Discussion on ayurveda

[Guest guest]

Dear

Re : Long list of chronic disorders

Ayurveda originated precisely because mankind started suffering from various

ailments. The reference to this is available in first chapter of Charak Samhita.

To find the solution for this, all the seers gathered together at the foothills

of Himalaya and a common consensus towards cure of ailments and methods to

prevent such diseases was arrived at. Advanced civilisations have always

experienced myraid of diseases, which is even true to this date. So my mention

of diseases in ancient India has nothing to do with feeling of guilt. It seems

that your impression about Ayurveda is more of ideological rather than realistic

one. If you are living a urban life, you are bound to face many ailments because

of hectic commitments, stress and unhealthy food-habits besides other health

deviating factors in environment. In spite of best of advices, mankind has

repeatedly shown tendency of fallability due to misplaced intellect. This cannot

be a point to blame Ayurveda. Wrong diet is one of the factors in causing

diseases, very much so in diabetes. Ayurveda mentions the cause-effect

association and that's it. No emotionalism involved. Or do you wish to say that

Indians should have been eating primitive diets or that India should have stayed

as a less civilised culture?

 

Re : High-carb diet in metabolic syndrome

Which Ayurvedic physicians are you counting on? In which part of world is this

view prevalent? If somebody is interpreting wrongly, is it the fault of Ayurveda

as whole? In my earlier clarifications, I had quoted a range of dietary groups

which also included meat. So what's the point in repeating the issue again and

again. Is it that somebody is directing you wrongly or your concept of Ayurveda

is still wanting?

 

Re : Genetic intolerance

I had mentioned about the principle of 'Okasaatmya' in my earlier reply. It

means that each human being is accustomed to the food-items used in his

family-culture-habitat axis. He is comfotable with the grains, vegetables and

herbs grwing in his surroundings. The concept of intolerance / incompatability

has been dealt in Charak Samhita in sutra-sthana chapter no 26. It is termed as

'Viruddha-Ahaar' ( incompatible foods)and there are many categories in this

factor. You could go thro' that section to get your query solved.

 

Re : Different view-points abot Prameha

There will be different arguments. But dear remember that arguments don't

make theorems / principles. Just as different people have liberty to express

their views on this forum, the same happens else-where too, also with the author

that you have mentioned. Hence the best means to understand Ayurveda is to learn

it in its originality as we like it to do rather than going into confusing

versions. I feel that there are large gaps of information which have not reached

the non-Indian Ayurveda learners. Hence the whole lot of confusions and queries.

 

I would like to emphasise again that wrong notions and partial understanding of

Ayurvedic principles and their applicability is causing such ill-placed

repurcusions or ideological statements about Ayurveda. If some people are

preaching amd practising Ayurveda wrongly outside India, it is their

irresponsible acts of omissions and commissions that are putting Ayurveda in bad

light.

 

Lastly, what I meant by Guru was a good exponent of original Ayurveda and not

the Guru from guru-shishya model. There are many brilliant people who have

learnt Ayurveda thro' colleges. Unfortunately, they have no exposure in Western

countries for various reasons best known to them. And those who have the right

contacts are only interested in teaching herbal and vegetarian approach of

Ayurveda as that view is convenient and commercially advantageous to them. Can

you help change the situation? If no, then the same vicious cycle will continue

of preaching convenient Ayurveda with business aspects in place.

 

Dr.D.B.Muzumdar

M.D.Ayurvedic Medicine (MUMBAI-INDIA)

_____________

http://health.ayurveda/message/11292

[Guest guest]

> Ayurveda originated precisely because mankind started suffering

> from various ailments.

 

If we want to get specific then we both know that tradition states

that Ayurveda was spoken by Brahma at the Creation, holy words

infused into the very universe of being that we inhabit now, along

with other vedas. The Ayurveda that India evolved several thousand

years ago is a comparatively recent as a response to an acute

manifestation of ill health in society, when very clearly, this

original knowledge had been forgotten or was inaccessible to the

people. This is the tradition. Is it truth? I don't know, but I do

know that some traditional Ayurvedic physicians are able to

acknowledge the mythology and also have more cogent, rational

explanations of Ayurveda's origin, and these can exist side by side

as the relative truth that defines the very nature of our awareness.

 

> The reference to this is available in first chapter of Charak

> Samhita. To find the solution for this, all the seers gathered

> together at the foothills of Himalaya and a common consensus

> towards cure of ailments and methods to prevent such diseases was

> arrived at. Advanced civilisations have always experienced myraid

> of diseases, which is even true to this date.

 

why? isn't this statement worthy of deeper investigation? why if we

are so advanced, do we become sicker? how on earth is this

advancement??

 

> So my mention of diseases in ancient India has nothing to do with

> feeling of guilt. It seems that your impression about Ayurveda is

> more of ideological rather than realistic one. If you are living a

> urban life, you are bound to face many ailments because of hectic

> commitments, stress and unhealthy food-habits besides other health

> deviating factors in environment. In spite of best of advices,

> mankind has repeatedly shown tendency of fallability due to

> misplaced intellect. This cannot be a point to blame Ayurveda.

> Wrong diet is one of the factors in causing diseases, very much so

> in diabetes. Ayurveda mentions the cause-effect association and

> that's it. No emotionalism involved. Or do you wish to say that

> Indians should have been eating primitive diets or that India

> should have stayed as a less civilised culture?

 

what i am saying is that we cannot ignore our genetics and compel it

to fulfill an imaginary reality based on philosophical dictums and

still be healthy

 

i believe there is a way to live a modern life but to eat in a way

which is more reflective of our human evolution

 

i also believe that this concept is found in ayurvedic principles,

but that to arrive at it one must see beyond cultural dictates

 

 

> Re : High-carb diet in metabolic syndrome

> Which Ayurvedic physicians are you counting on? In which part of

> world is this view prevalent? If somebody is interpreting wrongly,

> is it the fault of Ayurveda as whole? In my earlier clarifications,

> I had quoted a range of dietary groups which also included meat. So

> what's the point in repeating the issue again and again. Is it that

> somebody is directing you wrongly or your concept of Ayurveda is

> still wanting?

 

this issue should be cleared up between you and i, but others on the

list apparently don't share our thoughts

you are responding here to a thread that wasn't directed at you

 

> Re : Genetic intolerance

> I had mentioned about the principle of 'Okasaatmya' in my earlier

> reply. It means that each human being is accustomed to the food-

> items used in his family-culture-habitat axis. He is comfotable

> with the grains, vegetables and herbs grwing in his surroundings.

> The concept of intolerance / incompatability has been dealt in

> Charak Samhita in sutra-sthana chapter no 26. It is termed as

> 'Viruddha-Ahaar' ( incompatible foods)and there are many categories

> in this factor. You could go thro' that section to get your query

> solved.

 

correct - the evidence for genetic intolerance to certain foods

including grains and dairy is found in ayurveda as i have stated all

along, but others will persist in telling us that no no no, its

because the wheat is genetically modified (which isn't true) or its

because the cows are the wrong type, etc etc,

 

when you have a chance, read through some of the archives to see how

long THIS particular discussion has been going on

i welcome your input and support

 

> Re : Different view-points abot Prameha

> There will be different arguments. But dear remember that

> arguments don't make theorems / principles. Just as different

> people have liberty to express their views on this forum, the same

> happens else-where too, also with the author that you have

> mentioned. Hence the best means to understand Ayurveda is to learn

> it in its originality as we like it to do rather than going into

> confusing versions. I feel that there are large gaps of information

> which have not reached the non-Indian Ayurveda learners. Hence the

> whole lot of confusions and queries.

 

i also believe that everyone who wants to study ayurveda deeply

should go to india as well, which is what i did the parting injunction of my

teacher tho was that i needed to apply

these principles in context with my own environment

i know this isn't good news for indian exporters that want to cash in on the

ayurveda

 

people here are taken with the exoticism of ayurveda, but really its

just india they are attracted to ayurveda is all around them

 

my hope for them is that they transcend the exoticism to arrive a

truly authentic understanding of ayurveda that supports them where

they live

 

> I would like to emphasise again that wrong notions and partial

> understanding of Ayurvedic principles and their applicability is

> causing such ill-placed repurcusions or ideological statements

> about Ayurveda. If some people are preaching amd practising

> Ayurveda wrongly outside India, it is their irresponsible acts of

> omissions and commissions that are putting Ayurveda in bad light.

 

i agree this is happening, although you should be careful to sort

through the warp and weft and don't discard the golden threads

 

> Lastly, what I meant by Guru was a good exponent of original

> Ayurveda and not the Guru from guru-shishya model. There are many

> brilliant people who have learnt Ayurveda thro' colleges.

> Unfortunately, they have no exposure in Western countries for

> various reasons best known to them. And those who have the right

> contacts are only interested in teaching herbal and vegetarian

> approach of Ayurveda as that view is convenient and commercially

> advantageous to them. Can you help change the situation? If no,

> then the same vicious cycle will continue of preaching convenient

> Ayurveda with business aspects in place.

 

i have met several excellent and brilliant ayurvedic (most kerala)

physicians that have made the west their home some i have learned from, others i

have done research with, and others i teach with

 

all of them come with great knowledge, but many are also confused and bewildered

by such an unfamiliar environment one friend arrived from the south to a calgary

winter that was -40 Celsius - a big shock for someone that had never actually

worn socks before!

 

the natural tendency is to revert to the familiar, and import indian

herbs and implement diets that perhaps have a sound basis in tropical india but

don't make much sense here

 

best...

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

Ayurvedic practitioner, Medical Herbalist

web: http//:www.toddcaldecott.com

[Guest guest]

Dear

I described the cause for origin of Ayurveda which is unrefuted and undisputed.

Did you see the reference I quoted or are you just raising questions?

And if your teachers of Ayurveda are themselves confused and bewildered in

applying Ayurveda in foreign context as you say, I feel surprised how can they

teach you proper Ayurveda? And in the sense of confusion, if they are

implimenting the tropical diets or the diets they are well-versed with, then it

is the limitation of their understanding of Ayurveda.

And you definitely should not consider their views of Ayurveda as totalist

Ayurveda. I think this version of Ayurveda is creating more confusions in your

mind and raising more queries. We do not work in this way in India outside

Kerala. We have a broad spectrum and full scale of Ayurveda applications.

Perhaps your keralite friends, philosophers and guides of Ayurveda need your

best..... more.

 

Dr.D.B.Muzumdar.

M.D.Ayurvedic Medicine (MUMBAI-INDIA)

< dahpc >

___________________________

> Ayurveda originated precisely because mankind started suffering

> from various ailments.

 

If we want to get specific then we both know that tradition states

that Ayurveda was spoken by Brahma at the Creation, holy words

infused into the very universe of being that we inhabit now, along

with other vedas. .....

 

> The reference to this is available in first chapter of Charak

> Samhita. .....

 

why? isn't this statement worthy of deeper investigation? why if we

are so advanced, do we become sicker? how on earth is this

advancement??

 

> Wrong diet is one of the factors in causing diseases, very much so

> in diabetes. Ayurveda mentions the cause-effect association and

> that's it. No emotionalism involved. Or do you wish to say that

> Indians should have been eating primitive diets or that India

> should have stayed as a less civilised culture?

 

what i am saying is that we cannot ignore our genetics and compel it

to fulfill an imaginary reality based on philosophical dictums and

still be healthy

 

i also believe that this concept is found in ayurvedic principles,

but that to arrive at it one must see beyond cultural dictates

 

 

> I had quoted a range of dietary groups which also included meat. So

> what's the point in repeating the issue again and again. Is it that

> somebody is directing you wrongly or your concept of Ayurveda is

> still wanting?

 

this issue should be cleared up between you and i, but others on the

list apparently don't share our thoughts

you are responding here to a thread that wasn't directed at you

 

<snip>

[Guest guest]

there are many vaidyas in India who need to better themselves socially,

politically, and financially. so if they arise to meet rich or influential

westerners they will easily adopt many stances that may be counter to the

ayurvedic paradigm. go to the university of pune, many westerners have been

given many ayurvedic titles. I have met a couple of them. I agree with dr.

muzumdar greatly that Ayurveda in its totality must be understood. his

understanding is great and he wouldn't be be president of the bams society

of Mumbai if it wasn't so. I have met personally with the man and let me

tell you his intellectual prowess on the subject of Ayurveda is remarkable.

there are others like him as well. the sweeping changes happening in india

are causing the trees to be shaken and the ones who are able to hold on

tightly to those strong limbs of ayurvedic knowledge are the true

torchbearers of the knowledge of Ayurveda.

 

 

 

namaskar,

Raja G. Gursahani

*: 314.761.3134 (Clovis, CA)

*: rajagursahani(atgmail.com)