What distinguishes food that 'has lost rasa' from food merely perceived as unpleasant — is rasa-loss an objective physical quality or a relational one (e.g., prasada vs. ordinary food)?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

Shankara identifies amedhya as 'ayajnarha' (unfit for yajna) — does this mean the standard for food is ultimately sacrificial fitness rather than nutritional value, and what does that imply for modern food choices?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

Ramanuja adds an active counsel ('sattvika ahara alone should be taken by those who wish the good') that Shankara does not — what does this difference in register reveal about jnana-marga versus bhakti-yoga pedagogy?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

Madhusudan's three-column analysis maps each tamasic quality to its opposite sattvika quality — does this suggest that tamasic and sattvika food are not merely different but structurally contrary, making partial reform insufficient?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

Sridhara includes kalanja (specific forbidden foods) in amedhya — to what extent is the tamasic food-classification a doctrinal-metaphysical category versus a context-specific cultural prohibition, and how should practitioners navigate this?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

If the ucchishta of a guru or deity is mahaprasada (sacred) while ucchishta in 17.10 is tamasic, what principle determines when the 'leftover' of another is purifying versus polluting?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

All schools agree on the list but diverge on the explanatory register (sacrificial fitness, gunavridhhi, prasada-logic, systematic opposition) — does the convergence on the phenomenon and divergence on explanation suggest that food classification is a shared observational baseline on which doctrinal differences are then projected?

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves. See seven-school commentary at https://gita.ekrasworks.com/gita/17/10.

BG 17.10 — Śraddhātraya-Vibhāga-Yoga

Bhagavad Gītā 17.10Chapter 17 · Śraddhātraya-Vibhāga-Yoga · Krishna → Arjuna · anuṣṭubh

यातयामं गतरसं पूति पर्युषितं च यत् ।

उच्छिष्टमपि चामेध्यं भोजनं तामसप्रियम् ॥

yāta-yāmaṃ gata-rasaṃ pūti paryuṣitaṃ ca yat

ucchiṣṭam api cāmedhyaṃ bhojanaṃ tāmasa-priyam

spokensingle-voice recital; rendered via IndicF5 conditioned on a Sanskrit reference clip

meaning

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves.

ekras · bhāṣya

Yata-yamam — past its hour, stale-cooked; gata-rasam — drained of taste; puti — putrid; paryushitam — kept overnight; uchchhishtam — leavings of others' meals; amedhyam — ritually unfit. Such bhojanam is tamasa-priyam — dear to the tamasika.

Krishna names six categories of tamasic food. Each is a precise food-pathology. The bhakta who finds himself drawn to these foods has located the guna operating in him.

Shankara reads yata-yama as half-cooked or stale food whose virya — potency — has gone. Gata-rasa — drained of juice and vitality. Puti — putrid in smell. Paryushita — kept overnight after cooking. Ucchhishta — the leavings of another's meal. Amedhya — unfit for sacrifice. Such food is dear to the tamasika. The six categories together describe a dietary profile that produces tamasic effects on body and mind.

Madhusudana extends Shankara's reading: yata-yama is food half-cooked — ardhapakva — or, as Shankara specifies, food already covered by gata-rasa. Cooked rice and the like that have become cold after a prahara, drained of their extract. Paryushita is kept overnight and, Madhusudana adds, includes dhattura — intoxicants that produce mental disturbance. Uchchhishta is what remains in another's plate. Amedhya is what is structurally unfit for offering. Six concrete categories; tamasic life is recognizable by its food-shape.

Ramanuja reads food long-standing — chirakala-avasthita; stripped of natural rasa; foul-smelling; transformed by passage of time — kalatipattya rasantarapanna; left over from those other than guru and superiors — gurv-adibhyah anyesham bhukta-shishtam; and unworthy of yajna-offering. Such tamomaya food is dear to the tamasika and further increases tamas.

Ramanuja adds the relational element: leftovers from gurus or superiors are themselves prasada and not in this category; only leftovers from peers and below count as tamasic.

Madhva reads each term on the bheda-frame: yata-yama, gata-rasa, puti, paryushita, ucchhishta, amedhya — all tamasa-priya, the preference of the tamasika-jiva. Tamas binds the paratantra-jiva most heavily, pulling it away from the sattvika orientation that would align it correctly with svatantra Hari. The food is real, the binding is real, the tamasika's preference is real.

Vallabha reads chirakala-avasthita food — bereft of the freshness and fragrance that mark Krishna's prasada — as stale, putrid, leftover, sacrificially unworthy and dear to the tamasika. In pushti-marga, food derives its purifying potency only as prasada — overflow of Krishna's ananda-lila. Food that has lost rasa has, in the most literal sense, lost the relational substance that pushti-marga prizes.

Shridhara reads food cooked a full prahara ago and now cold — yata-yama as prahara-yasya pakvasya, shaitya-avastha-prapta. Food from which the sap has been pressed out — nishipita-sara. Foul-smelling. Cooked the previous day — dinantara-apakva. Left over from another's eating. Amedhya — abhakshya — forbidden foods like kalanja. Such food is dear to the tamasika person. The chapter's diagnostic now reaches into the tamasic palate with full operational specificity.

Context

where

Chapter 17 · Śraddhātraya-Vibhāga-Yoga · meter anuṣṭubh

who speaks

Krishna → Arjuna

preceded by — BG 17.9

Foods that are excessively bitter, sour, salty, scalding, sharp, dry, and burning are what the rajasic person loves, and they bring pain, sorrow, and disease.

What's going on

Food that is stale, putrid, left over from another's plate, or unfit for offering is what the tamasic person craves.

Sūtras through this verse (29)

MadhvaclassicalT1

Hari is supreme — the running reading-rulebetween

15.1The world-tree's root is Viṣṇu above.───→here17.10───→17.23Oṃ-tat-sat names the Lord, three times.

RamsukhdasclassicalD

The three modes (sattva, rajas, tamas) at workbetween

17.2Even faith itself comes in three flavors.───→here17.10───→18.19Knowledge, action, doer, each one threefold.

JayatīrthaclassicalB

Pañcabheda — the five distinctions enforced verse by verseexit

15.17Three orders, each a distinct relatum.───→here17.10───→

show all 29

MadhvaclassicalT12

Closure by gloss — the small repertoirebetween

15.1'Above' is just Viṣṇu, the upward one.───→here17.10───→17.14'Worship of gods' is worship of the One.

MadhvaclassicalT3

Ranking is real — and it never collapsesexit

15.17Beyond all selves stands the Highest Person alone.───→here17.10───→

MadhvaclassicalT4

Liberation is bliss in body — not absorptionexit

15.6The supreme abode does not return its dwellers.───→here17.10───→

MadhvaclassicalT10

The deluder is named — three goddesses, one Lordexit

15.4Cut the world-tree by knowing whose play it is.───→here17.10───→

Gauravmodernchaplaincy_kit_of_tools

Chaplaincy Kit Of Toolsbetween

13.7Itihasa stories and the witness virtues. 'Amanitvam adambhitvam ahimsa kshantir ───→here17.10───→17.15Mantra and speech. 'Anudvega-karam vakyam satyam priya-hitam cha yat, svadhyaya-

Ramsukhdasclassical

Sādhaka Sañjīvanī commentary at this versebetween

───→here17.10───→

Gauravmoderncivilizational_air_conditioning

Civilizational Air Conditioningexit

16.21'Tri-vidham narakasyedam dvaram nashanam atmanah, kamah krodhas tatha lobhah.' T───→here17.10───→

Gauravmodernwitness_self_neti_neti

Witness Self Neti Netiexit

15.7'Mamaivamsho jiva-loke jiva-bhutah sanatanah.' A part of me, eternal, has become───→here17.10───→

JayatīrthaclassicalE

Vishnu-sarvottamatva read into apparently neutral wordsexit

15.16Uttama-puruṣa is Viṣṇu, beyond both.───→here17.10───→

JayatīrthaclassicalG

Citation as proof — śruti, smṛti, MB, Aṣṭādhyāyī, Pañcarātraexit

15.16Aṣṭādhyāyī 5.2.127 controls bhūta.───→here17.10───→

JayatīrthaclassicalJ

Reading the silence — iti śeṣaḥ and iti bhāvaḥexit

15.1Tat-prasaṅge alaukikaṁ — iti śeṣaḥ.───→here17.10───→

RamsukhdasclassicalJ

Divine vs demonic patternsexit

17.5Hard penance off-script is still demonic.───→here17.10───→

RamsukhdasclassicalK

The body is not yoursexit

15.7Self drags the senses like wind drags scent.───→here17.10───→

RāmānujaclassicalK

Tri-guṇa diagnostic for the bhaktabetween

17.2Even faith is sorted by the three modes.───→here17.10───→18.7Wrong renunciation.

VallabhaclassicalJ

Strategic silence — pointers, not absencesbetween

13.24The threefold-knower catalogue goes to silence.───→here17.10───→17.12The threefold yajña/dāna/tapas catalogue is skipped.

MadhusūdanaclassicalB

Different students need different teachingsbetween

17.1A third class: faith without textual training.───→here17.10───→18.1Three kinds of renouncing, one for each grade.

MadhusūdanaclassicalJ

Two kinds of nature — divine and demonicbetween

17.1A third class: faith outside the texts.───→here17.10───→18.1Even renouncing splits into three by disposition.

Ekrasmodernend_of_life

End of life — the threshold tourexit · v2

15.8Carrying the perfume───→here17.10───→

Ekrasmodernanger_management

Anger Managementexit · other

16.22Released from the three gates───→here17.10───→

ĀnandagiriclassicalG

Anūdyate, na vidhīyateexit

17.2Threefold faith: tagged at this site.───→here17.10───→

ĀnandagiriclassicalJ

Prakṛti is never autonomousexit

15.7Aṃśa pinned to the Lord, not free.───→here17.10───→

RāmānujaclassicalF

Two prakṛtis · jīva as eternal aṃśaexit

15.18Named Puruṣottama.───→here17.10───→

VallabhaclassicalK

Aphorism, gloss, full commentaryexit

15.15The bhāṣya-author is named by the Lord himself.───→here17.10───→

VedāntadeśikaclassicalI

9.24 — the standing citation for ārādhyabetween

17.4The mode of worship reveals the worshipper.───→here17.10───→18.46Karma-yoga's act IS indweller-worship.

ŚaṅkaraclassicalF

The Lord is born only as it wereexit

15.16Both the changing and changeless are below the supreme.───→here17.10───→

AbhinavaguptaclassicalF

Three guṇas: contractions of one consciousnessexit

17.2Even faith is graded through the three.───→here17.10───→

Śabda · lemmas (14 unique · 15 occurrences)

पूति pūti — stinking, putrid · nominative neuter singular noun
उच्छिष्टम् √ucchiṣ — to be left over (ud- + √śiṣ); leavings · nominative neuter singular participle noun

show all 14

च ca ×2 — and; (homonym: also the consonant ca)
यात √yā — to go (verbal root) · compound participle (compound member)
यामम् yāma — watch (3-hour period); restraint · nominative neuter singular noun
गत √gam — to go (verbal root) · compound participle (compound member)
रसम् rasa — essence, taste, sentiment (the aesthetic rasa) · nominative neuter singular noun
पर्युषितम् paryuṣita — stale, kept overnight (pari- + √vas) · nominative neuter singular noun
यत् yad — which, who (relative pronoun) · nominative neuter singular noun
अपि api — also, even, although
अमेध्यम् amedhya — unfit for sacrifice, impure (a- + medhya) · nominative neuter singular noun
भोजनम् bhojana — food, eating (from √bhuj) · nominative neuter singular noun
तामस tāmasa — tāmasa (derived from tamas 'darkness': 'pertaining to the tamas guṇa') · compound
प्रियम् priya — dear, beloved · nominative neuter singular noun

Praśna · so what (7)

01What distinguishes food that 'has lost rasa' from food merely perceived as unpleasant — is rasa-loss an objective physical quality or a relational one (e.g., prasada vs. ordinary food)?
02Shankara identifies amedhya as 'ayajnarha' (unfit for yajna) — does this mean the standard for food is ultimately sacrificial fitness rather than nutritional value, and what does that imply for modern food choices?

show all 7

03Ramanuja adds an active counsel ('sattvika ahara alone should be taken by those who wish the good') that Shankara does not — what does this difference in register reveal about jnana-marga versus bhakti-yoga pedagogy?
04Madhusudan's three-column analysis maps each tamasic quality to its opposite sattvika quality — does this suggest that tamasic and sattvika food are not merely different but structurally contrary, making partial reform insufficient?
05Sridhara includes kalanja (specific forbidden foods) in amedhya — to what extent is the tamasic food-classification a doctrinal-metaphysical category versus a context-specific cultural prohibition, and how should practitioners navigate this?
06If the ucchishta of a guru or deity is mahaprasada (sacred) while ucchishta in 17.10 is tamasic, what principle determines when the 'leftover' of another is purifying versus polluting?
07All schools agree on the list but diverge on the explanatory register (sacrificial fitness, gunavridhhi, prasada-logic, systematic opposition) — does the convergence on the phenomenon and divergence on explanation suggest that food classification is a shared observational baseline on which doctrinal differences are then projected?

Vyavahāra · try it in your life

Advaita

Notice which foods in your daily meals have lost vitality — refrigerated leftovers eaten two days later, reheated food that has 'died' — and treat the pattern as a diagnostic of how much tamas you are inadvertently feeding. The point is not dietary purity as an end but as a condition for viveka (discriminative clarity); if your reasoning feels slow or heavy after habitual tamasic eating, that is the signal the shastra is pointing at.

Viśiṣṭādvaita

Before eating, consider whether the food could, in principle, be offered to Bhagavan — not as a ritual formality but as a genuine criterion: would you place this day-old, odorous, leftover food before the Lord? The Ramanuja counsel ('those who wish the jiva's good cultivate sattvika ahara') is practical: choose fresh, wholesome food as an act of sattva-cultivation that makes bhakti-yoga more available, not as self-discipline for its own sake.

show all 6

Dvaita

The jiva's dependence on Hari is total; even the body through which one attempts bhagavad-bhakti must be maintained in a mode conducive to that worship. Eating tamasic food is a form of practical denial of paratantratva (dependence) — it treats the body as if its quality does not matter to the Lord. A Madhva practitioner should understand that choosing wholesome, sattvika food is itself an act of deference to Hari's design for the jiva-sharira.

Śuddhādvaita

In the Pushti household, food is received as prasada — the grace-overflow of Krsna's own abundance. Stale, odorous, leftover food that was never offered cannot carry that grace; eating it is not a neutral act but an absence of the divine rasa that Krsna alone bestows. The practical implication: cook fresh, offer before eating, and understand that maha-prasada (Krsna's own ucchishta) is not the same category as the ucchishta condemned here — one is rasa received, the other is rasa abandoned.

Bhakti

Sridhara's precise, philological naming — cold cooked rice past a prahara, pressed-out ingredients, yesterday's cooking, forbidden-category foods like kalanja — gives practitioners a concrete checklist rather than a vague principle. Apply it: when planning meals, ask whether the food was cooked freshly, whether its natural essence is still present, and whether it belongs to a category your tradition marks as amedhya. The bhakti application is not asceticism but attentiveness: fresh food prepared with care is itself a form of reverence.

Advaita-Bhakti

Madhusudan's insight that the tamasic food group carries both seen (drshta) harm — physical illness, heaviness, mental dullness — and unseen (adrshta) harm — obstruction of the subtle channels through which jnana and bhakti flow — means the stakes are higher than mere health. His inclusion of vaidyaka-shastra (medical science) via api-ca suggests that modern nutritional awareness and the Gita's classification are not competitors but parallel witnesses to the same reality. Eat as if both your physician and your acharya are watching: freshness, purity, and the absence of intoxicants are the common ground.

Adhiṣṭhāna · substrate signature

substratev2.6-frozen

parserByT5-Sanskrit-multitask (Nehrdich/Hellwig/Keutzer EMNLP 2024)

mūlaBelvalkar critical edition (BORI 1947), via Ambuda multi-witness

show all metadata

weightsa=1 · b=0.01 · e_v=0.005 · z=0.2 · h=0 · th=0.01

anchorfit on Ramsukhdas's Sādhak Sañjīvanī (1980), frozen across the eight-commentator panel; cross-validated R@4 = 71.6% on Śaṅkara

extracted2026-04-21

methodPaper 1, Section II.B

↓ view raw per-verse object (JSON)↗ per-verse-object schema ↗ substrate code (MIT) + data (CC-BY 4.0)

The schema generalizes to any bounded-polysemy corpus with discrete primary text units, attested witness traditions, identifiable schools, and formal substrate. Port the per-verse object; refit weights on a domain-appropriate Layer-3 anchor; ship.

Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 17, Verse 10: Krishna to Arjuna — Śraddhātraya-Vibhāga-Yoga