Leads of review of literature in Ayurveda Samhita

S Surya; Anand Katti

Leads of review of literature in Ayurveda Samhita

Surya S.^1*, Katti A.²

DOI:

^1* S Surya, Post Graduate Scholar, Department of PG studies in Panchakarma, Govt. Ayurveda Medical College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.

² Anand Katti, Associate Professor, Department of Samhita Siddhanta, Govt. Ayurveda Medical College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.

Review of literature is an essential step of doing any good research. Review of literature gets connected to each step of research starting from selection of research problem, material methods, statistics to be employed so on and so forth. Research methods is developed as a systematic science recently and ayurveda samhita offer very limited information about researh methods. This article tries to find the leads suggesting the conduct of review of literature in ayurveda samhita. Tantrayukti like Prasanga, Ateetavekshana, Prasanga, Samucchaya, Purvapaksha serve as guiding lamps for review of literature

Keywords: Prasanga, Ateetavekshana, Samucchaya, Purvapaksha Akshepa, Vadamaryada, Uncha Sila Nyaya

Corresponding Author	How to Cite this Article	To Browse
S Surya, Post Graduate Scholar, Department of PG studies in Panchakarma, Govt. Ayurveda Medical College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. Email:	S Surya, Anand Katti, Leads of review of literature in Ayurveda Samhita. J Ayu Int Med Sci. 2022;7(2):90-94. Available From https://jaims.in/jaims/article/view/1670

Introduction

A Review of Literature or Literature review is a comprehensive summary of previous research on a topic. The review of literature surveys scholarly articles, books, and other sources relevant to a particular area of research. A review of literature creates a "landscape" for the reader, giving a full understanding of the developments in the field. This landscape informs the reader that the author has indeed assimilated all (or a vast majority of) previous, significant works in the field into research. The word review of literature is gained importance when the research methods and research process started flourishing in academics. However even though research methods are not entirely described in Ayurveda Samhitas, lead references for various aspects of research methods can be traced in Samhitas. So also, for review of Literature, In the context of Ayurveda, Literary research, is accepted as a type of research also relies on robust review of literature.

Acharyas of Ayurveda has undoubtedly explained methods of research but in ciphers. After having genuine research problem, a researcher, before beginning any research, must plan ahead for the same. The prior planning or preparation for any research comes up with its own scope and limitations. The leads of which can be obtained through Vadamaryada. Vadamaryada are the specific rules and regulations to be followed in Vada (debate). Vada i.e., debate is defined as Communicating with others, on a scientific platform with a purpose of defeating the opponent. Prior planning of research will be in the form of research protocol or synopsis which is also a communication in written form. Vadamaryada gives external and infernal structures for the research. This is followed by review and compilation.

Review of Literature and its Importance

A review of literature is a search and evaluation of the available literature in each subject or a chosen topic. The review of literature in any research related to Ayurveda, begins from Vedic literature where information is mostly found scattered. In later works like Charaka Samhitha, Sushrutha Samhitha, and Ashtanga Hridaya, the data is more systematically arranged and in more recent literature like Madhava Nidana, Sharangadhara Samhitha, and Chakradutta, the data is found to be

more structured and reflect contemporary developments in society, literature, and science. All the treatises in Ayurveda have been composed in Sutras and are not common and general in their presentation that they can are to be understood by various levels of intelligence. All these Granthas were revised and re-edited by later scholars. For example, ‘Agnivesha Tantra’ was redacted and boar a new name, ‘Charaka Samhita’ and was later supplemented by Drudhabala. Similarly, Sushrutha Samhitha was expounded by Divodasa, compiled by Sushrutha, supplemented by Nagarjuna, and retouched by Chandrata. Likewise, other Ayurveda Samhitas were also revised / re-edited. The last 17 chapters of Chikistasthana, the Siddhi and Kalpasthana were added to the Charaka Samhita by Drudhabala.

Vadamaryada: Debates and arguments then came to be recognized both as art of logical reasoning (Tarka Vidya) and science of causes (Hetu Shastra), following the path of a well-disciplined method of inquiry (Anvikshiki), testing scriptural knowledge by further scrutiny. Therefore, scholars belonging to various schools of philosophy were trained in Tarka Vidya: the art and skill of conducting impressive successful debates and disputes (Sambhasha or Vada Vidhi) in learned assemblies (Parishads).^[5] Their training modules included,

1. Methods of presenting arguments in a logically structured format

2. Ways to stoutly defend one's thesis by means of genuine criteria of knowledge (Pramana)

3. To attack the opponent’s thesis by means of indirect arguments (Tarka).

4. Estimating the strengths and weaknesses of arguments of either side.

5. Establishing one’s own points while setting aside those of the opponent.

As consumers of written texts, are often tempted to divide writing into two categories: argumentative and non-argumentative. According to this view, to be argumentative, writing must have the following qualities. It must defend a position in a debate between two or more opposing sides; it must be on a controversial topic; and the goal of such writing must be to prove the correctness of one point of view over another.

On the other hand, this view goes, non-argumentative texts include narratives, descriptions, technical reports, and so on. When deciding to which category a given piece of writing belongs, we sometimes look for familiar traits of argument, such as the presence of a thesis statement, of “factual” evidence, and so on.

Research writing is often categorized as “non-argumentative.” This happens because of the way in which we learn about research writing. Most of us do that through the traditional research report, the kind which focuses too much on information-gathering and note cards and not enough on constructing engaging and interesting points of view for real audiences. It is the gathering and compiling of information, and not doing something productive and interesting with this information, that become the primary goals of this writing exercise. Generic research papers are also often evaluated on the quantity and accuracy of external information that they gather, rather than on the persuasive impact they make and the interest they generate among readers.

Having written countless research reports, we begin to suspect that all research-based writing is non-argumentative. Even when explicitly asked to construct a thesis statement and support it through researched evidence, beginning writers are likely to pay more attention to such mechanics of research as finding the assigned number and kind of sources and documenting them correctly, than to constructing an argument capable of making an impact on the reader. Finally, it reveals the limits and scope of that research

The Charaka Samhita , a principal Ayurveda Text (dated around the second century), in its third part, called Vimanasthana, along with other topics like training of a physician, ethics of medical practice, pathology, diet and nourishment, taste of medicines, etc., also contains a discussion on the principles of debate.

The related doctrines are treated in Caraka Samhita^[6] under three heads, namely,

1. Karyabhinirvrtti, the aggregate of resources for the accomplishment of an action

2. Pariksa, the standard of examination, and

3. Sambhasha-Vidhi, or Vada-Vidhi, the method of debate.

For example, there is a discussion on the various resources that are to be examined to accomplish an action. These resources include Karana (the actor, or agent who accomplishes an action), Karya (the action), Karya-Phala (the effect), Desha (the place of the action), Kala (the time of the action), Pravrtti (the activity or exertion put forth for achieving the action), etc.

The second head, Pariksa, deals with the standard of examination. These standards are: Aptopadesa (reliable assertion); Pratyaksa (perception); Anumana (inference); Yukti (reasoning). The discussion under the third head is much more elaborate.

Tantrayukti ^[7]are important because of the following advantages:

शास्त्राधिगमः।(सुगृहीतं शास्त्रं रक्षति, दुर्गृहीतं क्षिणोति) (Ch.Si.12/48,49) Shastradhigama: proper understanding of Ayurveda. Because only proper understanding helps for maintenance of health and curing diseases. Improper knowledge may be harmful.
प्रबोधनम्- अम्बुजवनस्यार्कः। (Ch.Si.12/46, Su.U.65/7) Prabodhanam Ambujavanasyarka: Just like the lotus blooms, in sunlight, with Tantrayukti, the meaning of Ayurvedic texts is elaborated.
प्रकाशनम्- प्रदीपो वेश्मनो। (Ch.Si. 12/46, Su.U. 65/7) Prakashanam Pradeepo Veshmano: Just like a light removes darkness in the house, with Tantrayukti, meaning of difficult topics becomes lucid.
अनुक्तार्थज्ञानम्। (Su.U..65/6) Anuktartha Jnanartham: Tantrayukti enables to understand even the unsaid hidden meanings.
आशु अन्यशास्त्रप्रबोधनम्। (Ch.Si.12/47) Aashu Anyashatraprabodhanam: By knowing Tantrayukti, not only Ayurveda, but one becomes capable of understanding other allied sciences also.
स्ववाक्यसिद्ध्यर्थम्। (Su.U..65/5) Swavakya Siddhyartham: The meanings drawn with help of Tantrayukti, justify one’s statements in a scientific discourse.
असद्वादिवाक्यप्रतिषेधनम्।^[^8] (Su.U. 65/5) Asadvadi Vakya Patishedham: In a scientific discourse, statements of those who are misinterpreting texts, can be refuted with the help of Tantrayukti.

Below are the few Tantrayuktis that indicate review of literature.

Prasanga^[9]

It is a virtue by which allusion is made to things repeatedly described in another chapter in different context. Here it is necessary, to refer certain facts, for proper understanding of concepts at other places in other contexts. So, this is not mere repetition. E.g., As per Charak Samhita, only Sama Prakriti (balanced state of all three doshas) is Prakriti (natural), and Vatala (Vata dominant) etc. Prakriti (specific body constitution with predominance of one or two doshas) are termed as in fact Vikriti (imbalance, abnormality). Therefore, the treatment for them is described in seventh chapter of Sutra Sthana in (Cha.Su.7/41). This is restated in sixth chapter of Vimana Sthana (Cha.Vi.6/14-18) to discuss about treatment for Vatala etc. In clinical medicines, this is useful in linking previous events to present pathogenesis. In research, this is quoting the same reference again in different context. To quote anything it is essential to conduct thorough review of literature of the pertinent subject.

Ateetavekshana^[10]

It permits alluding to things described before. Certain concepts or information mentioned in the initial sections or chapters of the text, are to be applied in the next chapters or sections, for proper understanding. E.g., Concepts from all other sections described in prior sections, are to be applied in Chikitsa Sthana, while understanding the treatments. E.g., Specific types of Sweda (sudation) are indicated in treatment of Jwara. (Cha.Chi.3/269).

The types of Sweda are already mentioned in 14^th chapter of Sutra Sthana (Cha.Su.14/39-40). Since they are already described in Sutra Sthana, here it isn’t necessary to repeat the description, rather one can go to the previous reference. In clinical medicine and research, various previous experiences and evidence are referred for supporting statements. In some instances, the texts refer to the description of a given topic made earlier, such quotation of reference is known as 'Ateetavekshana'. Ateetavekshana serves a paramount role as it suggests conducting review of literature from the most ancient available sources to the recent published information.

Samucchaya

It means the grouping of two or more similar things together. In certain sentences, multiple words are used, while highlighting and emphasizing each word. This type of method is called as Samucchaya. E.g., The important assessment parameters of residual life span are enlisted in first chapter of Indriya Sthana. Here each word is written as Varnashcha, Svarashcha etc. By adding ‘Cha’, each word is specified. (Cha.In.1/3). This is to denote that each of these topics are equally important and form a group. In clinical medicine, groups of similar symptoms will lead to diagnosis of a specific disease.

In case of review of literature all the collected refences are to be read, understood, categorized, and presented.

Purvapaksha or Akshepa^[11]

This is the objection raised on a statement. e.g., at different places in Samhita, some objections are raised and then the topic is discussed further in details. The raised objection with proper justification is Purvapaksha. In sixth chapter of Sharira Sthana, the query, if Atma (the soul) is said to be devoid of actions, then how at the same time it is considered as responsible for all the actions? Such questions are asked to initiate a debate, which will ultimately help to understand the scientific truth.

In clinical medicine, the history of a patient is discussed with objections and justifications to reach final diagnosis and proper treatment protocol.

In research, the search begins with objection to existing theories, and it is discussed with review of earlier research done on the topic.

आक्षेपपूर्वकः प्रश्नः पूर्वपक्षः । यथा- कथं वातनिमित्ताश्चत्वारः प्रमेह असाध्या भवन्तीति || सु. उ/२५||

During a logical discourse (epistemology), raising a query in pro tempore (for the time being) along with an objection (ākṣepapūrvakaḥ praśnah) to beget clarity of the statement, falls under the purvapakṣaḥ yukti. Example - katham vatanimittäścatvāraḥ prameha (Why is that the Vata caused four types of Prameha) Asadhya Bhavantīti (is considered to be Asādhya).

And it is well known that questions like what, why, when, where, who, how, are very important for any topic and to answer them review of literature is to be conducted.

Uncha and Sila Nyaya^[12]

Dridhbala (4th century) - The final strata of the completion of the Charaka Samhita are the addition of the chapters missing from the Sareera Stana while the text redacted by Charaka. Thus, the missing 41 chapters (17 of the Chikitsa Sthana, 12 of the Kalpa Sthana and 12 of the Siddhi Sthana). The methodology used by Dridhbala is the selective and the collective methodology called the Unchha and Shila Vritti. The very same method of searching the literature and selecting only the relevant and essential information is the hallmark of review of literature.

Conclusion

The complete research methods including the statistics is available in abstract form. Research methods It will be noticed in Samhita if Samhita are read with that viewpoint. Leads for review of literature are also available in Samhita. Prasanga Tantrayukti, Samucchaya Tantrayukti, Ateetavekshana Tantrayukti, Purvapaksha Tantrayukti coupled with Aptopadesha hint the methods of conducting review of literature and are enough to say that Ayurveda Samhita mention about review of literature.

Reference

1. R C Goyal. Research Methodology of Health Professionals. New Delhi: JAYPEE Publications; 1st ed; 2013.

2. Sujata P Dhoke et al. Application of Tantrayukti for the better understanding of Ayurveda classics - a literary review. Global J Res Med Plants & Indigen Med. 2015,125–1344.

3. Agnivesha, Charaka, Dridhabala. Charaka Samhita, edited by Acharya Yadavji Trikamji, Siddhisthana chapter 1 2, verse 41-44. Varanasi; Chaukhamba Surabharati Prakashan. Reprinted 2011, p736-737.

4. Anonymous. Caraka Samhita. Gulabkunverba Ayurveda Society Publication, Jamnagar. 1949;12.

5. Suresh Babu. Comprehensive Research Methodology for Ayurvedic Scholars. Varanasi; Chaukhamba Orientalia. 1st edition, 2013, p24.

6. Literature review sources. [Internet]. 2016. [Cited on. 20/6/2016]. Available

from: http://research-methodology.net/research-methodology/literature-review%20sources/

7. Acharya Yadavji Trikamji. Sushruta Samhita, Uttaratantra, chapter 66, verse 3-40. Varanasi; Choukhamba Orientalia. Reprint edition, 2009, p815-819.

8. Venkatanathacarya. Kautaliya Arthasastra. Mysore University, Mysore. 4th edition, 1960.

9. Anonymous. Caraka Samhita. Gulabkunverba Ayurveda Society Publication, Jamnagar. 1949;12.

10. S Suresh Babu. Comprehensive Research Methodology for Ayurvedic Scholars. Varanasi; Chaukhamba Orientalia. 1st edition, 2013, p23.

11. Mhatre HB. Application of Tantrayukti in Samhita Adhyayanam [ M D Thesis]. Jamnagar: Gujarat Ayurved University. 1998.

12. Acharya Yadavji Trikamji. Sushruta Samhita, Uttaratantra. Varanasi; Choukhamba Orientalia. Reprint edition, 2009, p858 .

13. Nilamegha. Tantra Yuktivicara, ed. Shrinarayana Misra. Kerala Government Ayurvedic Publication. Series No. I Trivendram, 1976.

14. Ranjit Kumar. Research Methodology step-by-step guide for beginners. New Delhi: SAGE publications. 3rd edition, 2011.

Manuscript Received	Review Round 1	Review Round 2	Review Round 3	Accepted
2022-01-29	2022-01-31	2022-02-07	2022-02-14	2022-02-21
Conflict of Interest	Funding	Ethical Approval	Plagiarism X-checker	Note
Nil	Nil	Yes	16%

Review Article

Ayurveda Samhita

Journal of Ayurveda and Integrated Medical Sciences