is dialectic important for ayurveda and its resurgence.

[Guest guest]

Dialectics are indeed necesssary, and was even practised in good old days of

Ayurveda and is known as Tad-Vidya Sambhasha. But all the recent studies and

opinions which are quoted here, should be affirmed on the lines and observations

of Ayurvedic dictums. Any apparantly contrary statement or study, which is not

confirming with main-stream Ayurveda should not be pushed under the garb of

Ayurveda. I had tried to stick to this policy during the diabetes debate as well

as this debate on sedative properties of Ashwagandha. When a certain outspoken

member of this group contests the opinion that taking 10 gms of Ashwagandha daiy

to achieve sedative action; it is not just childish, but harmful to the

impression of Ayurveda. Who would like to eat 10 gms of powder for a

consistently long duration, when 1or 2 tablets of other herbs or herbal

combination can effectively achieve the desired result?

 

While describing the virtues of medicinal herb, Ayurveda states four attributes

 

1) that the herb should be of broad spectrum use having many virtues(Bahu-gunam)

2) that the herb should be versatile, useful in many combinations (Bahu-kalpam)

3) that the herb should be of full potency (Sampannam)

4) that the medicine should be suitable to the patient as far as the dose,

taste, effectivity and such other factors are concerned (Yogyam)

Does use of Ashwagandha as a sedative herb qualify all these criteria? obviously

not. But just because some herbalist, merely by virtue of knowing herbs

mentioned in Ayurveda, starts preaching about it's pharmacology and uses based

on some preliminary studies, cannot be accepted as a authentic doctor / vaidya /

medical opinion. One should understand one's own limitations while standing up

for dialectics. Even in medical conferences, a minimum eligibility criteria is

considered before allowing entry. Just because free access to such groups is

possible does not mean taking disadvantage of the facility.

 

The scholarly impression of a post, by gathering references and must stand to

the scrutiny when the flaws and limitations in the study are pointed out.This

just cannot be dialectics

 

May true dialectics prevail

In the name of Ayurveda

 

Dr.D.B.Muzumdar

__________________

dialectic i believe is still important especially for ayurveda and its

resurgence. so its a blend of respect but at the same time of inquiry.

[Guest guest]

Muzumdar,

 

Where have I advocated a dose of 10g of Ashwagandha to be used as

sedative? You had better review the posts more carefully. If you

recall, this was the extrapolated dose used in an experimental study

showing a GABAnergic activity. I am not advising and have never

advised anyone to take this dose as a sedative - this ENTIRE

conversation was supposed to based around the reasons for a

paradoxical reaction. Your capacity to misconstrue my words if only

to prove your moral authority boggles the mind...

Caldecott

todd

www.toddcaldecott.com

________________________

 

Dialectics are indeed necesssary, and was even practised in good

old days of Ayurveda and is known as Tad-Vidya Sambhasha. But all

the recent studies and opinions which are quoted here, should be

affirmed on the lines and observations of Ayurvedic dictums. Any

apparantly contrary statement or study, which is not confirming

with main-stream Ayurveda should not be pushed under the garb of

Ayurveda. I had tried to stick to this policy during the diabetes

debate as well as this debate on sedative properties of

Ashwagandha. When a certain outspoken member of this group contests

the opinion that taking 10 gms of Ashwagandha daiy to achieve

sedative action; it is not just childish, but harmful to the

impression of Ayurveda. Who would like to eat 10 gms of powder for

a consistently long duration, when 1or 2 tablets of other herbs or

herbal combination can effectively achieve the desired result?