, fruits and nuts.
How and when
man discovered use of salt and spices is an open to question probably
towards the latter stage of Paleolithic time.
Contemporary History from 5000 years to 2500.
During this period man was eating mixed
diet containing milk (animal), sugar, salt, spices and animal and fish
products. In spite of agriculture man never ceased to consume animal
food, in fact it became a major constitute, judging by the tribal and
religious practices from 5000 to 2000 years. This is probably the period
where single supper or a single meal changed to multiple meals
especially the upper classes but slaves and lower classes subsisted on
an average single large meal.
The longevity and average health increased proportionately to double the prehistoric period.
Most of the sages and philosophers except hedonists lived an austere life while recommending the same to the masses.
2500 and the emergence of the Vegetarian Life
Even though some Jainers advocated
vegetarian life, it was with the emergence of the Buddhists way of life
in India that preceded the current wave of vegetarian (purported to be
healthy) food fads. Neither, Ten Commandments, the Jesus Christ’s
Sayings nor Muslim Koran abhors sacrifices of animals.
The
vegetarian life is comparatively new one probably only 2500 years old in
the history of mankind and that is why, there are so many
misconceptions. Unlike monkeys, baboons and gorillas who are mostly
vegetarians, from which man originated in an evolutionary point of view,
the man had always been a carnivorous mammal.
2500
years is a small time in evolutionary time scale, a healthy dialogue on
vegetarian diet is mandatory in the present context.
Our
intestine and teeth bear different relationships to tree dwelling
mammals, some are morphological in nature (genetic) and some are based
on the diet (environmental) we eat. That is the view I hold not an
opinion substantiated.
As far as the growth and development of children are concerned my view is that single diet is not adequate.
That is my entry point to discuss another point of view.
Can a young novice monk who has not gone through puberty be sustained on single diet?
This is a question I find it difficult to answer even thought I have stated my gut feeling above. This is another reason I defer on ordaining young underage monks (there are other reasons stated elsewhere) apart from psychological maturity to go on an austere life as prescribed by Vinaya.
Parents should have a say in these issues. They should not plunge a young one into priesthood early in their tender years.
What should an average Dhana (Single Meal) should contain?
The physiological effect and the calorie intake of an average
meal should last 18 hours.
That is the time when the glycogens storage
starts to become depleted.
The diet should not have
high sugary (desert) components that stimulate surge of insulin and late
dumping syndrome due to insulin surge at the time of the meal.
The
vegetarian diet has no problem since the fiber makes the release of
dietary sugar gradual.
The best desert for the monks is not ice cream
but fruits.
Out of the fruits, the best is bananas which
releases its sugars slowly without upsetting insulin surges and
maintaining a stable blood sugar. Milk and curd are preferred, since they give a supply of fat for starving intervals.
Missing
ingredient is nuts, not only they contain short fatty acids which supply
nutrition for starving intervals and also healthy vitamins.
I would encourage the young monks to go liberal on fruits and nuts.
A supply of
nuts (not aggalas and jaggery and sweets), fruits, papaw, banana and
proper breakfast cereal containing millet (Kurrakkan) should be the
breakfast for our monks.
Somebody
should invest and develop a proper breakfast cereal for our kids (which
can be used by young monks in their growing years) instead of foreign
breakfast cereals.
For
the monks in the West a Buddhist dietitian with knowledge in Vinaya
practice should investigate how their mid day Dhana should be
constituted.
My belief is many of them are having an inappropriate diet for winter conditions.
I hope a good breakfast cereal will emerge from the west for the monks on a meagre diet.
My
prescription for priesthood is entirely different. When I see young
monks in the TV giving emotional speeches rather than mature sermons, I
become sometimes terrified.
Even my
twilight years, I sometimes reserve my judgment or giving advices on
certain issues. Never over the telephone, only, when I can have an eye
to eye contact with the person concerned where I, can have an immediate
assessment of the person’s psychological makeup and the reactions.
One can do more damage by volunteering advice not appropriate.
My advice
goes as this. Let the young one follows a simple observational life. In
other words learn to observe in a simple scientific and logical fashion.
Teach them science in simple terms as we tend to understand them from
facts to fiction.
Children learn fiction better in the early years and they should be allowed to mature into scientific and factual way.
They have the philosophical views embedded in their brains. Encourage them as much as possible
This is why they always asks mommy why?
Encourage the philosophical views at an early age, even though we do not have ready made answers always.
Then only
they should be allowed to think of a religion or religions in their
life. If we are to stop, young from being taken into terrorist or
religious cadres, that is the only way out left. That is the very thing
we are not doing at present and ignoring. We are slowly encouraging and
allowing young militants being made out of innocent minds because of our
failure in commonsense education.
Most of the religious and militant groups know this very well, the best currency to propagate their rigid views is the young mind.
