I would like to see some thoughtful discussion of the increasing appearance of ocimum sanctum (Tulasi) in different forms in herbal compounds. The thought has always made me uncomfortable, I guess because my connection with Tulasi goes back as far as it's possible in ISKCON. And I remember hearing that Srila Prabhupada stopped devotees in Hawaii from using Tulasi medicinally (although I think that may have been because she was steeped for tea, or maybe even smoked). An old acquaintance of mine has for many years been selling ayurvedic compounds, many of which include Tulasi. When I asked him about it, he just shrugged. Now I see dried Tulasi sold in the bulk herbs section of health-food stores, and Tulasi or Tulasi extracts show up in new herbal medicines all the time.
What understanding or realization do other Tattva-viveka members have?
This makes me uncomfortable as well. My Dad has a friend that he did drug research with thirty years ago, who made the unexpected turn into researching herbal products after marrying a woman who is connected with some spiritual group in India. My Dad contacted him and, lo and behold, he was in India researching the medicinal effects of Tulasi. By this point my Dad had already been to Vrindavana a couple of times to see me, so he went to see his old friend and got interested in Tulasi. He is now using it for everything, from tea to pizza toppings (vegetarian, at least).
I tried to dissuade him, but he pointed out that several people offered him Tulasi tea in Vrindavana, including Ksirodaksasayi Visnu Maharaja (a disciple of Srila Prabhupada and sannyasa disciple of Paramadwaiti Maharaja), and I didn't really know how to reply to that.
Many times in Indian supermarkets I saw Tulasi sold for cooking is drastically different then one we use for worship. I'm not talking Ram or Krsna, they are not same species at all. Leaves are about 4 inches long, etc.
My Tulasis sometimes have pretty large leaves, but not that long. My concern is that these supplements are labeled as containing ocimum santum, which is Tulasi, not ocimum gratissimum, which is basil.
When my next-door neighbor, who is from the Philippines, saw me collecting Tulasi one morning, she commented that Filipinos use that plant in their cooking. My wife commented half-jokingly that we need to keep a close eye on Jean.
In thinking about the “profane uses” to which non-devotees put Tulasi Devi, I’m reminded of the story in Chaitanya Charitamrita about the Rama bhakta who felt such pain when thinking that Ravana had kidnapped Sita Devi. Mahaprabhu relieved the bhakta’s mind by revealing that Ravana obtained only a replica of Sita Devi fashioned by Maya for his bewilderment. I suggest that this is an appropriate way to view the present case also. Tulasi Devi is the internal energy of the Lord, just as Sita Devi is. A non-devotee with motives of exploitation can have no access to Tulasi Devi. Just a mayic replica in the form of Ocimum Sanctum.
Maybe, but somehow that doesn't satisfy. When devotees used Tulasi as medicine, Srila Prabhupada stopped it. When we gave some Tulasi plants to the Foster Botanical Garden in Honolulu in 1971, he made us go get them back. (And boy, was that awkward!) His instruction was clearly that Tulasi was meant for worshiping Vishnu and nothing else. Maybe I'm sentimental because of my own background. I do remember that at one point Goursundar wanted to send Turiya das and me to the New Hebrides (now Vanuatu) to preach and plant Tulasi everywhere. Maybe we had some innocent faith that if Tulasi were growing everywhere, it would naturally make the people there Krishna conscious. (Oh, man--was that a long time ago! Was I ever really that young?)
And speaking of maya Tulasi, I checked out the bulk Tulasi tea at the health-food store the other day. It smelled like weak basil. I haven't ever dried Tulasi (although I may do so now to send to my daughter in Montana for her worship), but this didn't have that clove-and-camphory fragrance.
If Tulasi as a herbal remedy can cure people, and these qualities are thus praised by healers and patients, isn't that wonderful?
If Tulasi as a herbal remedy can cure people, and these qualities are thus praised by healers and patients, isn't that wonderful?
That's a generous perspective. My immediate reaction, though, is that such praise would be like folks saying Srila Prabhupada was a kindly old man with a big smile. More to my point, though, is that these folks are exploiting Tulasi, who I have been trained to see as meant exclusively for pleasing Krishna (Vishnu, at least), for personal profit. My experience with Srila Prabhupada is that we should train others to serve--even worship--Tulasi, not exploit her.
It's said in Visnu-Smrti that when one breaks the branch of tulasi Visnu feels pain in his heart. We don't want to cause any pain to bhagavan svayam, do we? Anyway, I agree with Babhru das, tulasi plant is a manifestation of the greatest devotee of Krsna and not a homeopathic remedy for a common cold, so She should be treated as such.
I tend to agree with Babru. I have a non-devotee friend who grew Tulasi a few years ago for "medicinal purposes," making teas and other stuff out of her. When she passed away (winters are difficult for Tulasidevi here in Finland) he was very cavalier about it, just as when any other plant has died. I felt terrible about it. Yes, growing Tulasi is conducive for bhakti and should be taken up by everyone, but one should have at least some understanding of her position before doing so.
Your servant,
Bhrgu
I like Nanda-tanuja's use of "She" with a capital S.