Gestational diabetes: please suggest any remedy

September 13, 2007

On 13-Sep-07, at 2:24 AM, ayurveda wrote:

> Re: Gestational diabetes : pleasesuggestanyremedy

>

> Posted by: " muzumdar " dahpc dbm2110

>

> Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:16 am (PST)

>

> Dear

> I am glad that we are going into the depths of Ayurvedic approach.

dear dr. muzumdar

who am i be to argue with Charaka (!), but hopefully you might

consider the issue of emphasis and interpretation, with regard to

applying the principles and practices described by him in a modern,

non-Indian context

yes, i believe that the principles of ayurveda are timeless, and that

the basic attributes of the doshas, dravyguna etc does not change -

however, i am not convinced that the delineation of specific disease

states (prameha etc), their causes, attributes and progression can

have the same level of confidence

it is clear that the enumerated disease states in ayurveda, which

increased in number as time progressed but were more or less

finalized in the Madhava nidanam, are based on patterns that

clinicians observed several thousand years ago in an Indian

population eating a particular diet - but do these factors translate

across the board to all peoples?

as a medical practitioner, you might admit that there are holes in

the nidana of disease states described, or causative factors that are either

irrelevant or obscure - thus the advice of Vagbhata seems

vitally relevant (AH, SS, 12:64), esp. when we consider disease

states such as autoimmunity that are reaching epidemic proportions

and yet have no specific disease category in ayurveda

while key concepts like tridosha etc remain unchanging it is clear

that diseases and their associated factors do change, and as such,

sometimes the old formulas don't work the way they should

perhaps this explains that why in the several millennia that ayurveda

has been practiced there are so many different formulas for each type

of disease - why else would it be necessary to have so many

treatments? i spent several days with a Kerala vaidya going through

Sharangadhara, with him indicating the formulas that he felt were

clinically effective and those that were not - why do you think

this? his opinion was that the old formulas weren't wrong per se,

but that they no longer worked as well as perhaps they once did

> And if you are saying of Ayurvedic doctors having truncal obesity,

> each one is entitled to one's own health. It would be like saying

> that eye specialists should never need spects or all cardiologists

> should have a very strong and healthy heart. Are we morally

> authorised to comment on this?

it is simply an observation - would you have much confidence in a

doctor telling you to quit smoking while he was puffing away?

i am not trying to be mean, but it is a point worthy of concern and

further exploration

admittedly, one can be a good clinician and be unhealthy - however,

if a particular condition appears to be endemic among clinicians,

then what does this say about the state of practice?

>

> Re : Global aspects of Ayurveda, food, medicinal herbs and rutucharya.

> Ayurveda has covered areas from Egypt, Africa in west to China and

> far east according to references available in texts.

i would be interested to see these references - i have never come

across any _substantial_ ayurvedic analysis of other peoples and

climes outside the subcontinent in the ayurvedic corpus

if this does exist, it could be very helpful in understanding the

application of ayurveda outside of india

>

> Re : Vegeterianism and Non-vegeterianism

> That must be your personal experience. The view is basically

> Brahmanical and not Indian to be frank. And Ayurveda has no

> prejudice over meat eating. Not only in health, but Ayurveda has

> also advocated meats in certain diseases, Prameha being one of

> those described above.

agreed! - perhaps you too would find it curious why every single

book on ayurveda in the west recommends vegetarianism, or why the

vaidyas here tell their western patients to adopt an indian " sattvic "

diet, of legumes, grains and milk?

>

> I may have left out some points inadvertantly, we can discuss them

> one by one thread-bare. I would definitely like to take a walk in

> the forests of Canada along with you.

the offer is open indefinitely

> In the same breath, I would invite you to India to spend some days

> with me to grasp the total grandeur and splendour of Ayurveda along

> with all its nuances and details.

i would enjoy this as well - i have a trip tentatively planned for

next year

i will provide more details when the time comes - perhaps you could

forward me your contact details

dr. bhate also promised me a cow next time i come, but i may have

trouble checking this item in, especially if she hasn't been milked,

because of course, liquids over 3 oz might contains explosives

best... todd caldecott

Caldecott, Dip. Cl.H, RH(AHG)

Ayurvedic practitioner, Medical Herbalist

203 - 1750 East 10th Ave

Vancouver, BC V5N 5K4 CANADA

web: http//:www.toddcaldecott.com

email: todd

tel: 778.896.8894

fax: 415.376.6736

September 14, 2007

Dear

This fundamental query has arisen as you have not gone thro' the history of

Ayurveda, a seperate subject taught in Ayurvedic acedemies in India.

Re ; Modern diseases in Ayurvedic contexts

If you go thro' the whole Sanskrit versions of basic Ayurvedic Samhitas, you

will have very little to doubt at all.

Re : Madhav Nidan and diet-based classification.

This again is a wrong understanding. Madhava high-lighted some set of symptoms

more pravelant and named them seperately. For example, Pravaahika is a part of

symptom exhibit of Kaphaja Atisaar, if you check Charaka Samhita properly. The

same is true of Amlapitta. Firanga is the only disease considered to be brought

in Indian continent by Europeans.

There are very few references towards Indian diet as such. All the causative

factors which are food-related are mentioned by their Gunas (attributes /

properties) and / or Rasas (tastes). These are to be co-related with the list of

food-items mentioned in seperate chapter like chapter 27 of Sutra-Sthana in

Charak Samhita. Similar chapters are available in Sushrut Samhita, Ashtang

Hrudaya / Sangraha of Vagbhata.The list is really exhaustive even by Indian

standards.

Re : Different formulations for same diseases

You will agree that communication was not wide spread before the age of

printing. Even the element of secrecy and shrouding one's knowledge was a

considered norm. So, different Vaidyas practicing in diverse and far-off areas

covering all over India had their own formulas derived from the herbs available

in their locality. Even the basic Samhitas like Charak and Sushrut have given

the liberty for change in formulations as they knew the limitations of local

herb availability. When printing was made easy and communication and travel was

more convenient, then the different variables came into limelight and were

compiled together leading to multiple choices and ensuing confusion.We do study

them during our research assignments for academic interest. Even as on today;

Konkan, Pune, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh and Kerala have their own

school of thoughts and heritage and you will still find variations in the

approaches of these schools. Kerala is the most hyped and high-lighted school,

as it is sponsered by State Government of Kerala as a supplement of tourism

taking advantage of medical tourism. Other schools are also equally competant,

but they do not get the advantage of being advertised abroad as Kerala.

The observation of the Kerala Vaidya should be considered as his personal

opinion. The buck of Ayurveda definitely does not stop in Kerala nor Kerala is

the last word in Ayurveda. But each vaidya is entitled to have his own opinion

based on his practice, but that cannot be considered as the general opinion of

Ayurveda.

Re : Specific disease category

In the concluding part of Chikitsa Sthana of Charaka Samhita, there is a

reference which clarifies that all those diseases that are not mentioned here

because of multitude of names and symptom-exhibits, they should be treated

according to their presenting dosha-exhibit. Medicines acting to counter causes,

doshas and dushyas is the rule to be followed in all diseases, whether mentioned

here or not (Sh.291,292)

The main dicussions are available in Viman Sthana of Charak Samhita.

About immunity, the theory of Oja is considered to be significant. The three

types of Oja patology - Oja Kshaya, Oja Visrans and Oja Vyapat aptly describe

the different shades of immunological damage.

The basis for Disease classification will always be a changing issue as the

understanding of pathogenesis shifts. Earlier it was the doshas. Now they are

pathogens and active bio-chemicals. The future may work at molecular level or

DNA level and a newer classification may come in existence. Ayurvedic outlook

will stay valid because it considers the body language interpreted in the

category of doshic manifestation.

Re ; Global aspects of Ayurveda

You will really need to take a hard look at the original Sanskrit texts to

understand this axis. Chinak is the word used for silk which came from China,

The food list includes reptiles which are still a part of Chinese and far-east

cuisine. Yavan is the word used for Greek and Egypt region as that area was

known as Yunan in the olden times. Kankayan - a rishi who participated in

first ever international conference mentioned in the opening chapter of Charak

Samhita, hailed from Afghanisthan.The meats of monkey and earthworm mentioned in

food-list must be indicative of African preferences, as Indian tribes are not

known much to have liking for such foods.We can find many more such references,

but for us Ayurvedic clinicians it only stays as a matter of acedemic reference,

as these things have no practical use in day-to-day clinics.

To know real Ayurveda, you will have to come to India. Nowhere can you learn

Ayurveda in its total perspective as it is in India.

Dr.D.B.Muzumdar

M.D.Ayurvedic-Medicine (INDIA)

< dahpc >

September 17, 2007

> Dear

> This fundamental query has arisen as you have not gone thro' the

> history of

> Ayurveda, a seperate subject taught in Ayurvedic acedemies in India.

dear dr. muzumdar

indian history is an interest of mine but i am by no means an expert

in this field

i agree i think its very difficult to understand ayurveda without

looking at history, but we must also admit that history is not an

objective discipline that can settle all matters, esp. when history

becomes politicized or bent to serve a particular agenda

>

> Re ; Modern diseases in Ayurvedic contexts

> If you go thro' the whole Sanskrit versions of basic Ayurvedic

> Samhitas, you

> will have very little to doubt at all.

please see my other email on diabetes in first nations populations,

as a case in point

and so i remain with doubts that have not been addressed, not of

concepts like tridosha, but of how specific protocols are applied in

practical terms in a non-Indian context

>

> Re : Madhav Nidan and diet-based classification.

> This again is a wrong understanding.

sorry, what is a wrong understanding? that the madhava contains more

diseases than described in previous nighantus? or that the madhava

stands out as authoritative with regard to nidana, and therefore

formally established the organization of disease classification for

later practitioners? i never mentioned anything about diet with

regard to the Madhava nidana

> Madhava high-lighted some set of symptoms

> more pravelant and named them seperately. For example, Pravaahika

> is a part of

> symptom exhibit of Kaphaja Atisaar, if you check Charaka Samhita

> properly. The

> same is true of Amlapitta.

yes, reorganization is a common theme in the successive stream of

Ayurvedic literature - it was for this reason that Vagbhata wrote the

AH, to essentially reorganize the theory and practice of ayurveda to

make it easier to understand? but i am not sure of your point...

> Firanga is the only disease considered to be brought

> in Indian continent by Europeans.

yes, syphillis, or 'firanga - the " Portuguese " disease

my point was that history demonstrates that Ayurveda is adaptable to

understanding new diseases and new treatments, and as such, should be

adaptable to new people and places, but that the old paradigms may

not hold true, just like none of the old herbs and treatments worked

for firanga - thus vaidyas were forced to innovate

> There are very few references towards Indian diet as such.

this is because an Indian diet is taken for granted!

the authors and readership were Indian, so why make special reference

to an " Indian " diet?

>

> Re : Different formulations for same diseases

> You will agree that communication was not wide spread before the

> age of

> printing. Even the element of secrecy and shrouding one's knowledge

> was a

> considered norm. So, different Vaidyas practicing in diverse and

> far-off areas

> covering all over India had their own formulas derived from the

> herbs available

> in their locality.

agreed! which is exactly why i say that employing Ayurvedic

principles outside of India will cause the system itself to manifest

its own distinct flavor to an even greater degree, such that it might

seem unfamiliar

> The buck of Ayurveda definitely does not stop in Kerala nor Kerala is

> the last word in Ayurveda. But each vaidya is entitled to have his

> own opinion

> based on his practice, but that cannot be considered as the general

> opinion of

> Ayurveda.

so far i have presented the thoughts of two different vaidyas, one in

Nepal and the other in Kerala, who have both stated that sometimes

the classical formulas don't work the way the should, or are not

effective - two small opinions yes, but interestingly congruent and

corroborating some of the things i have seen in my own practice

but i wonder how this could be much of a surprise? haven't you ever

encountered patients for whom the indicated therapy didn't work as

suggested? isn't this WHY we have clinicians in the first place, to

develop and innovate?

if we look at the history of the plague and syphilis in Europe, it

was these two events more than any other that promoted the evolution

of modern medicine, simply because all the old herbal therapies

didn't work, just like the Indian herbs weren't so effective for firanga

of course, there is much to criticize about early medieval European

medicine, namely that it had stopped innovation and solely relied

upon the medical textbooks of Galen and others, but perhaps this is

what happens when any human endeavour becomes " classical " - it can

lose its relevance because by its very nature it does not adapt to

change

> The main dicussions are available in Viman Sthana of Charak Samhita.

> About immunity, the theory of Oja is considered to be significant.

> The three

> types of Oja patology - Oja Kshaya, Oja Visrans and Oja Vyapat

> aptly describe

> the different shades of immunological damage.

i agree that the theoretical basis of immune disorders is found in

Ayurveda - my point was that autoimmunity is a now a disease

deserving of its own category, but is absent as a specific disease in

classical Ayurveda

i don't see this as the fault of Ayurveda per se, but the changing

and evolving nature of disease in a population to which Ayurveda must

be prepared to adapt

> The basis for Disease classification will always be a changing

> issue as the

> understanding of pathogenesis shifts. Earlier it was the doshas.

> Now they are

> pathogens and active bio-chemicals. The future may work at

> molecular level or

> DNA level and a newer classification may come in existence.

> Ayurvedic outlook

> will stay valid because it considers the body language interpreted

> in the

> category of doshic manifestation.

i am not saying we should abandon the doshas! what i am saying is

our treatment of the doshas may need to encompass criteria not

previously considered in India, as Ayurveda expands globally

>

> Re ; Global aspects of Ayurveda

> You will really need to take a hard look at the original Sanskrit

> texts to

> understand this axis. Chinak is the word used for silk which came

> from China,

> The food list includes reptiles which are still a part of Chinese

> and far-east

> cuisine. Yavan is the word used for Greek and Egypt region as that

> area was

> known as Yunan in the olden times. Kankayan - a rishi who

> participated in

> first ever international conference mentioned in the opening

> chapter of Charak

> Samhita, hailed from Afghanisthan.The meats of monkey and earthworm

> mentioned in

> food-list must be indicative of African preferences, as Indian

> tribes are not

> known much to have liking for such foods.We can find many more such

> references,

> but for us Ayurvedic clinicians it only stays as a matter of

> acedemic reference,

> as these things have no practical use in day-to-day clinics.

ok, but adjectives such as 'cina' (e.g. in tamil names such as

cinaparram for Smilax sp) or 'unani' (which is arabic in origin, not

indian) are weak references that don't provide a practical insight

into an Ayurvedic understanding of other cultures and climes, so they

don't support your previous statement:

> Ayurveda has covered areas from Egypt, Africa in west to China and

> far east according to references available in texts.

i know this is academic for you, but for me living in temperate

Canada largely serving a non-Indian population, it is a matter of

vital concern, esp, when we are talking about effective treatment for

serious chronic diseases like diabetes

best

Caldecott, Dip. Cl.H, RH(AHG)

Ayurvedic practitioner, Medical Herbalist

203 - 1750 East 10th Ave

Vancouver, BC V5N 5K4 CANADA

web: http//:www.toddcaldecott.com

email: todd

tel: 778.896.8894

fax: 1-866-703-2792

September 17, 2007

Dear Dr.

I do agree with my colleague Dr.Muzumdar, I have seen many times, there is a

deviated interpretation of Ayurveda , may be due to ignorance ! Also without

studying Ayurveda with its original Sanskrit text with proper knowledge of

Sanskrit grammar & ability to co relate those verses correctly , one may come

out with better output !

What he says is also correct certain things in Ayurveda can be understood better

in India !! We must also keep in mind that Naturopathy although a good science ,

may not be equated with Ayurveda & principles of both should be understood

separately & need not be confused with those with Ayurveda !! Same is true for

Herbalism !!

Nice to read your communication & reply of Dr.Muzumdar on the same !

Wishing all the group members a very Happy Ganeshotsava ! May Lord Ganesh Bless

all !

With warm regards,

Dr.Aashish Phadke

M.D.(Ayurveda)(Mumbai),M.I.I.M.(Gold Medal)

Adv.Dip.in Yoga,Dip.in Yogic Edu.,Dip.in Sankrit

www.ayurvision.com

September 17, 2007

dear dr. muzumdar

many thanks for your comments - i appreciate your balanced perspective

question: would you say, as per Charaka, that we should be importing

and using Indian medicinal herbs and formulations in the West, or

using local plants and treatments?

Caldecott, Dip. Cl.H, RH(AHG)

Ayurvedic practitioner, Medical Herbalist

203 - 1750 East 10th Ave

Vancouver, BC V5N 5K4 CANADA

web: http//:www.toddcaldecott.com

email: todd

tel: 778.896.8894

fax: 1-866-703-2792

On 17-Sep-07, at 2:29 AM, ayurveda wrote:

> I know , it may be a tad tedious for you, as the Ayurveda you are

> exposed to is of a very limited version. Ayurveda expects this from

> Indians too. There is so much diversity of food from Kashmir in the

> north to Tamilnadu in the south and Bengal in the east to Gujarat

> and Maharashtra in the west. The dietary versions developed by

> vaidyas suit their different environs and food habits and are

> beneficial to the patients. No two diet patterns from two different

> states may be similar, but they still fulfill the therapeutic

> requirements. AND none is contrary to Ayurvedic guidelines.

> So, that is a logical approach.

September 17, 2007

Dear

If at all you can import Indian herbs and formulations, nothing like it. Indian

medicines work very well on Westerners when they come to India for Ayurvedic

treatments. If this is true, why should they not work anywhere else. My

sister-in-law stays in Newark and whenever she visits India, she carries lots of

Ayurvedic medicines from me, for her daughter and acquantances back there in

USA. How is that these medicines work in USA? I have patients in Muscat,

Singapore, New Zealand to name a few countries of diverse ethnicity and

environs. And our Ayurvedic medicines from India are equally effective all over.

However, the stiff approach of pharmaceuticals and your governments is not going

to make matters easier for Ayurveda, you and all of us over here in India.

So, the best policy, as on to-day would be understand the broad, basic concepts

of Ayurveda and incf pharmaceuticals orporate them to suit your local

necessities.

If you could categorize your herbs in Guru-Laghu, Ushna-Sheeta, Manda-Teekshna,

Snigdha-Ruksha variety of classification and also consider the presenting and

prominent Rasa (taste) of the herb, it will be easier for you to use those herbs

applying the scale of Ayurveda.

Best of efforts and looking forward to meeting you personally

Dr.D.B.Muzumdar

M.D.Ayurvedic Medicine (INDIA)

< dahpc >

________________________________

question: would you say, as per Charaka, that we should be importing

and using Indian medicinal herbs and formulations in the West, or

using local plants and treatments?

September 18, 2007

My Views about Gestational diabetes.

First and foremost diabetes is not mentioned anywhere in the

garbhavakranti as upadrava or roga arising in pregnancy, but now a

days due to tremendous stressful life style it has become very

common.First and foremnost, prameha chikitsa ( apatarpna and then

santrpana) is opposite to the garbha poshana which strongly

recomends only santarpana treatment ( See masa nu masika charya) in

the whole course of the period. When this is the case opposite

treaments is not suitable for the growing garbha. severe Apatarpna

done during the pregnancy have there own complications and even the

simplest and most effective drugs for prameha I'e Nishamalaki has

its side effects. SO I CONCLUDE " HUMANAN INSULIN IS THE SAFEST

DRUG " .

September 18, 2007

Dear Dr Aashish

Thanks for your presence. Most of us had thought that you had almost

left the interest in group.

To avoid the confusions which may be caused by inadequate

understanding of original sanskrit verses, Dr Bapalal Vaidya has

written several books on ayurveda with a view to take ayurveda to

every home, rather than in the book cases of Vaidyas. Till today no

practitioner has challenged his writing as " inadequate sanskrit

translation " ! Due to these contributions, Botany department of Surat

university is nameed after him. Some recent postings including the

appended one, have expressed that inadequate sanskrit understanding

has caused confusions. These posts would have become more convincing

if some examples from some texts by vaidyas could have been included.

Considering some thing appearing in a well known text as " grandma

remedy " was another shock to this author.

It is noteworthy that many vaidyas have written several texts in

simple local languages so that people give more respect to herbs,

cultivate them in court yard gardens and improve their lifestyle.

When recommended texts in many ayurvedic colleges are translations

(along with original verses also) or those written in english and

universities allow writing exams for M.A.(Sanskrit) also in local

languages( in 2007), how can we expect people to understand original

sanskrit texts well? It is a very sad state of affairs. We

would consider your pointing out such consfusions in very clear way

by taking certain examples would be a good contrubution to this

group, rather than making blanket statements that sanskrit

understanding only can afford best knowledge of Ayurveda. In future a

view may emerge that to learn sanskrit, one may have to come to India

only.

-- In ayurveda , " dr.aashish phadke "

<ayurinstitute wrote:

> I do agree with my colleague Dr.Muzumdar, I have seen many times,

there is a deviated interpretation of Ayurveda , may be due to

ignorance ! Also without studying Ayurveda with its original Sanskrit

text with proper knowledge of Sanskrit grammar & ability to co relate

those verses correctly , one may come out with better output !

> What he says is also correct certain things in Ayurveda can be

understood better in India !!

September 18, 2007

Dear Dr.Bhate,

Thanks for remembering me ! Well I enjoy reading our group postings, yes I use

to contribute as well ! But at times I felt that more than discussing ,if I can

read these posts , learn any thing valuable out of them & leave those things

which I do not agree with will be the better policy !

You have mentioned about Late Dr.Bapalal Vaidya , yes I do agree with you ,

that he was one of the best personality, academician in Ayurveda ! One of his

wellknown text was 'The controversial Drugs in Ayurveda ' , but as per my memory

I never said that his translation was wrong ! In fact what I was trying to say

that when anyone reads the matter in its original form in this case Sanskrit, it

makes a lot of difference,,,,!! Thats how I also spent years in learning

Sanskrit in its applied way with special ref. to Ayurveda !!

< .... To avoid the confusions which may be caused by inadequate

understanding of original sanskrit verses, Dr Bapalal Vaidya has

written several books on ayurveda with a view to take ayurveda to

every home, rather than in the book cases of Vaidyas. Till today no

practitioner has challenged his writing as " inadequate sanskrit

translation " !......>

You have also asked that whether one need to learn Sanskrit for better

understanding of Ayurveda ? The answer is Yes ! If we need to understand the

correct views then we must take some pains for achieving that, isn't it ?? I

really wonder how many people with very basic knowledge of Ayurveda do advice

even regarding Rasaushadhis, complicated formulations , panchakarmas & many more

such things.......! If that all comes under Dadi maa ke nukhse or Naturopathy or

Herbalism then I think there need not be need or requirement of Ayurvedic

Medical Colleges or courses per say ... because it seems every one is self made

Aacharyas in Ayurveda , then what to say & to whom to say........!!

I do agree that there are certain good exceptions who write with lots of

efforts, with better approach & sincere , thourough knowledge about authentic

Ayurveda, but rest all ......No comments please !

<........how can we expect people to understand original

sanskrit texts well? It is a very sad state of affairs. We

would consider your pointing out such consfusions in very clear way

by taking certain examples would be a good contrubution to this

group, rather than making blanket statements that sanskrit

understanding only can afford best knowledge of Ayurveda. In future a

view may emerge that to learn sanskrit, one may have to come to India

only. ......>

Thats how whenever I see some good discussion between two or more such learned

scholars then only I dare to get involved myself by way of suggesting something

or mentioning my views....!!

I hope you will NOT misinterpret my words & take them in a right perspective !

With warm regards,

Dr.Aashish Phadke

September 18, 2007

On 17-Sep-07, at 11:34 PM, ayurveda wrote:

> .

> Re: Gestational diabetes: please suggest any remedy

>

> Posted by: " muzumdar " dahpc dbm2110

>

> Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:32 pm (PST)

>

> Dear

>

> If you could categorize your herbs in Guru-Laghu, Ushna-Sheeta,

> Manda-Teekshna, Snigdha-Ruksha variety of classification and also

> consider the presenting and prominent Rasa (taste) of the herb, it

> will be easier for you to use those herbs applying the scale of

> Ayurveda.

yes, I have been doing this for 10 years - in fact, i took herb

samples from canada (constituents of two coastal salishan (first

nations) formulas that were traditionally used to treat very serious

diseases, including tuberculosis and gastric cancer) to india in 1997

and tested many different vaidyas to get their input on rasa, virya

etc., but as can be expected their experience was only an inference

and many weren't confident in their assessment

because of their doubts, many of these vaidyas wanted to see the herb

in question, to see where it grows, its ecology and habit, etc.

of course, dravyguna must be born out in empirical experience, and

for this i rely upon the clinical, traditional and ethnobotanical

data for these herbs, as well as my own clinical experience

best... todd caldecott

September 18, 2007

> Re: Gestational diabetes: please suggest any remedy

>

> Posted by: " dr.aashish phadke " ayurinstitute ayurinstitute

>

> Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:22 am (PST)

>

> Dear Dr.

> I do agree with my colleague Dr.Muzumdar, I have seen many times,

> there is a deviated interpretation of Ayurveda , may be due to

> ignorance ! Also without studying Ayurveda with its original

> Sanskrit text with proper knowledge of Sanskrit grammar & ability

> to co relate those verses correctly , one may come out with better

> output !

> What he says is also correct certain things in Ayurveda can be

> understood better in India !! We must also keep in mind that

> Naturopathy although a good science , may not be equated with

> Ayurveda & principles of both should be understood separately &

> need not be confused with those with Ayurveda !! Same is true for

> Herbalism !!

> Nice to read your communication & reply of Dr.Muzumdar on the same !

> Wishing all the group members a very Happy Ganeshotsava ! May Lord

> Ganesh Bless all !

interesting comments dr phadke, but are they perhaps at odds with the

notion that the vedic sciences are universal, and not indian in

origin? didn't this great source of knowledge issue forth from

brahma at the time of creation, without respect to creed? as such,

isn't everything in the universe infused with this knowledge, and

that as such we must admit the possibility that this can be

discovered independently?

if i recall, the great sage sri ramana attained the highest of all

attainments of the vedic sciences, knowing very little of the

sanksrit literature

another case in point is the American Samuel Thomson, who as an

illiterate farmer in the 1800's essentially discovered panch karma,

without knowing anything about ayurveda, humoral medicine or indeed

any form of medicine, other than using his five senses to discover

which the properties of herbs and the treatments that they taught him

based on a simple understanding of hot and cold, Thomson evolved 5

measures to treat serious disease that are remarkably similar to

panch karma, consisting of sudation, emesis, purgation and enema,

applied is a specific manner, according to specific criteria

if you have time, please read the following paper with an open mind,

and share your thoughts

for me it is clear evidence that ayurveda is inherent in our

relationship with the earth, and we don't necessarily need to know

Sanskrit to understand this

in this light, hopefully we can work together for the benefit of all

humanity

humble regards

and happy ganeshotsava!

***

Thomsonism and Ayurveda

As far as the modern clinical herbalist is concerned, the

significance of Samuel Thomson and the reform he brought to health

care during the 19th century is without question. A poor farmer with

no education, Thomson challenged the practices of the college-trained

doctors of his day with nothing other than his experience,

conviction, and the wild plants that grew around him. In a few short

years of self-sacrifice and perseverance, Thomson single-handedly

created a thriving industry in North America, with hundreds upon

thousands of people purchasing and practicing his patented system of

medicine.

From a strictly anthropological perspective, Thomson's incredible

success can be seen as the culmination of several favorable factors

that supported his ideas and enterprise. The United States that

Thomson was born into was a young country, full of the ideals of

Jeffersonian democracy, and with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803,

which added some 2 million square kilometers to the country, there

were seemingly limitless opportunities for expansion. Thomson's 'do-

it-yourself' approach to health care, which in large part made the

professional physician obsolete, greatly appealed to the aesthetic of

a citizenry that had been made aware of its power and was

increasingly distrustful of those that withheld it from them.

But rather than simply rationalizing him as a product of this

environment, Thomson's devotion to the cause of health care reform,

his ability to reach a great diversity of people, as well as his

remarkable effectiveness as a practitioner, demonstrates that he was

indeed a singular individual. In India, another is mentioned, named

Dhanvantari, revered for rediscovering the practice of surgery, long

after the people had forgot it. Traditional belief among Hindus is

that Dhanvantari was an avatar of the god Vishnu: an incarnation of a

divine agency, made manifest out of a great compassion for human

suffering. As both a clinical herbalist and student of Ayurveda, I

see a certain resonance between the myth of Dhanvantari and Thomson's

own life. Thomson too, rediscovered and promulgated a way of

medicine that had been long forgotten by the people, and after it had

been introduced, significantly raised the standard of the practice of

medicine in 19th century North America. But beyond facile

comparisons, with this paper I hope to show that the principles and

practices of Thomsonism bear many remarkable similarities to

Ayurveda, and that in fact they are the same form of medicine: a

system of healing knowledge rooted in our sensuous relationship with

the community of nature.

SENSE AND SENSIBILITY

According to traditional Indian history, when disease and suffering

began to afflict humanity, an accomplished sage named Bharadvaja

volunteered among his peers to uncover the secrets of health and

longevity. Bharadvaja traversed the rugged terrain of the Himalayan

mountains to finally arrive at the court of Indra, king of the gods.

Indra had learnt Ayurveda from a lineage of other gods, all of whom

had learned it from Brahma, Lord of Creation. Indra told Bharadvaja

that when Brahma awoke to create the universe, he remembered the

teachings of Ayurveda. Once Bharadvaja had completed his study with

Indra, he returned home, and presented this teaching to his disciples.

The story of Bharadvaja is told to all students as they begin their

studies in Ayurveda, and while most probably wouldn't spend too much

time trying to justify it on historical grounds, many take it to mean

that the practices of Ayurveda have existed, unchanged, since time

immemorial. The suggestion that Brahma recalls Ayurveda before

creating the universe however suggests a kind of knowledge that isn't

necessarily mediated by our intellect, something similar to what

phenomenology calls 'preconceptual experience.'

Thomson tells us in his memoirs that it had been his habit, as a

child wandering the pastures in search of cows, to closely observe

the wild plants that grew around him. At the age of four he

discovered the powerfully acrid emetic properties of Lobelia, and

would later take great delight in testing its properties on his

unsuspecting playmates. By the age of five, Thomson's rather severe

father put him to work on the farm, but having been born with a

clubfoot, the young boy found the work exceedingly difficult, and

suffered from chronic hip and back pain. One of his few respites was

an old woman named Benton who lived on a farm nearby, and served the

local community as a root doctor.

Young Samuel would walk with the older woman as she gathered roots

and herbs, asking her questions and observing her treatments. As a

result, Thomson's fascination with the local flora grew, and soon, as

he states in his memoir, he was “… constantly in the habit of

tasting everything of the kind I saw,” and having a good memory,

“recollected the taste and use of all that [was] ever shown me by

others, and like-wise all that I discovered myself” (Thomson 1825,

26-27).

In these formative years, Thomson had learned to rely upon his senses

to determine what plants were medicine and what properties they

contained. This reliance upon the senses has long been an important

tool of traditional herbalists all over the world, and even remains

an important diagnostic tool among European pharmacognoscists. In

the Sankhya system of the Vedic sciences, it is said that all matter

is formed from the tanmatras of smell (gandha), taste (rasa), sight

(rupa), touch (sparsha), and hearing (shabda) (Gupta 1996, 55).

Thus, according to the Sankhya system it is not matter that

constitutes the universe but our perception of sense. This idea is

related to the concept of maya, that each of us creates our reality

based upon externally reinforced, self-developed illusions. By

relying upon and emphasizing the importance of the senses in his

work, Thomson echoes the transcendent perspective of the Sankhya

system, which is fundamental to the theoretical structure of

Ayurveda. Viewed in this light, Thomson's anti-intellectual stance,

criticized by many of his contemporaries such as Alva Curtis who

wished to see herbal medicine become a regulated, licensed

profession, contains an important warning for modern herbalism, which

finds itself at similar crossroads. Today, as herbal educators, we

train students to memorize the phytochemistry and pharmacology of

medicinal plants, but are they taught to truly know the plant?

THE DIGESTIVE FIRE

In his book Kindly Medicine, John S. Haller Jr. suggests that both

19th century Regular medicine and Thomsonism operated on the same

mechanistic premise: that the key to health lay in altering and

controlling the body's various secretions (1997, 16). But while this

is arguably true, the net result of these two systems, especially

where patients were concerned, was dramatically different. A key

difference between Regular medicine and Thomsonism, apart from their

respective materia medicas, is the description of an independent

force called 'vitality.' Phrased in rather abstract terms by the

later physiomedicalists, vitality was for Thomson the innate “heat ”

of the body, which resided in the stomach (1835, 8). This notion

parallels the Ayurvedic principle of agni, the deity of fire who

resides principally in the amasaya, or stomach. Thomson stressed

that the stomach was the foundation of health, “the depository from

which the whole body is supported” (1835, 8). Similarly, Ayurveda

places a premium upon the correct functioning of the amasaya, wherein

agni “cooks” the ingested food to sustain the body (Srikanthamurthy

1994, 404-405). The loss of this bodily heat is called anujyoti, and

is a matter of grave concern and a premonitory symptom of death

(Sharma and Dash 1985, 577).

For both Thomsonism and Ayurveda, the archetypal disease is an

affliction of the digestive power. Using the analogy of a wood-

burning stove, Thomson explained that when the coals are too weak to

ignite a proper burn, soot accumulates, clogs the stack, and prevents

a proper draw that facilitates the circulation of heat (1835, 8).

Thus it is an insufficiency of heat, or coldness, which is the

primary cause of disease in Thomsonism. The manifestation of this

disease is what Thomson called “canker,” observed as a “white

feverish coat attached to the mucous membranes” (507, 1841). Those

familiar with Ayurvedic diagnostic techniques will see this symptom

as more or less synonymous with Kapha dosha.

In Ayurvedic terms, it is not only the weakness of the digestive fire

which promotes canker, but, using Thomson's analogy, the kind of fuel

used to heat the stove. As anyone who has lived in the country can

appreciate, some kinds of wood burn very poorly. This means that

when food acts in opposition to the catabolic activity of heat, “the

stomach becomes foul, so that the food is not well digested” (Thomson

1835,8). The product of poor digestion is called ama in Ayurveda,

identical with what Thomson referred to as “putrefaction,” which is

the result of canker (Thomson 507, 1841). Thomson states that when

“putrefaction commences” and the “animal heat [is] not strong enough

to overcome its progress, it will communicate with the blood, when

death will end the contest between heat and cold” (Thomson 507,

1841). Similarly, when ama mixes with the blood (rakta) and lodges in

the different tissues (dhatus) of the body, death is its ultimate

result (Srikanthamurthy 1994, 127).

Expanding upon the Thomsonian idea that heat is the sole

representative of vitality Ayurveda describes the existence of

another component of the body called ojas. According the Vedic agni-

somiya principle, ojas is the feminine counterpart to the masculine

agni, representing nurturing, supportive, and pacifying

characteristics. In contrast, agni destroys, exposes, and

stimulates. Both of these principles are interdependent entities:

ojas is derived from tissue (dhatu) metabolism, a process which is

guided by a subset of agni called the dhatvagni. Once created, ojas

circulates throughout the body to protect and sustain the dhatus and

to serve the creation of life during reproduction. But ultimately,

ojas will feed itself to agni, to extract the nutrients that feed the

tissues, which in turn ensures the replenishment of ojas.

When either ojas is depleted or agni is weakened the eventual result

is ama. Like ojas, ama bears heavy, cooling and moistening

properties, but unlike ojas, nourishes itself at the expense of the

body. When ojas is strong, the eyes are bright, the limbs have great

energy and strength, digestion is good, and the mind and senses are

sharp (Srikanthamurthy 1994, 164). In contrast, the presence of ama

is recognized by symptoms such as fatigue, pain, bloating, irregular

elimination, mucoid accumulations, a sense of heaviness and

constriction, puffiness under the eyes, and problems with fertility

(Srikanthamurthy 1994, 187; Lad and Frawley 1986, 42).

THE UNITY OF DISEASE

The formation of ama or putrefaction is the prerequisite to disease

in both Thomsonism and Ayurveda. The primary form of this disease is

fever, or jvara. All diseases described in Ayurveda are more or less

based upon the etiology and pathogenesis described in jvara.

According to Ayurveda, fever occurs because ama (as Kapha)

accumulates in the amasaya and blocks the channels (srotas) of the

body (Srikanthamurthy 1995b, 12). Thomson too describes that it is

when the “canker assumes the power” inside the stomach that fever

results (Thomson 1835, 16). According to Ayurveda, when this

congestion disrupts the labile force of Vata, agni (as Pitta) is

pushed to the periphery of the body. The presence of ama also blocks

the svedavaha srotas, or sudoriferous glands, and when the heat is

forced outwards but cannot escape as sweat, the result is fever.

Ayurveda differentiates the symptoms of jvara according to the

different doshas. Thus, the symptoms of Vataja jvara are irregular

and labile in nature with sudden rises and decreases in body

temperature, migrating body pain, dryness of the oral mucosa,

constipation and abdominal distension, and frequent yawning

(Srikanthamurthy 1995c, 7). Pittaja jvara displays symptoms of

consistently high body temperature, insomnia, ulcers of the oral and

nasal mucosa, burning sensations, delirium, and fluid eliminations of

feces and catarrh with a yellowish discoloration (Srikanthamurthy

1995c, 7). Kaphaja jvara is recognized by symptoms of coldness with

a mild rise in body temperature, lassitude and a sense of heaviness,

nausea, coryza, indigestion, and whitish discolorations of the feces

and mucus (Srikanthamurthy 1995c, 7). The symptoms of each kind of

jvara may appear in association with other symptoms, and thus jvara

can also manifest as a combination of any two or all three of the

doshas.

Kenneth Zysk describes that in ancient India, jvara existed along

side takman (yakshma), or consumption, as the archetypal form of

disease (1998, 15). Those familiar with the ideas of 18th century

Scottish physician John Brown will see that his idea of sthenic and

asthenic conditions is more or less synonymous with jvara and takman,

respectively. Simply stated, takman is the end result of jvara, in

which the continual disturbance of agni and accumulation of ama

results in the depletion of ojas and the vitality of the body

(Srikanthamurthy 1995c, 42).

THE TREATMENT OF DISEASE

In the treatment of disease both Thomsonism and Ayurveda stress the

importance of removing accumulated wastes that impair vitality. The

basic Thomsonian approach was a series of treatments numbered one

through five: No. 1 to enkindle digestion; No. 2 to raise the heat;

No. 3 to clear obstruction; No. 4 to correct the secretions of the

liver; and No. 5 to strengthen the body (Thomson 1841, 581-628).

Taken as a whole, Thomson's system bears remarkable similarity to

certain aspects of Ayurvedic panch karma and rasayana treatment.

The botanical inspiration for Thomson's system were his early

experiments with Lobelia, what he later used to enkindle the heat of

the stomach, acting like “dry wood shavings” added to a fire (Thomson

1841, 507): dry, light, and easily consumed. This use of Lobelia

closely parallels the Ayurvedic notion of dipana, an herbal action

used to enkindle agni (Srikanthamurthy 1984, 17). Lobelia is such a

strong stimulant to digestion however, that like a fuel added to a

fire that causes the flames to shoot upwards, Lobelia may cause the

fire of digestion to rise upwards and initiate emesis. Thomson used

Lobelia in relatively large doses to take advantage of this property,

to throw off the congestion of canker by emesis as well as restore

heat to the stomach (Thomson 1835, 38). Many botanicals used by

Ayurvedic physicians in emetic recipes in the treatment of fever also

display this dipana activity, such as Madana fruit (Randia

dumetorium). Madana fruit is reputed to be the safest of emetics;

its hot, dry and light properties are comparable to Thomson's

description of Lobelia (Nadkarni 1976, 1048). The Ashtanga Hrdaya

states that the fruits should be harvested just as they ripen in late

spring, bundled in the sacred Kusha grass (Desmosthachya bipinnata),

smeared with a layer of cow dung and concealed in a heap of grain,

and allowed to ferment for eight days (Srikanthamurthy 1995b,

529-530). The fruits are then soaked in a decoction of Madhuyasti

(Glycyrrhiza glabra) overnight, dried in the sun, and then powdered

(Srikanthamurthy 1995b, 529-530). The powder is then administered

with Pippali fruit (Piper longum), and honey or salt, followed by

drinking warm water (Srikanthamurthy 1995b, 174).

For emetic therapy, or vamana, Ayurveda maintains a long list of

conditions in which treatment should be avoided, such as in pregnancy

or in the elderly, but also in conditions where ama has not ripened,

and remains embedded in the dhatus. “Just as it is difficult to

obtain the juice from an unripe fruit,” the Charaka samhita states,

emetic therapies are to be used only when ama is in a stage of

utklesha, or ripening. Ama is ripe for emetic therapy when it is

located in the amasaya, initiating symptoms such as nausea and

catarrh (Sharma and Dash 1988, 153).

Among the more important therapies to promote the ripening of ama are

the purva karmas, or preparatory methods of snehana (oleation) and

svedana (sweating) (Dash and Sharma 1988, 153). Thomson too was a

resolute advocate of sweating therapies, believing that in many

cases, his “system of practice… would… be insufficient to effect a

cure” (1835, 20). Ayurveda expands upon this Thomsonian practice by

the application of medicated oils, called taila, prior to sudation.

Such oils protect the body from the high heat used in svedana

treatment, and have an additional effect for the ripening and removal

of ama. Examples of medicated oils used in ama conditions include

Kottamchukadi taila and Bhrat Saindhavaya taila (Sahasrayoga,

Tailaprakarana, 12; Bhaishajyaratnavali, Amavatadhikara, 157-15).

Sometimes an oil is applied very warm, imparting an additional

svedana activity, such as in pizzichil or pinda sveda. After each

snehana treatment the patient typically sits or lies inside a

specially constructed chamber and is exposed to steam.

Thomson's use of Capsicum spp. as his No. 2 to raise the natural heat

of the body is identical with an herbal action in Ayurveda referred

to as pachana. In fact, until Thomson discovered the utility of

Capsicum, he used herbs such as Shunti (Zingiber officinalis) as his

No.2, which is an important pachana remedy in Ayurveda (Thomson 1841,

594-597; Dash 1991, 133). Pachana herbs are those that “cook the

undigested food,” thereby assisting in the removal of ama which

allows the heat of the body to emanate from its seat in the amasaya

(Srikanthamurthy 1984, 17).

Thomson's No. 3 remedies such as Myrica cerifera, Nymphaea odorata,

and Hamamelis virginica are all astringent remedies, to “scour the

stomach and bowels, by removing the canker” (Thomson 1835, 54). This

class of therapeutic agents evokes a herbal action in Ayurveda called

grahi, which, while possessing both dipana and pachana properties,

has an additional astringent property to “dry up the tissues and

wastes of the body” (Srikanthamurthy 1984, 18). One herb from the

Ayurvedic materia medica designated as grahi is Gajapippali fruit

(Scindapsus officinalis), an herb with dry, light and warming

properties (Srikanthamurthy 1984, 18; Nadkarni 1974, 964-965, 1117).

Nadkarni states that this herb is specific to Kapha conditions, which

as I have suggested, represent a set of signs and symptoms that are

identical with the Thomson's notion of canker.

Thomson's No. 4 remedies, comprised of bitter-tasting botanicals such

as Populus tremuloides, Berberis vulgaris and Chelone glabra were

used to correct the secretions of the liver and gall bladder (Thomson

1841, 613-618). This class of remedies is very similar to the

therapeutic regimen in Ayurvedic medicine called virechana, which is

a treatment to Pitta and the organs with which it is associated,

namely, the liver-gall bladder and small intestine. Purgation

therapy was of course used widely by Regular physicians during

Thomson's day, but rather than to simply stimulate the liver (to

diminish “arterial excitability”), Thomson's No.4 remedies and

virechana therapies are used to correct and restore the function of

the liver. Several of the important virechana drugs used in

Ayurveda, such as Haritaki (Terminalia chebula) and Amalaki (Emblica

officinalis), are of great interest to both researchers and

clinicians, not just for their hepatorestorative activity, but for

their wide-ranging ability to support and regulate several aspects of

physiological function (Sharma and Dash 1992, 65; Rege et al. 1999)

Vasti, or enema therapy, is an important aspect of panch karma, and

Thomson too relied upon “injections” to a great degree, although he

used this technique primarily to promote diaphoresis in fever, and

clear canker and inflammation from the bowel (1835, 22-23). While

Ayurveda mentions the use of enemata in fever, it is used especially

after virechana treatment to restore and pacify the function of Vata,

whose seat is in the colon and lower pelvic organs (Srikanthamurthy

1995b, 194). Vasti therapy typically alternates between niruha, or

decoction enema, with anuvasana, or oil enema. These two aspects of

vasti therapy are used to tone and strengthen the bowel, as well as

correct the function of Vata.

Lastly, Thomson used his No. 5 remedies to restore digestion and

strengthen the body after his No. 4 remedies had been employed. The

names that Thomson gave such remedies, such as the “Syrup for Weakly

Patients” or the “Antidyspeptic Conserve,” (Thomson 1841, 707, 709),

suggest that Thomson thought it necessary, especially in cases of

chronic illness and debility, to restore the patient after

treatment. This approach bears strong similarity with Ayurvedic

rasayana treatment, which is used after panch karma to rejuvenate the

body. Thomson also used his No. 5 remedies as a general preventative

to maintain health, much as rasayanas are used today in Ayurveda

(Thomson 1835, 82-83). When compared to the relative sophistication

of Ayurvedic rasayana treatment Thomson's approach seems modest,

especially in his choice of remedies such as Cherry pits (Prunus

virginiana) as restorative agents. Such remedies would not rate high

on a list of rasayanas considered by the Ayurvedic physician. If we

remember however, that Thomson was solely concerned with the stomach,

anything that restored normalcy to its function could be thought of a

rejuvenative, and especially the pleasant and aromatic syrups he used

as his No. 5. Nonetheless, Thomson and the later physiomedicalists

would add several remedies to their materia medica, such as the herb

Panax quinquefolium, which could more rightly be described as

rasayana agent, used as a “tonic nervine” in cases of

“debility” (Thomson 1841, 687).

CONCLUSION

While many claim it as their own, clinical herbalists today rarely

practice the system of medicine that Thomson built around the emetic

properties of Lobelia. In truth, herbalists had already begun to

turn away from these practices as the movement was in decline by the

late 19th century and the low dose orientation of the Eclectics began

to dominate the field. This trend is now reinforced by the practice

of modern medicine, which, having long since abandoned any pretense

of modeling itself after Hippocrates or Galen, views such therapies

as emesis or purgation as nonsensical and dangerous. Interestingly,

it is from within the field of modern herbal medicine that Thomsonism

has taken the most heat, dismissed by some as an outdated form of

“heroic” intervention with underlying misogynous elements (Weed 1989,

51-57). Given that Thomson enjoyed considerable success with his

methods however, in the treatment of everything from colds and flus,

chronic degenerative disorders like rheumatoid arthritis, to highly

contagious diseases such as cholera and tuberculosis, I believe that

there is sufficient reason to undertake an empirical reassessment of

Thomson's methodologies. Since by in large Thomsonism is no longer

practiced, the obvious similarities between it and Ayurveda suggests

that practitioners experienced in panch karma and rasayana therapy

could prove to be a valuable resource in this endeavor.

REFERENCES

Dash, Bhagwan. 1991. Materia Medica of Ayurveda. New Delhi: B.

Jain Publishers.

Frawley, David and Vasant Lad. 1986. The Yoga Of Herbs: An Ayurvedic

Guide to Herbal Medicine. Santa Fe, NM: Lotus Press.

Griggs, Barbara. 1981. Green Pharmacy: A History of Herbal Medicine.

London: Jill Norman and Hobbhouse.

Gupta, L.P. 1996. Essentials of Ayurveda. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit

Pratishthan

Haller, John S. Jr. 1997. Kindly Medicine: Physiomedicalism in

America, 1836-1911. Kent, OH: Kent State University.

India. Ministry of Health and Family Planning. 1978. The Ayurvedic

Formulary of India. Part 1. 1st ed. Delhi.

Nadkarni, Dr. K.M. 1976. The Indian Materia Medica, with Ayurvedic,

Unani and Home Remedies. Revised and enlarged by A.K. Nadkarni.

1954. Reprint. Bombay: Bombay Popular Prakashan PVP.

Rege N.N. et al. 1999. Adaptogenic properties of six rasayana herbs

used in Ayurvedic medicine. Phytother Res Jun;13(4):275-91

Sharma, R.K. and Bhagwan Dash. trans. 1992. Agnivesa's Caraka

Samhita (Text with English Translation and Critical Exposition based

on Cakrapani Datta's Ayurveda Dipika) Vol. 1 (Sutra sthana). 3rd ed.

Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia.

---. 1988. Agnivesa's Caraka Samhita (Text with English Translation

and Critical Exposition based on Cakrapani Datta's Ayurveda Dipika)

Vol. 3. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia.

---. 1985. Agnivesa's Caraka Samhita (Text with English Translation

and Critical Exposition based on Cakrapani Datta's Ayurveda Dipika)

Vol. 2. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia.

Srikanthamurthy, K.R. 1995a. trans. Vagbhata's Astanga Hrdayam. vol.

3 (Uttara Sthana). Varanasi: Krishnadas Academy.

---. 1995b. Vagbhata's Astanga Hrdayam. vol. 2 (Nidana, Chikitsa and

Kalpasiddhi Sthana). Varanasi: Krishnadas Academy.

---. 1995c. Madhava Nidanam: Roga Viniscaya of Madhavakara.

Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia.

---. 1994. Vagbhata's Astanga Hrdayam. vol. 1 (Sutra Sthana and

Sharira Sthana). Varanasi: Krishnadas Academy.

---. 1984. Sarnagadhar-Samhita: A Treatise on Ayurveda. Chaukhambha

Varanasi: Orientalia.

Thomson, Samuel. 1841. The Thomsonian Materia Medica. 13th ed. Albany

---. 1835. New Guide To Health; or Botanic Family Physician. Boston.

---. 1825. A Narrative of the Life and Medical Discoveries of Samuel

Thomson. Boston.

Weed, Susun. 1989. Wise Women Herbal: Healing Wise. Woodstock, N.Y.:

Ash Tree.

Zysk, Kenneth G. 1998. Asceticism and Healing in Ancient India. Vol.

2. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

September 18, 2007

hello

sorry for interfering with your conversation. i used both local and indian

plants, and i also had this question in mind: which are better for us, indian or

local plants? there are reasons supporting both ideeas:

1. local: there is a " wisdom of nature " that makes grow the plants people need

(e.g .in areas with humid cold climat grow the best plants for arthritis in big

amounts) . we are growing in same energetic field, we resonate easier and better

with them. they grow from a soild containing elements, same soil feeding the

vegetables and fruits we eat

2. indian: they grow in a very spiritual area, are impregnated with this

resonance. they were used sistematicaly and even scientifically four thousands

years, so the collective subconsciousness is impregnated with the ideea of

succes and healing connected to them.

my personal experience proved me that in most cases indian plants effects are

much stronger . for sure there are some exceptions. as a " compromise solution "

we (my group of friends) have a habbit: give 2 recipes, 1 with indian plants and

1 with local plants. we use both , usually in different manner (eg. indian

plants as powder under tongue and local plants as cold water extract for

treating urinary or circulatory diseases, or as tincture if we aim deeper

tissues)

we have the advantage that in our ayurveda school, for the last 13-14 years,

many people are working in describing local plants by ayurvedic system ( rasa,

virya, vipaka, prabhava, guna, karman) and lately even finding correspondences

between local and indian plants.

using indian plants for myself, i had beautifull spiritual experiences. the

indian plants are a treasure, we should use it, just let's not forget the local

treasure

all the best,

cri

muzumdar dahpc last

ayurveda

Monday, September 17, 2007 10:08:40 PM

Re: <ayurveda> Gestational diabetes: please suggest any remedy