Holy Water

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Friends,

I have a question in my mind but before asking that, i would like to give a little background of the subject to comprehend the issue.

Perhaps, many of board members here would be aware of the fact that dead bodies are supposes to be burnt in Hinduism, instead of being buried like Abrahamic religions.

So, a dead body used to be put on lot of woods and burnt. But, after one or two days, when the fire subsides and ashes become cool, the members of the family, especially heir, have to go there again and sort out the remaining half burnt bones from the ashes. They are washed in the water and milk and preserved carefully in a small red cotton bag.

Now, the heir of the dead have to go the city of Haridwar (door to divine), which is located at the banks of the holy river Ganges. There is a particular spot of around 200 meters long at the bank of Ganges at Haridwar, where the last ritual is done. After the ritual, those half burnt bones are thrown in the river, somewhere in that spread of 200 meters.

After that, everyone is supposed to carry some litres of water from that very spot and take home. That water is considered sacred and kept in almost all Hindu families. It is called Ganga-Jal ( Jal= water). We can kept it for many years, even up to 10-15 or even more.

The question i want to ask that, inspite of taken from that very spot, where millions of half burnt bones are been thrown
since thousands of years, why that water does not rot or demomopse for so many years?

It is not a myth but a fact. Even my family has 15 year old Ganga jal. The even more surprising fact is that if you take water from anywhere else from the same bank, except that 200 meters where bones are thrown, it would demompose within 2-3 years, but GangaJal would not.

This question troubles me. Perhaps, those half burnt bones may cause any chemical reaction in that particular area, which enhances the shell life of the water!

I do not know. Any gusses?

with love,
sanjay

2

telegraphindia.com/1090928/j … 545375.jsp

The bones could be making the water more alkaline, which might inhibit bacteria.

3

After overcoming my initial fears of illness and disease lurking around every corner in India. I ended up bathing daily for two weeks in the sacred mother Ganga.
I even took to cleansing the airways in yoga Neti system. Which is to pour water into one nostril and let it run out the other or out of the mouth. After overcoming the unpleasant first feelings this is quite invigorating. I even went as far as to drink the sacred water. I did me no harm. I was very far north, though, not far from the source and the river was relatively (?) clean.

4

Drinking the water is NOT recommended. :-&

5

I thought about that too and perhaps that may be the reason. But, it is still an assumption and i want to be sure of that.

with love,
sanjay

6

The parts of the body that create rot would have been turned to ash. Also the river is moving, taking the organic materials down river. But right off the bat those things that rot are already taken care of.

Water does not rot, either, or decompose.

7

Moreno,

I know that water itself does not rot. But, the fact remains that there is a huge difference between the shell life of the water taken from that particular area and anywhere else from the same river, same city and same bank.

If the flow of the warter takes the organic waste downwards, then those water samples should not display different characterstics. But, that still happens. Why? That is my question.

One more interesting thing i want to tell you. I very recently visited there, merely three days back, when i carried the ashes of my aunt. And, Forget about drinking, the water in that particular area looks so dirty to the naked eyes that one cannot even think of taking bath in that if he is not religiously biased.

with love,
sanjay

8

You were in Haridwar, Sanjay?
The Ganges at Haridwar has come down from the source in the Himalaya only 250(?)kms so before it gets to the city it is quite clean.
I was in the area near Gangotri, where the river starts and is very clear, clean and cold!
I bathed many times at Lakhsman Jhula and Rishikesh too.
Yes I have seen the water there is very dirty in some places, and near the ghats it looks not so good. There is a lot of city waste from Haridwar and the area that goes directly into the river. Its also very agricultural area so there’s that pollution aswell.
In the rains season lots of silty water fills up the Ganga but that usually has a good cleaning effect.

9

with love,
sanjay

10

Here’s some research already done…

hitxp.com/articles/science-t … ga-ganges/

This points out that there is a bacteriophage - an organism that kills bacteria - in the river and this would directly answer your question.

The Ganges has high levels of oxygen, which also keeps water fresh, and they do not, however, know the reason for this.

However, note: these characteristics are found all through the river, not just at that point.

If it is really the case that above and below that point on the river the shelf life is different, this can be easily tested and confirmed and the water samples compared chemically.

11

Moreno,

Thanks for that article. That throws some light on the issue.

That is true. It is a fact that the water taken anywhere from the Ganges remain fresh far longer than any other water.

Moreno, it is also a fact that the shell life of the water from that particular point is even more compared anywhere from the Ganges. It is not a myth but a proven fact. As a said in my first post, even my family has 15 year old Ganga-jal, and it is still alright. And, it is not an exceptional case.

In old times, when travelling was difficult, people from the southern part of the India, used to store Ganga-Jal for decades because it was considered piased and also, it is supposed to be good to put its few drops in the mouth of a dying person.

If they were right about the purifing capacity of the Ganges water in general, they must had found something special about the water of that particulat point as well. Otherwise, why did they give so much importance to that dirty water after 300 kms down the hill, instead of from the very source of the Ganges, where it is asolutely pure?

I do not think that they were so stupid. They must had some valid resons for that.

It is sad that there are not much official studies done in his regard by the Indian Government. Who knows if they were able to find the exact sources and reasons for the antibiotic qualities of the Ganges, perhaps that would help those millions also, who do not live by the Ganges.

As it was said long ago so it must be superstitious and wrong.

with love,
sanjay