Ayurveda in Puranas

[Guest guest]

I am glad Shirish that we are finally on the right track with Skin

disease and its treatment, etc as per Garud Purana.

 

Whether we follow Samhitas or not, this indeed is the real source of

Ayurveda.

We cannot say that we would like authenticity in Ayurveda and give it

our own bent of mind.

Individuality of the Vaidya's thinking will still be present in

diagnosing a disease entity where tridoshas are present. Still, nothing like

examination of the patient, actual intrroagation and then prescription.

 

Your current post has broad outline, which is the most appropriate way

of handling this mass e-mail. Regardless of any "legal opinion", etc,

this e-mail is not restricted only to Indian population, since it is on

the net.

And all "world wide patients" do not understand all the implications of

our herbal medications or other treatment. And your current approach is

the best solution.

Keep it up.

 

Durgesh Mankikar, MD

[Guest guest]

Dear Durgesh,

 

Ayurveda is more of a philosophy. What you have been repeatedly

stressing is to restrict ourselves to diseases, treatments and try to

systematise everything so that a reader gets trained, albeit slowly,

in practicing ayurveda (like modern medicine), at least for

himself/herself. In other words, restrict to what is covered in

Samhitas, other texts etc. That will make this forum an ayurvedic

chat-room college, with no powers to award degrees. And such

knowledge can generate persons who may be able to hand out

prescriptions, but not health. Health, if thought as "absense of dis-

ease" then yes.

 

This amounts to restricting ayurveda only to physical body. Instead

of saying something in a number of lines, this author would request

you to check up the thoughts by another like minded Vaidya

 

<http://www.ayurvedahc.com/articlelive/articles/112/1/The-Holistic-

nature-of-Ayurveda-or-Holistic-Ayurveda>

 

We are heavily influenced by our environment. Hence we should not

take a narrow view of just patient, physical examination, clinical

practice and herbs. Like in modern science, in ayurveda too, deep

considerations are necessary to preserve public health. The field of

Vaidyas is most diverse, since there are no specializations like in

moderns science. Vaidya should know gyn diseases as well as

psychological ones. Whole body is one, rather divided in three

bodies, and in equilibrium with environment. When Vaidya is faced

with patients suffering from factors not inside their bodies/minds,

but by environmental poisons, Vaidya is concerned. He has to

investigate and advise his patients accordingly. Unfortunately,

mostly these envirnomental poisons are in the garb of pharma drugs,

and then benificiaries of this scheme feel sad that ayurvedists are

stepping out of legal sphere. True Ayurvedist is never jealous or

critic of anyone trying to improve the "wellness" of society, be it

through avoiding poisons, or increasing fertility of soil.

 

On this public health theme, some thoughts are expressed at:

 

<http://www.ayurvedahc.com/articlelive/articles/130/1/Samajika-

Ayurveda-%26-Vedic-Model-of-Society-%28part-1%29>

 

One more thing is, if a patient with skin disease keeps consuming

poisons through food, or suppressive drugs of modern science, even

Garud Purana cant help him. Even before using Garud Purana, he

requires cleansing of body and mind toxins. Often, patients feel that

if he takes two medicines instead of one, the cure should multiply.

While it is true in ayurveda if a combination is properly chosen, the

incompatibility of medicines amongst each other is also a fact,

though not mentioned in ayurveda extensively, but accumulated by

experience by Vaidyas. And in modern medicine this is well

documented. In similarity with modern medicine, in ayurveda too, the

experience with patients overrides many a time the dictums of ancient

texts. While one ayurvedic ancient text recommends telling the

patient that his disease as per ancient text is "asadhya" and leave

him to his fate, rather than handing out prescription. This technique

is also followed by modern medicine in case of cancers of advanced

stages. And same patient become "cured" later using ayurveda (Panch

Gavya medicines in case of cancer). Should we follow samhitas or

Experience? Being philosophy and collection of experience, ayurveda

is subject to change. Change will be brought in by spiritual leaders

and "healers guided by humanitarian principles", not those who want

to see ayurveda like ISO standards, construction and practice codes

compiled by several American Institutes and Societies dealing with

science and engineering. Codes are made to protect customers when

things are sold on industrial scale. Do we want to commercialise

ayurveda to make it a industry like modern medicine and pharma?

 

The approach of restricting our discussions to what may be covered in

Ayurvedic colleges will leave out this kind of experience knowledge

on this forum.

 

Since ayurvedic philosophy is broad, this author, with very sensitive

antennae to sense the society trends, feels that ayurveda documented

in ancient texts requires broadening of understanding to

tackle "chemical sea" issue. The inclusion of "breathing techniques"

by yogis in their approach, is very much valid under integration of

yoga and ayurveda as documented in samhitas. And with the success

obtained, there is a clear case for coining the term "spiritual"

ayurveda, which includes mainly yoga, meditation, pranayama, other

breathing and detox techniques, and last resort is to herbs and

pharma medicines. Moment such a broad definition is adopted, all

alternative techniques unite to a single goal: Peace. None of us will

be able to prevent this progress. In one interview Ramdev Maharaj was

asked, "You have received threats from MNCs, are you not afraid that

you work will remain incomplete?" He answered:"Ten Ramdevs will be

born for every one Ramdev eliminated". This has indeed come true. The

promoter swamy of "Art of Living" yoga, Sri Ravi Shankar is also now

teaching Sudarshan Kriya, strengthening the movement initiated by

Ramdev Maharaj. "No medicine" approach is gaining popularity in

India. And looking at foreigners visiting, the movement is likely to

spread like revolution in next ten years. If that happens, we can as

well forget herbs and diseases.

 

As pointed from time to time, the thoughts presented in this forum by

this author were born in the "pain" he suffered seeing people suffer

due to lack of proper identification of "healers" or "healing

factors".

 

 

Regards

Dr Bhate

 

ayurveda, durgesh mankikar

<d_mankikar> wrote:

> I am glad Shirish that we are finally on the right track with Skin

> disease and its treatment, etc as per Garud Purana.

>

> Whether we follow Samhitas or not, this indeed is the real source

of

> Ayurveda.

> We cannot say that we would like authenticity in Ayurveda and give

it

> our own bent of mind.

> Individuality of the Vaidya's thinking will still be present in

> diagnosing a disease entity where tridoshas are present. Still,

nothing like

> examination of the patient, actual intrroagation and then

prescription.

>

> Your current post has broad outline, which is the most appropriate

way

> of handling this mass e-mail. Regardless of any "legal opinion",

etc,

> this e-mail is not restricted only to Indian population, since it

is on

> the net.

> And all "world wide patients" do not understand all the

implications of

> our herbal medications or other treatment. And your current

approach is

> the best solution.

> Keep it up.

>

> Durgesh Mankikar, MD