Chapter 24: Ayurvedic Veterinary Medicine, by Robert J. Silver

A Review by Dr. C. Viswanathan*
 
 

Introduction

Attempting to understand another tradition is no easy job. On this ground, Dr. Robert J Silver deserves praise for his attempt at a summary of the "background, history and principles of Ayurvedic medicine." It is, therefore especially unfortunate that his understanding of the subject leaves much to be desired. The author's extensive dependence on second hand sources for his study rather than the classic treatises on Ayurveda probably explains the fact his account does not represent a true picture of the healing art of ancient physicians of India. I would like to point out a few instances where such misrepresentations are all too obvious.

History

The author describes a text named Ayurveda supposed to have been "written sometimes between 2500 and 600 BC" (P.451) where "the most detailed account of instructions and information to be used for treatment or prevention of diseases is found"(P.452). This text, if we are to believe the author, predates the Susruta Samhita and the Caraka Samhita.

This whole statement, to say the least, is a pathetic mistake. Indian tradition does not talk about a book called Ayurveda. Traditionally, three ancient source-books of Ayurveda are recognized in India. These are figuratively called the vriddha-trayi ("the three elder ones") or Brihat trayi (Great trio) and include Susruta Samhita, Caraka Samhita and Ashtanga-samgraha. [Of these, the third is "more in the nature of a medical manual prepared by a famous physician called Vagbhata, who undoubtedly depends on Caraka Samhita and Susruta Samhita"(Chattopadhyaya 1977)]

An account of the history of Christianity that presumes the existence of a book called "Christianity" prior to the New Testament may be a reasonable comparison!

Ayurvedic concepts of health and Disease

Those who prefer to brand ancient Indian medicine as some kind of a mystical entity generally pick up some convenient part of ancient literature, (not necessarily from Ayurvedic books), embellish it beyond recognition and then present their new concoction as a "uniquely Ayurvedic" concept. Many intelligent students of Ayurveda are often misled by such prejudiced presentations.

As an example of this deplorable state of affairs, see how the concept of Purusha is dealt with in this article. The author quotes two modern commentators and presents two different views on this topic as follows: (1) Lad (1995) describes Purusha as the male energy. It is without form or color and beyond all attributes." and (2) Svoboda and Lade (1995) ".consider Purusha as the Absolute Reality from which all evolves. In other words, Purusha is consciousness without any characteristic whatsoever, beyond time, space and causation, a single point that encompasses everything and cannot be perceived by mind or accurately described in human language."

Significantly, the present author seems to be either unaware of or has chosen to overlook the following passage from the very first chapter of Susruta Samhita: "In the present science (Ayurveda), the Purusha (self-conscious organic individual) is described as the resultant of the combination of the soul and the five primary material principles. All medical acts such as surgical operations, administration of medicinal remedies and application of alkaline substances, cauterization etc., are restricted to Purusha alone."

It is depressing to note how some modern proponents of Ayurveda misrepresent the world views of ancient Indian physicians. Ancient Indian physicians were convinced that the human body has nothing preternatural about it. Thus Caraka Samhita says : "Whatever concretely exists in the world, exists also in man; whatever concretely exists in man, exists also in nature. Such is the way in which intelligent persons want to view both."

Somehow, such naturalistic concepts do not seem to appeal to neo-ayurvedists who prefer mysticism as a basis for medicine. This trend does, perhaps, have antecedents in ancient Indian religion. As one ancient religious text states: "the gods are fond of the obscure; they detest direct knowledge"

Pulse Diagnosis

It is to be noted that the pulse diagnosis (Nadi-parikha) the author describes is not part of classical Ayurveda. ("Nadi-parikha and opium are not even mentioned in ancient Indian medical classics"- Kutumbiah 1969.) It was not known until at least as late as 9th century A.D. Linking the practice of Pulse diagnosis with the Classical Ayurveda of Caraka Samhita and Susruta Samhita is a gross mistake.

Conclusion

Dr. Robert J Silver's article is an unreliable source for anyone interested in Ayurvedic veterinary medicine. The medical tradition of ancient India certainly deserves a better treatment. Though this fact is not generally recognized in the west, veterinary medicine existed as a separate discipline in this country some twenty centuries ago. Aswa-Ayurveda (Horse Ayurveda) and Hasthi-Ayurveda (Elephant Ayurveda) are topics on which ancient treatises have at least partially survived to the present day. Any attempt to understand and evaluate genuine Ayurvedic views on treatment of animals will be an exercise in futility unless these treatises are studied in detail.
 

* Dr. C. Viswanathan: (Chathoth = family name, Viswanathan = first name)
Nationality - Indian
B.Sc Degree (Zoology) 1981
Entered medical college in 1982
M.B.B.S Degree 1988
D.Orth (2 year postgraduate diploma in Orthopedics)
In private practice (Orthopedic surgery) till early 1999
Presently works as Lecturer in Orthopedics in a government medical college.
Lives in the small town of Ottapalam in the state of Kerala in Southern India.