Indian Journal of History of Science, 51.1 (2016) 48-55 DOI: 10.16943/ijhs/2016/v51i1/48377

Knowledge Generation in Āyurveda: Methodological Aspects

S N Venugopalan Nair* and Darshan Shankar**

(Received 30 April 2015; revised 30 November 2015)

Abstract The wise consider the entire universe as their preceptor (Caraka Sahitā CS.Vi.14). Knowledge generation in Āyurveda has followed mainly four types of siddhānta (theory) viz. 1. śarvatantra siddhānta (the theory which is accepted by all śāstrā-s), 2. pratitantra siddhānta (the theories not in any other śāstrā-s:), 3. adhikaraa siddhānta (from the related topics and theories) and 4. abhyupagama siddhānta (unproven and not fully tested theories). These siddhānta-s were debated among groups of scientists and students of various schools of thought. The methods of such discourses are guided by 44 rules of logic, ‘vādamārga’ (CS. Vi.8.26) to justify propositions. The Āyurvedic texts are formulated based on the 32 criteria (Suśruta Sahita; SS.Utta.65) and 36 criteria by Caraka (CS.Si.43) known as tantra-yukti in order to ensure rigour. Āyurveda considers knowledge of whole cannot be obtained by knowing its parts. Key words: Āyurveda, Darśana, Knowledge, Logic, Tantrayukti, Vādamārga.

1. INTRODUCTION 2. GENERATION OF AYURVEDIC KNOWLEDGE Āyurvedic knowledge has a long history Caraka says that the entire world is the in the country, most part of which is lost due to its teacher to the intelligent and foe to the being part of old oral tradition. Some of the oral unintelligent. Knowing this well, with proper traditions of ancient times, the Vedic brāhmaic attention, one should listen even to an unfriendly and the heterodox, have survived, thanks to their person. ‘Purucōyam lōkasammita’: ‘Human being is a microcosm of the physical and biological sacred nature. What we know as the history of world’ (CS. Vi.8.14). All entities in the universe yurveda is mainly based on sahitā-s mainly of Ā are there in the person and vice versa. Intuitive Suśruta and Caraka, generally dated to the period knowledge is distinct from the methodologically th nd between 6 century BC and 2 century AD. realised knowledge that overcomes the distinction Ācarya Ātreya is the first known author of an between the knower and the known. It is the Āyurvedic medical treatise, the Ātreya sahitā. perfect knowledge, while all other knowledge is It is believed that Caraka made his Sahitā largely incomplete and imperfect in so far as it does not based on Ātreya’s work. What emerges as striking bring about identification between the subject and is the methodological rigour that his Sahitā the object. exhibits. We seek to discuss generation of This knowledge was preserved as in the Āyurvedic knowledge, its logical structure, case of any other, initially in the form of oral dialectical procedure. compositions like sūtra-s (aphorisms) in which

* Associate Professor, Trans Disciplinary University, Institute of Trans Disciplinary Health Sciences and Technology, FRLHT, 74/2, Jarakabande Kaval, Post Attur, via Yelahanka, Bangalore 64; Email: [email protected] **Vice Chancellor, Trans Disciplinary University, Institute of Trans Disciplinary Health Sciences and Technology, FRLHT. KNOWLEDGE GENERATION IN ĀYURVEDA: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 49 sets of information are strung out as if along a In Āyurveda the basic knowledge is the thread. This is like a thread which holds together knowledge about the knowable object, padārtha beads or flowers in a garland. The knowledge thus vijñāna. The knowledge of the material, its preserved is in a condensed form, very precise and practical context and the observation of results are free of repetitions, enabling its remembrance and fundamental to the generation of Āyurvedic retrieval on demand relatively easy. Subsequently knowledge. In Āyurveda, padārtha vijñāna is all this was codified and systematised in the form extended into a holistic understanding with of written texts, namely sahitā-s (the theoretical foundations and logical arguments compendia). Both the modes had followed the emphasizing practical relevance. Sahitā-s of poetic genre for the organisation of knowledge. Āyurveda hold this knowledge as eternal (śāśvata) Āyurvedic texts start with a chapter known as and without beginning (anādi) because it deals sūtra-sthāna which explains the fundamental with properties of entities of a universal nature features and principles of the knowledge they (svabhāva sasiddha lakcaatvāt ) which has embody by way of the philosophy, logic and permanent (bhāva svabhāva nityatvāt ) characters concepts. The systematised texts of the sahitā (CS. 30: 27). tradition also followed the same style of precision. – – Naturally at a later stage this necessitated 3. DIALECTICAL PROCEDURE (VADAMARGA) commentaries involving explanations (bhāya), As in the case of any other stream of annotations (vārtika) and redactions (prati- knowledge in traditional India, Āyurveda also had samskaraa). The compilation of pre-existing followed Vādamārga (dialectical procedures) orally transmitted knowledge had led to generation based on Nyāya siddhānta for improving and of new knowledge through empirical observation entrenching and its knowledge (CS. Vi.8: 26). Vāda and theoretical deduction. Caraka mentions about mārga-s are procedures and focal points of the acquisition of empirical knowledge about debate used in intellectual discussions of any medicinal plants, from the tribal people subjects of importance. Its focal points are given (CS.1:120). The codification and systematisation below in table 1. of inherited knowledge had the pressure of pedagogic needs on them. It appears that sahitā-s were the works of ācārya-s who were practitioners Table 1. Procedures and Focal Points of Debates used in Intellectual Discussion and teachers of the gurukūla tradition of education under which the pupils stayed with the teacher’s Vāda Debate with reference texts (1. jalpa, family. This tradition of knowledge transmission 2. vitaa) had given birth to several lineages of teachers and About Substances pupils, namely the guru-śiya parampara-s in Gua Physical and biological properties Action different domains of knowledge such as Veda, Sāmānya Generality , yurveda etc. In certain regions this Ā Viśēa Specificity tradition has survived to the present times among Samavāya Inseparability eg. property and action certain communities of hereditary association with Pratijha Proposition, it is a statement which is such domains of knowledge. Caraka underlines to be proved at the end of argument the primacy of practical knowledge. Vāgbhaa (e.g. man is eternal): A deductive logic mentions three phases viz., adhīti (learning), Sthāpana Proof bodha (understanding), ācaraa (practising) and Pratisthāpana Counter proof pracāraa (propagating) of the knowledge (ASM. Hētu Cause: (pratyaka, anumāna, aitīhya, upam na) 1:28). ā 50 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

Dānta Example In the process of defining the concept of Upanaya Leading towards truth health, the siddhānta (theory) about the svastha Nigamana Inference (healthy individual) the parameters (3 doa-s, 7 Uttara Rejoinder, asserts disparity between body tissues, mind and ātma etc.) are discussed cause and effect: in detail on the basis of Vādamārgā-s by the group Siddhānta Theoretical conclusion: (universal as of scientists on the basis of theoretical and well as specific generalisation) practical understanding of the subject. The health Śabda Dristārtha (observable meaning), is defined by Suśruta as follows: Adristārtha (unobservable meaning), (truth), Anruta (false) “samadōa samāgniśca samadhātu- Pratyaka Direct perception : (Mind, sensory malakriyā| experience) prasannātmēndriya manā svastha Anumāna Inference: Logical conclusion based ityabhidhīyatē|| on reason [SS.15/10] Aitīhya Verbal Testimony: Āptopadēsa, Veda Human being is considered to be (Pure reason) completely healthy only when the body Aoupamya Analogy constituents namely tridoa-s (vāta, pitta, kapha), Samśaya Doubt dhātu-s (seven body tissues), effluents like three Prayojana Purpose mala-s (essential waste products), pañcendriya (5 Savyabhicāra Exceptional statements Jijñāsā Enquiry sense organs), manas (mind) and ātma (soul) are Vyavasāya Determination all in equilibrium / contentment stage.

Arthāpatti Implied meaning – Sambhava Origin or source 4. LOGIC OF AYURVEDIC KNOWLEDGE Anuyojya Imperfect statement (TANTRA-YUKTI) Ananuyojya Perfect statement It appears that the codification and Anuyoga Question systematisation of Āyurvedic knowledge into Pratyanuyoga Further question sahitā-s were influenced by the a-darśana-s, Vākyadoa Flaws of speech: (insufficient, the six schools of thought (Nyāya, Vaiśeika, superfluous, meaningless, wrong and Sānghya, Yoga, Pūrvamīmāmsā, and contradictory) Uttaramīmāmsā), the exact chronology of which Vākyapraśamsā Excellence of speech is not known. There is a preponderance of the Chhalam Quibbling methods of the Nyāya school in the constitution Ahetu Fallacy (no reason): (of common cause, of doubt, of analogy) of Āyurvedic knowledge. Its structure and the Atītakālam Delayed in time pattern of the organisation of knowledge is based Upālambha Adjoining factors: on the logical constructs of the Nyāya thought. Parihāra Amendment Gautama’s influence is explicit in the logical Pratijñāhāni Abandonment of proposition procedures adopted in the sahitā-s by Suśruta Abhanunjā Acceptance and Caraka. Hetvantaram Fallacy of reason – Arthāntaram Differential meaning, Confusion 5. LOGICAL REASONING OF (GAUTAMA Nigraha-sthāna Defeat or discomfiture: by any of the 600 BC) ON PROOF OF KNOWLEDGE items of 29-43 also can bring out The term tantra-yukti means the logical rejection of the theory proposed plan of knowledge constitution. This enables KNOWLEDGE GENERATION IN ĀYURVEDA: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 51

Pramāa Proof

Anuhāva Smti Experiential Memory

Prama Aprama Prama Valid Invalid Valid Samsaya Aprama Anumāna Sābda Pratyaka Upamāna Doubt Invalid Inference Comparison Testimony Tarka Vaidika Savikalpa Nirvikalpa Hetva- Argument abhasa of Veda Fallaciers Laoukika of Laukika Alaukika Svārtha thinkers Ordinary extraordinary for onself Sensory Sāmānya Paratha Generality for others Mānasa Purvā-vat Njana Lakana effect from cause Experience Seśavat Yogaja Cause-from-effect Extra sensory Samanyato driśtavat Uniformity of co existence expansion of knowledge, elucidation of its constitution of knowledge based on the logical meaning (semantics) and systematic exposition of parameters stipulated by tantra-yukti. According its subject matter (thesis). It provides the focal to Caraka, a person well versed in the postulates points of logical statements and deductive of tantra-yukti can ascertain the logic of procedures for the constitution of solid knowledge. systematised knowledge in any of intellectual One can scan a systematised body of knowledge using the prescriptions of tantra-yukti and gauge domains (CS.Si. 12.47). The sahitā-s of Caraka its intellectual depth, authenticity and and Suśruta have the following postulates of applicability. Sahitā-s of Āyurveda represent the tantra-yukti as their basic constituents:

Sl Caraka Si.41 Suśruta.Utta.65 Meaning 1 Adhikaraa Adhikaraa Subject matter, with authority, 2 Yoga Yoga Union, unification 3 Hētvartha Hētvartha Extension of argument, logical argument 4 Padārtha Padārtha Word meaning / about knowable objects 5 Pradēsa Pradēsa Partial enunciation 6 Uddēśa Uddēśa Concise statement, objective 7 Nirdēśa Nirdēśa Amplification 8 VākyaśēaVākyaśēa Supply of missing parts of words or sentences, remainder 9 Prayojana Prayojana Objectives 52 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

10 Upadēśa Upadēśa Authoritative instructions, the scope 11 Apadēśa Apadēśa Reasoning a statement 12 Atidēśa Atidēśa Indication, extrapolation 13 Arthāpatti Arthāpatti Implication, inference 14 Niraya Niraya Decision, conclusion 15 Prasanga Prasanga Restatement, case illustration 16 Ekānta Ekānta Categorical statement, the sole meaning 17 Anekānta Anekānta Compromising statement, multimeaning 18 Apavarga Apavarja Exceptions 19 Viparyaya Viparyaya Reconfirmation with other opposite statement, the contradiction 20 PūrvapakaPūrvapaka Amplification of earlier statement, earlier premises 21 Vidhāna Vidhāna Correct interpretation, methodology 22 Anumata Anumata Confession, consent 23 Vyākhyāna Vyākhyāna Explanation, commentary 24 Saśaya Saśaya Doubt 25 Atīta-avēkaa Atikranta-vēkaa Retrospective statement, back reference 26 Anāgata- atīta- Anāgata- atīta- reference, foretelling avēkaaavēkaa 27 Sva-samjña Sva-sanga Use of technical terms, terminology 28 Ūhya ūhya Deduction 29 Samuccaya Samuccaya Specification, group statement 30 Nidarśana Nidarśana Illustration 31 Nirvācana Nirvācana Citation of analogy, definition 32 Samyoga Niyoga Injunction, commandment 33 Vikalpa Vikalpa Option, alternative 34 Pratyutsāra - Rebuttal 35 Uddhāra - Reaffirmation 36 Sambhava - Possibility

Caraka emphasizes that all biological kāraa, the colour of cloth is Asamavāyi kāraa, events are based on cause and effect relationships. and the process of the person or tools for making the cloth is Nimitta kāraa. The cause and effect “vikārah prakrtiścaiva dvayam sarvam samāsatah. is explained in detail in Āyurveda. An external factor or an infection is always considered as a tad hetu-vaśagam hetor abhāvannanu Nimitta kāraa. According to Tarka-sagraha of vartate.” Annambhaa (1876) on establishing causation, There are three types of causes: 1) explains that “vyāptiviśia pakadharmatā Samavāyi kāraa, 2) Asamavāyi kāraa 3) Nimitta jnānam parāmarśah” this Pakadharmata is used kāraa. For example, the relationship with doa to establish cause and effect relationship. and health or diseases is Samavāyi kāraa. The relationship with excessive eating which increases 6. VALIDATION STRATEGIES kapha is Asamavāyi kāraa, the relationship with Sahitā-s and other authentic texts of other factors increasing the kapha while taking have advocated evidence-based the food is Nimitta kāraa. In another context, the approach to the creation of theoretical knowledge threads that constitute a cloth are samavāyi and clinical practice. Therefore, strategies of KNOWLEDGE GENERATION IN ĀYURVEDA: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 53 experiential validation are central to Āyurvedic repository of medicinal plants and it is estimated knowledge and practice. Proof of knowledge around 6500 species (FRLHT database) and accepted by Āyurvedic ācārya-s is four-fold viz., Āyurveda has incorporated more than 1500 pramāa viz., pratyaka (direct sensory species. This nomenclature information was been perception), anumāna (inference), yukti further updated with additional synonyms given (experimental reasoning) and āptopadēśa to plant names by the authors of lexicons or (testimony of the Veda or the final knowledge). nighau-s in later periods. The source of such The pattern of classification and recognition of knowledge was obtained through (CS.Sū.1:120) the proof of knowledge followed by various goatherds, cowherds, and other foresters who are schools of thought as seen in the Āyurvedic texts acquainted with names and forms of medicinal is shown below: plants. The ethno-medical information of medicinal plants is being updated to Table 2. Proof of Knowledge followed by Various School pharmacopoeia based on “rasa-pañcaka” studies of Thoughts carried out by experts. The term rasa-pañcaka Schools No. of Pramāna-s stands for the pharmacological action of drugs of thought Pramānas accepted based on Āyurvedic parameters like Rasa, gua, Cārvaka 1 P vīrya, vipāka and prabhāva. These parameters are Vaiśēika 2 P,A sufficient for an Āyurvedist to understand the Bauddha 2 P,A action and efficacy of medicinal plants at an in Sākhya 3 P,A,S vivo level. Nyāya 4 P,A,S,U Caraka (Ayu) 4 P,A,S,Y Great importance is attached to the Suśurta (Ayu) 4 P,A,S,U Āyurvedic tradition of assessing the safety and Prabhākara efficacy of a medicinal substance in a realistic Mīmāmsa 5 P,A,S,U,Ar manner: “mriyante mākikāh prāśya kāka kāma Bhāā svaro bhavet”. The Aānga Hdayam Mimāmsā 6 P,A,S,U,Ar,Ab recommends testing of the toxicity by Vēdāntā 6 P,A,S,U,Ar,Ab administering substances to animals. Caraka states Paurānika 8 P,A,S,U,Ar,Ab,Sa,Ai that even if the identity of a drug is known and if Tāntrika 9 P,A,S,U,Ar,Ab,Sa,Ai,C it is used improperly it may cause ill effects: P-Pratyaka (direct), A-Anumāna (inference), S-Śābda / “prayōgo śamayēt vyādhim yō anyam āptopadesa (testimony), U-Upamāna (comparison), Y-Yukti anyam udīrayēt, (empirical), Ar-Arthāpatti (implied knowledge), Ab-Abhāva (absence), Sa-Sambhava (incidence), Ai-Aitihya (event), C- nāsau viśuddha śuddhastu śamayēt yō na Chea (presentations) kōpayēt”. CS.Ni.8:23 Sahitā-s of both Caraka and Suśruta A typical definition of a good drug or advocate evidence-based approach to clinical treatment is not that which achieves its intended practice. Caraka warns that the drug whose name, target by curing the disease but one that does not form and properties are not known or the drug cause unintended side effects by creating another which though known is not properly used will disease (CS.Ni.8:23). A safe intervention depends cause ill effects: (CS.Sū.1:125). He also states that, upon various factors like condition of the patient, the proper nomenclature, identification and stage of the disease or prognosis of the diseases knowledge on its application are the prerequisites and other psychosomatic factors during and after for updating the pharmacopoeia. India has a rich at the time of intervention. 54 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

Āyurvedic domain of knowledge has siddhānta (the theory that is not there in any other potentials to contribute towards 1) Prakti: genetic śāstrā-s) exemplified by the theory of the origins classification of human beings and personalized of six tastes (a-rasa), unique to Āyurvedic medicine for better health and well-being 2) works, which explains dhātu pariāma Disease diagnosis and treatment methods which (transformation of body tissues in a sequential include a-kriyakā (six stages of diseases order) in Āyurvedic texts; 3) Adhikaraa progression) 3) Rasāyana interventions for siddhānta (the theory that seeks relation to other managing chronic diseases and rejuvenation 4) theories proved elsewhere) exemplified by the Role of metals and mineral based medicine theory of karma, which appears in Āyurveda in (nanoparticle and metallo-proteins) in relation to the definition of purua (man), jani management of health and diseases 5) Surgical (birth) and mtyu (death); 4) Abhyupagama interventions and allied approaches 6) siddhānta (unproven and not fully tested theories) Pañcakarma (five purificatory measures) for exemplified by the theory of topics unknown and health and diseases 7) Knowledge of chrono- undecided; biology which links up with systemic functions and environmental, geographical and seasonal 8. HOLISTIC KNOWLEDGE changes. 8) Customized drug design 9) Āyurvedic Ācāryā-s of Āyurveda consider the world nutraceuticals for healthy life. as their great teacher. Suśruta insists on the

– importance of a philosophical approach and a 7. THEORY (SIDDHANTA) comprehensive view of the phenomenal world that Caraka defines a siddhānta (theory) as consists of the inherent nature (svabhāva), the follows: supreme consciousness (īśvara), the time (kāla), siddhānta nāma ya parīkakair the accidental (yadcchā), the destiny (niyati), and bahuvidham parīkya / the transformation (pariāma) as the fundamentals of the phenomenal world (SS.1: 8). This implies hētubhiśca sādhitvā sthāpayatē niraya sa siddhānta // that mere analytical approach alone will not do to CS. Vi.8 comprehend nature. The knowledge of the whole cannot be acquired from the knowledge of its parts. The word siddhānta is a confirmed judgmental conclusion based on a hypothesis jñānāvayavēna ktsnē jñēyē tested using various ways and means with vijñānamutpadyatē….. sufficient results. This method is almost equal to ēvamavayavēna jñānasya krtsnē jñēyē that of hypothetico-deductive reasoning, which is jñānamabhimanyamānā pariskhalanti central to modern scientific knowledge CS.Vi.7.4 production. In Ayurveda no siddhānta is The knowledge of the whole of the considered complete and unchanging, which is knowable will not come about by knowing merely another basic attribute of scientific approach. a limb of it (CS.Vi.7.4). This also means that the There are four types of siddhānta-s mentioned in whole is more than the sum of its parts. This is traditional Indian texts of knowledge as listed true of any of organic wholes that have been below: 1) Sarvatantra siddhānta, (the theory that defined as systems, the behaviour of which is not is accepted by all śāstrā-s) as exemplified by the determined by that of their individual elements. theory of five fundamental elements The individual parts are themselves determined (pañcamahābhūta), accepted by all in connection by the intrinsic nature of the whole. There are with structure of a material; 2) Pratitantra many such examples in Āyurveda. It is more KNOWLEDGE GENERATION IN ĀYURVEDA: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 55 evident while explaining the genetic makeup of a different schools of Indian thoughts especially the person (prakti), action of compound formulations Nyāya, Sāmkhya and Vaiśeika systems. This (yoga) and administration of medicine. Caraka, eclectic approach is integrated by the strong the legendary physician explains “yōgamāsām tu conviction about the ultimate ontological unity yō vidyāt dēśakālōpapāditam, puruam puruam between the knower and the known or the subject vīkya sa jñēyō bhiaguttamai:” He was very and the object. insightful about administering medicines in accordance with their region and the kāla and BIBLIOGRAPHY prakti of each person individually. These imply Balasubramanian, A.V. Concept of Health and Disease, the consideration of the habitation and the mode LSPSS-CIKS, Chennai, 1993. of procurement of medicinal plants. Caraka says Caraka Sahitā of Caraka, Shree Gulabkunverba Ayurvedic that the action of a compound formulation varies Society, Jamnagar, 1949. from the action of its ingredients, i.e., the activity of a whole cannot be fully explained in terms of Caraka Sahitā of Caraka, Edited and translated by P.V. Sharma, Vol I,II, Chaukambha Orientalia Publications, the activity of the ingredients. The argument is Varanasi, 1998. that one should examine the synergic effect of the substance as a whole for better understanding as Kannan, K.S. The Theoretical Foundations of Ayurveda (2014), IAIM-FRLHT, Foundation for Revitalisation made explicit in: “tada yuktē hi samudāyē of Local Health Traditions, Bangalore. 2011. samudāya prabhava tatvamēva upalabhya dravya vikāra tatvam avyavasyēt” (CS.Vi.3.12). Krishnamurthi, K.H. A Source-book of Indian Medicine, D.K. Publishers, New Delhi, 1991. Manohar, Ram. Evidence and Clinical Research for 9. CONCLUSION Ayurveda from India, European Journal of Integrative Holistic approach is fundamental to the Medicine, Vol. 2.4 (2010): 170-171. methodological aspects of the generation of Mishra, Y.C. Padārtha Vij–ana. Chaukhambha Ayurvedic knowledge. ‘Man as a whole’ is the Bhawan, Varanasi, 2005. approach of Āyurveda: “puruōyam Nagel, Ernest. The Structure of Science, Macmillan India, lōkasammitā:” It insists on the primacy of human New Delhi, 1979. relationship with the environment. There is need Radhakrishnan, S. The Principal , Harper for a unified theory of health and its investigation Collins publishers, India, New Delhi, 1994. premises: “ēā parīka nāsti anyathā sarvam parīkyatē (CS.Sū.11-26). This constitutes the Shankar, Darshan and Unnikrishnan, P.M. Challenging Indian Medical Heritage, CEE & Foundation books guiding principle of investigation about Ayurvedic Pvt. Ltd., 2004. knowledge. Its methodology of knowledge generation distinct for the primacy of empirical Suśruta Sahitā of Suśruta, Edited and translated by P.V. Sharma, 2001 (with English translation of text and knowledge (padārtha-j–āna), dialectical Dalhana’s commentary along with critical notes) Vol procedure (vādamārga), logical structure (tantra- I,II,III, Haridas Ayurveda series-9, Chaukambha yukti), and theory (siddhānta) is drawn from Visvabharati publications, Varanasi.