Dr. Azad’s clinic. Afternoon light filters through half-drawn blinds. Scattered notes from previous sessions cover the table. The students sit with open notebooks.
Kabir: Uncle, we read the lesson “Ten Pairs of Properties.” Does the Charaka Saṃhitā itself describe guṇas the way we read here—with bowls, stones, grains, oils and other tangible examples? It felt almost like a laboratory demonstration.
Dr. Azad: An important question. The classical text does not present the lesson in that concrete manner. What you read is a pedagogical reconstruction. The author has translated Charaka’s conceptual teaching into sensory terms such as heat, weight and texture so that modern readers can grasp the principles more directly. The approach is interpretive, but it remains faithful in intent.
Kabir: That makes sense. It certainly helped me visualize what each property means.
Aarav: And in the earlier chapter all padārthas were introduced along with a brief mention of forty-one guṇas. This chapter narrows the focus to twenty guṇas and further connects six of them to the therapeutic methods—the ṣaḍ-upakrama.
Rohan: From a therapeutic point of view, I think the other seven pairs merge seamlessly into these three pairs. Am I correct?
Dr. Azad: Correct. Charaka singles out these three pairs because they provide the operational core of therapy. All others can be merged into these three. For example, sthūla, ślakṣṇa, manda, picchila, mṛdu, and sthira can be generally grouped under bṛṃhaṇa; their opposites under langhana. And that is why Vagbhata classified all upakramas under only two categories: langhana and bṛṃhaṇa.
Rohan: So, when we apply langhana, we may be actually using laghu, rūkṣa, sūkṣma and khara properties to reduce guru, manda, picchila, mṛdu, and snigdha excesses?
Dr. Azad: Roughly, yes. Each upakrama represents a strategic use of guṇas to reverse excess or deficiency. The physician selects the combination according to doṣa-specific symptom-pattern, season, and patient strength.
Kabir: Charaka illustrates this using the example of obesity and overweight.
Dr. Azad: Yes. That is a good example. Simple one. Straight forward. When the body becomes heavy or sluggish through rich food and inactivity, we apply langhana (lightening therapy) through fasting, light food, and exercise. When tissues are dry and depleted, bṛṃhaṇa or snehana restore nourishment and lubrication.
Rohan: There are other examples as well: diarrhoea, for instance.
Dr. Azad: Yes, when cold and stiffness dominate, svedana warms and loosens. When excessive fluid loss or motion occurs, sthambhana restores stability. Every upakrama is a directed application of opposite guṇas.
Kabir: Uncle, the text says, “A stone is guru, cotton is laghu.” But in the next example, “meat is guru, green gram is laghu.” In the first case, it is about weight. In the second, about digestion. Aren’t they different?
Dr. Azad: Good observation. The comparison of stone and cotton is only a metaphor to illustrate contrast. Guru and laghu are not physical weights. They are qualitative principles. When Charaka says meat is guru, he refers to how the body processes it and what effects does it have, not to its density or mass.
Kabir: In that case, could we treat guru and laghu as a working hypotheses rather than fact? Can they lead to testable predictions?
Dr. Azad: A valid point. Let us restate them as propositions open to testing rather than dogma. We might begin with these working hypotheses:
H₁: Substances described as guru delay gastric emptying and prolong satiety relative to laghu foods of equal caloric value.
H₂: Guru foods correlate with higher lipid and protein density, lower fiber content, and greater post-prandial insulin and leptin response.
H₃: Laghu foods produce faster glucose utilization, shorter digestion time, and transient sympathetic arousal.
H₄: Chronic predominance of guru intake increases body mass and induces parasympathetic dominance.
H₅: Chronic laghu intake increases catabolic rate and sympathetic tone.
H₆: The cognitive state following guru intake shows reduced cortical arousal; laghu intake shows increased alertness and reactivity.
Aarav: Then guṇa becomes a predictive variable?
Dr. Azad: Exactly. Each hypothesis could be tested through measurable parameters such as gastric motility scans, caloric density assays, hormonal profiling, or EEG patterns. Ayurveda gives the qualitative expectation; physiology supplies the quantitative test.
Rohan: Could we extend that logic to other pairs like snigdha–rūkṣa or uṣṇa–śīta?
Dr. Azad: Certainly. Snigdha could be linked with lipid-mediated lubrication and parasympathetic dominance; rūkṣa with dehydration and sympathetic excitation. Uṣṇa might correlate with thermogenic compounds that raise metabolic rate, while śīta might correspond to cooling agents that reduce it. Each pair can be reformulated as a set of measurable hypotheses.
Kabir: So guru and laghu are not speculative notions but empirical patterns awaiting testing.
Dr. Azad: That is a fair interpretation. They describe what we feel and observe before we could measure it. Now, with modern methods, those same descriptions can be quantified. Ayurveda offers the grammar; science provides the metrics.
(He pauses, allowing the students to note the hypotheses before returning to the wider discussion.)
Aarav: The text says even activities can have guṇa. That looks a bit imaginative.
Dr. Azad: Well, it suggests that excessive sleep and physical inactivity lead to guru, manda, and snigdha excess. Understanding guṇas means discerning both condition and correction.
Kabir: Does the Charaka Saṃhitā explicitly attribute the effect of gurvādiguṇa on the mental plane?
Dr. Azad: Yes, in the context of prakṛti, Charaka does that. For instance, features such as talkativeness, restlessness, quick learning and short memory in Vāta-prakṛti are linked with laghu, cala, and śighra qualities, whereas calmness, steadiness, and lethargy in Kapha-prakṛti reflect guru and manda. This shows that the same guṇas that shape bodily tendencies also manifest as cognitive and behavioural patterns.
Aarav: Then guṇas are more than sensory qualities?
Dr. Azad: Indeed. Charaka says this clearly. In Ayurveda, guṇas are categories, not just attributes. They function as explanatory principles of doṣa on one side and as diagnostic indicators on the other. They are postulated in one direction—as inherent tendencies of doṣa and other kinds of dravya—and inferred in the opposite direction from symptoms.
Kabir: Could you please elaborate this a bit?
Dr. Azad: When the text says that Pitta is uṣṇa and tīkṣṇa, that is a theoretical postulate. But when a patient shows warmth, burning, and sharp appetite, we infer uṣṇa and tīkṣṇa as active guṇas and identify Pitta as the doṣa involved. The movement of reasoning is bidirectional.
Rohan: From principle to manifestation and from manifestation back to principle?
Dr. Azad: Exactly. They form the diagnostic bridge. The physician recognizes configurations of guṇa in bodily and mental states and then employs upakrama to restore balance.
Kabir: Is this approach precise enough to diagnose and treat all diseases?
Dr. Azad: An important question. No, guṇas alone are not sufficient. They serve as a heuristic tools for reasoning, not as a complete system of diagnosis.
Aarav: Elaboration needed, please!
Dr. Azad: For instance, obesity may result from hypothyroidism. If one relies only on qualitative assessment, it may appear as simple over-nutrition and be treated by langhana. That would miss the endocrine cause. Similarly, a diabetic or a patient with hyperthyroidism may appear lean, thin, and dry, suggesting Vāta excess, yet nourishment will not help—they lose weight despite good food intake.
Aarav: So, analytical judgment is essential.
Dr. Azad: Yes, one must integrate observation through guṇa with pathophysiological understanding through modern medicine. Ayurveda provides the grammar of reasoning; current science supplies the instruments of measurement.
Kabir: Interesting! Another example, please.
Dr. Azad: A patient with headache may present with symptoms of Vāta, Pitta, or Kapha-related śiraśūla. Without deeper investigation, one might miss hyperaldosteronism-induced hypertension and misapply tridoṣa reasoning. Thus, while guṇa-based analysis offers a powerful qualitative framework, it requires inputs from science for diagnostic accuracy.
Kabir: That makes sense.
Aarav: In therapy? Are they adequate?
Dr. Azad: No. Ayurveda employs additional determinants such as rasa (taste), vīrya (potency), vipāka (post-digestive effect), and prabhāva (specific action) to refine therapeutic judgment and explain effects of the drugs that guṇas alone cannot account for. But this scheme too is not enough in present times.
Kabir: So, this is not exhaustive. It provides the framework for reasoning, not the entire range of explanation.
Dr. Azad: Yes. Caraka’s system connects observation with action. Diagnosis starts by locating imbalance of guṇas. Therapy seeks to restore equilibrium by opposites. The six upakramas operationalize the twenty guṇas in care.
Kabir: So a careful physician pairs guṇa– and doṣa-based diagnosis with biomedical investigation. The guṇa–upakrama logic guides perception. Modern clinical science sharpens it.
Dr. Azad: Yes. Germ theory was unknown to Charaka. Yet classical texts did describe contagion and epidemics as aupasargika and janapadodhvaṃsa. Today precision demands pathogen identification in cases like tuberculosis through lab work. One cannot rely on doṣa and guṇa alone.
(The students note silently. A page turns; pens pause.)
Dr. Azad: The ancient text gives the principle; the modern version gives the picture. Both show that health and illness are shifts in properties, and treatment means restoring balance. Guṇa shows the state, upakrama gives the method, and clear judgment unites them in practice.
Kabir: Do you mean the modern science follows a similar principle too?
Dr. Azad: Yes. The logic is parallel. Modern medicine approaches this through the concept of homeostasis.
Kabir: That is interesting. Can you give one example?
Dr. Azad: Iron deficiency is corrected by iron supplementation, hypothyroidism by thyroxine, and diabetes by insulin. Each therapy restores what is deficient. Ayurveda follows the same reasoning through qualities rather than molecules: what is lost is replenished, what is excessive is reduced, and balance is the goal.
Kabir: But in Ayurveda opposites are required to be balanced in health too, right?
Dr. Azad: It is true even in modern medicine. The heart rate is governed by opposites: sympathetic nervous system increases it, and parasympathetic nervous system decreases. A balance between the two is essential! Similarly, you name any physiological parameter, and you have opposites governing it.
Kabir: Does modern medicine use this principle in treatment, other than deficiency disorders?
Dr. Azad: Yes. Beta blockers reduce sympathetic tone, and adrenaline increases it. It is always about striking the balance!
Kabir: Thanks a lot, Azad uncle! Today we had an insightful discussion! We will get back after reading another chapter!
Dr. Azad: Perfect! Even I am learning while discussing all this!
Aarav, Rohan, and Kabir leave. On the way back, they keep discussing what Dr. Azad said at the end. Both sciences, they agree, rest on the same principle: restoring equilibrium. Whether expressed through guṇas or hormones, the physician’s task remains the same—to perceive the imbalance accurately and to apply judgment with precision.
#####
Leave a Reply