Cocoa and chocolate are not to be taken as they are intoxicants. - Letter to Surasrestha, Los Angeles, June 14 1972
(b) Is it considered bonafide to offer preparations made with chocolate to the dieties? If it is not intox—can be offered. - Letter to Paramahamsa, Amsterdam, May 27 1975
If chocolate is not an intoxicant, it can be offered to the Deities. - Letter to Malati, Honolulu, June 8, 1975
Aside from Vedic standards, even by the standard of Swamiji's New York disciples the devotees in San Francisco were not very strict. Some continued going to the doughnut shop, eating food without offering it to Krsna, and eating forbidden things like chocolate and commercial ice cream. Some even indulged in after-kirtana cigarette breaks right outside the temple door. Some got initiated without knowing precisely what they had agreed to practice. - SP Lilamrta 3.22
Nothing to be confused about. Prabhupada instructs us that if something is not an intoxicant then it is ok to offer. If chocolate was not an intoxicant then it would be ok to offer.
Prabhupada instructs us that if something is not an intoxicant then it is ok to offer. If chocolate was not an intoxicant then it would be ok to offer. Chocolate is an intoxicant so it is not ok to offer.
Sorry, still confused. In the above quotes Prabhupada didn't say "If chocolate was not an intoxicant then it would be ok to offer". He said "If chocolate is not an intoxicant, it can be offered to the Deities." Also, in the second one "Is it considered bonafide to offer preparations made with chocolate to the dieties? If it is not intox—can be offered." In this letter he didn't just answer "no, it is an intoxicant", but rather that if the preparation (or chocolate) is not intoxicating,then it can be offered. The meaning that I naturally derive from these two quotes is that some of the chocolate can be intoxicating, and some not. Totally confusing.
I think if it would be an intoxicant, in this case chocolate, it can't be offered to the deities. But if it wouldn't be then you could. But it is so you can't offer it. Is this it?
saryu & shina matajis, here are two posts from sita-pati's blog on chocolate. i find them helpful in considering the question if chocolate really is an intoxicant or not:
the question if it can be offered to your deities doesn't really arise unless you made the chocolate yourself: you can't offer things prepared by non-devotees. and if you go through the whole trouble of making chocolate, why not use carob instead, as shina suggested?
to me it seems as if you're a little fixated on this chocolate issue; if that's true, perhaps that should be reason enough to stay away from it?
that saryu has a doubt on a confusing quote about something, doesn't mean that a fixation exists. Be it chocolate or anything for that matter. I also find it somehow dual. Being a letter, "If it is not intox—can be offered." can certainly give ground to doubts. And no, I do not eat chocolate. hehe
not necessarily, i was only asking it that's possible.
thing is i don't find the quotes mentioned here confusing. some say "if intox., then no," and others say that it's intox. so the result is 'no.' and there's also scientific evidence that says cocoa contains intoxicating chemicals. where's the doubt?
>that saryu has a doubt on a confusing quote about something, doesn't mean that a fixation exists. Be it chocolate or anything for that matter. I also find it somehow dual. Being a letter, "If it is not intox—can be offered." can certainly give ground to doubts. And no, I do not eat chocolate. hehe>
Thank you, couldn't say it better myself. I don't eat chocolate either, and no one does in my family. My personal opinion gathered from experience is that it is very addictive and is a mild intoxicant. However I know many devotees who think otherwise, and I know at least one temple where chocolate is served to devotees as prasad (not in pure form, but as part of cakes, ice-cream etc). I was wonering whether devotees find justification to do so in one of the above-mentioned quotes. And I would really like to know what Srila Prabhupada meant when he was writing that chocolate was an intoxicant in one letter, and writing that it might or might not be in another.
sorry for suggesting you might be glued to chocolate while you don't even eat it; will try to be more careful in the future.
> I would really like to know what Srila Prabhupada meant when he was writing that chocolate was an intoxicant in one letter, and writing that it might or might not be in another.
isn't that rather obvious? he didn't know. he was not omniscient in the same way visnu is: he didn't know all technical and chemical details of the universe. he was trained and working as a pharmacist, but the exact ingredients of cocoa and their effect on the body chemistry have not been analyzed until fairly recently. his pharmacological training didn't include these.
i don't think there is any doubt that cocoa contains intoxicating chemicals; milder than coffee in it's stimulating effect, but having other effects as well. and together with SP's letters, saying "if ... then no," that shouldn't leave any room for doubt if we're supposed to eat it or not: we're not.
another thought on chocolate: offering cocoa-preparations made by devotees to the deities might actually be ok. in many indian temples betelnut is offered, but not taken by devotees; they give it to outsiders instead.
offering betelnut is actually one of the 64 items offered in elaborate deity worship, described in haribhakti vilas. chocolate is not, but if it's done in the spirit of offering something very nice to your deities, they might enjoy it. you could distribute it to friends who don't follow the 4 reg's afterwards.
Is it considered bonafide to offer preparations made with chocolate to the dieties? If it is not intox—can be offered. - Letter to Paramahamsa, Amsterdam, May 27 1975
If chocolate is not an intoxicant, it can be offered to the Deities. - Letter to Malati, Honolulu, June 8, 1975
seeing the whole letters these quotes come from i could possibly try to argue that "offering to the deities" refers to "offering and then distributing to the devotees," but it's not worth my effort or your time. there's no real need for chocolate-preparations to be offered.
I heard that Prabhupada said that when you have doubts, better don't offer... so...
and what about white chocolate? is it intoxicant or not? because I never liked chocolate very much but I liked white chocolate and maybe I can eat... oops... offer it and I'm not offering it :P
re. intoxicating: look what it contains. cocoa is intoxicating, some other possible things my even be non-veg. (sometimes tricky, if they show mysterious codes; to be sure you'll have to look those up via google.)
re. offering: depends on your standard of deity worship. if you generally offer things prepared by outsiders, it may be ok; but that's not a very high standard ...
And while we're at it, can I ask for some guidance please? Being loyal to Srila Prabhupada, ISKCON and ISKCON gurus as I am, I am not sure how to react to the rumours that some of the ISKCON sannyasis do eat chocolate. I kind of believe it, because I heard it from different unrelated sources. If it is true, how the common folk can be blamed for eating and offering it? "Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues" (BG 3.21). I was told by my Guru Maharaja that eating chocolate is low standard, but how I can look up to someone and trust in their competent leadership if they follow low standards? After all this being said, I also realize that the devotees I know who eat chocolate actually are more advanced than I am, so I kind of learned to accept the fact that whether one eats or doesn't eat chocolate doesn't say anything about the person's spiritual advancement.
"sitapati Comments: If you follow His Holiness Sivarama Swami, chocolate is no longer banned in ISKCON, according to his podcast from mid-last year. "
I find this disturbing. Srila Prabhupada says no to intoxicants which chocolate is one. I feel deeply that Srila Prabhupada's instructions over rule such changes.
One thing scarcely mentioned in these chocolate discussions is that there is no guarrantee that chocolate (or any factory-processed food for that matter, but sweets are obviously much more 'vulnerable') is vegetarian. The last article in this newsletter (in Czech language) is about disinfestation (anti-insect and anti-rodent warfare) in food factories: http://www.agroporadenstvi.cz/poradenstvi/Ecasopisy/PZ8-2004.pdf
Then I specifically asked about this at main Czech agro server's help desk and they admitted there is no way to eliminate such pollution but it's a thing they really don't like to divulge...
I heard that the cocoa coming from third world is infested with rodents, "raches", etc. What a nice way to start disliking chocolate. No philosophy, no quotes needed :)
I'm sorry for bringing up such an old topic, but since there are still some places that still offer chocolate to the deities (like Dallas), I'd like to point out that Ayurveda places chocolate on the same level as garlic and onions.
Chocolate - VPK +; rajasic and tamasic Good for depression, hypotension, and or a warm/hot drink
Most of the foods we eat are sattvic, with a little bit of rajasic foods like chillies, which should be taken in winter times.
Source: Ayurveda Encyclopedia by Swami Sada Shiva Tirtha
I don't have the quote but somewhere I read that Prabhupada states that if there is intoxicant then we can not offer or ingest. Chocolate has caffeine in it.
I've heard that it is not the caffeine that is so much the intoxicant in the choc - rather theobromine which is the aphrodesiac, depression lifting, feel good substance heavy choc eaters get hooked on. Apparently it stimulates neurotransmitters in the brain that make ya feel good.
8.5 General Guidelines 8.5.1 Prohibition of Chocolate As it contains various stimulants like caffeine (contained in coffee), theine (contained in black tea) and theobromine (contained in cocoa), chocolate should not be eaten by ISKCON devotees.(93)
(it is actually from 1993 - no.31)
However there is a 'Chocolate proposal' for some years now - it have never gained a majority (give it a few years of recession:)
So a couple of years ago there was a discussion in Mayapura. Some GBC members wanted to rescind that law, because it turns out that chocolate doesn't have caffeine in it.
Afterwards HH Sivarama Swami announced on his podcast that chocolate was no longer banned in ISKCON. However, there was no official pronouncement from the GBC and other GBC members disputed it when questioned.
Interesting factoid: Some medical research indicates that two pieces of dark chocolate (70+% cocoa) per day reduces your chances of heart disease.
It is a GBC resolution. If the a number of GBCs do not follow it themselves and contradict the resolution that is based on Prabhupada's instruction, how can we take them seriously or should they expect it anyway? In a way I have not problem with them being relaxed about it, it will not make me eat it, but how can someone summon respect if he does not follow his own authority? Besides the above any other GBCs eat choc? (BTW choc does contain caffeine, just a little bit). I guess they were not there yet when the resolution was taken... but the point remains, if they choose and pick if they can eat chocolate or not, what about regular members?
