Legitimizing Ancient Wisdom
While Ayurveda has its strengths in prevention and cure of many ailments it must pass the test of scientific validation. — Dr. Jaya Kakkar
These are interesting but contentious times for asserting the ‘scientific’ basis of our ancient traditional knowledge systems. Patanjali Yogapeetha has set up a ‘vedic school board’ that will teach students the ‘original’ Manusmriti, Vedas, and Upanishads to promote ‘core values’. The Manusmriti is an ancient text on human affairs having codified laws; critics say it promoted caste system and inferiority of women in the society. However, the Yogapeeth says that the original text did not have these evils. Indeed these distortions took place around the seventh century. But where is the ‘original’ Manusmriti benefit of such distortions.
Bharatiya Shiksha Board (BSB) and other such boards, which have been recently granted equivalence by the government bringing them at par with other boards including the CBSE, have decided that these will teach modern subjects while integrating concepts from the Indian knowledge systems, say, for example Kautilya’s Arthashashtra. Vedas’ concept of gravitational law will be taught alongside Newton’s. Science, geometry, physics, economics and all other subjects will have blended learning, borrowing very liberally from the ancient texts. For example, Geometry has its origin in the Rig Vedas. The aim is to equip students with ancient heritage knowledge & wisdom and thereby make them take pride in India’s cultural journey.
While no sane person will dispute that we have a rich legacy of traditional knowledge in all fields, including polity, economics, mathematics, and even sciences, it is equally true that overtime facts and fables have intertwined. Hundreds of years of foreign domination did lead to side stepping of such ancient wisdom, which eventually got faded and erased from our memory and learning system. Moreover, many distortions creeped in overtime. For example, the Brahamnical system actively promoted caste system. What is needed is to weed out these infirmities on one hand and separate facts from fictions on the other. While the first imperative is value based and normative, certainly the criterion of applying scientific validity premise is practicable and must be enforced.
Recently the government has asked Patanjali Ayurveda to refrain from advertising certain products that claim to cure blood pressure, diabetes, high lipid levels, etc.
Notably, these advertisements were banned, not the products themselves, since the advertisements violate the country’s drug laws which prohibit such advertisements promoting remedies for certain categories of health disorders, namely the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954. It is noteworthy that these Acts deal with Allopathy and don’t think there is any cure for such ailments, in Allopathy – and in other systems of medicine. More importantly, the company has decided to withdraw the advertisements and not contested the government order. But the company ‘claims’ that these are evidence based medicines. But it is not clear whether this evidence has been shared with appropriate authorities.
Around the same time All India Institute of Medical Sciences has found that anti-diabetic ayurvedic drug BGR-34 is effective in cutting down obesity, along with improving metabolism mechanisms of the patient afflicted with the chronic disease. This drug, incidentally, has been developed by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research.
Infact herbal based ayurvedic medicines are gaining increasing acceptance, especially in post covid times, among these who were more keen on taking preventive health measures. The government too supports these time tested products derived from medicinal plants as being immunity boosters. But are these products preventive or curative? Largely, their use is faith based rather than evidence based, since not much research has been undertaken which can pass the rigours of modern day scientific scrutiny.
An another example, in the domain of contentious issues, the NDA government has decided to permit practitioners of alternative medicines to perform surgeries and prescribe allopathic medicines. This has been challenged in the Supreme Court. As per recent amendments to relevant acts, the PG scholars of the shalya and shalakya streams have been authorized to independently perform the surgeries or procedures. The objections emanate from two factors, one legitimate and the other one not entirely justified. The legitimate question is whether the practitioners of alternative medicines are adequately qualified to offer modern medical treatment, including medicines and surgeries, without appropriate qualification or experience. The other dimension of the objection, however, is that many acts were passed recognizing only Allopathy system of treatment and not accepting the wisdom inherent in traditional systems of AYUSH. Moreover, it is a question of fighting the turf war by the practioners of allopathy. An answer can be found only when the traditional systems pass the test of legitimacy of practice. No doubt these systems are dotted with outdated theories, implausible conjectures, and unestablished beliefs. The ancient texts must be sieved through dispassionately to distil only the knowledge which is scientifically established.
While the National Medical Commission has proposed that modern medicine be integrated with the traditional medicines to provide a more holistic and effective treatment, we must not forget that ultimately it is the welfare of the users that is the key issue; at no cost it can be compromised. No doubt ayurveda has been in existence since several millennia and serves millions, its widespread adoption merely on the basis of faith is fraught with danger. Many scientific facts for example do not reconcile with ancient ‘received wisdom’, which was often based on speculation. For example, in ancient texts kidney played no role in filtration of waste toxins from the body. Where traditional medicines have failed is the non adoption of important findings from modern research. These practitioners more or less solely rely on ancient theories, some part of which may not even hold true, while remaining resistant to later day scientific developments. These tests have infact become dogmatic scriptures since they admit of no possibilities of scientific revisions; no reforms, even though long overdue, are tenable since the texts have ‘timeless relevance’!
This in face of the fact that enlightened ayurvedic practitioners have themselves admitted that the anatomy and physiology contained in these classics may not pass the test of scientific scrutiny. The ‘modern’ preachers and practitioners, and that includes the ayurvedic educational institutions are trying to, at times, provide validity to ancient concepts by super imposing current scientific findings upon them. This is not merely travesty of facts; more ominously this is dangerous since it leads to wrong diagnosis and treatment. Let’s admit the traditional wisdom, valuable for its observations but not for speculation, needs a thorough scrutiny before being integrated into the mainstream of scientific knowledge.
Share This
