180 chapter
Th is comparison between allopathic and ayurvedic treatments should be
qualifi ed with the observation that the distinction between more abrasive ther-
apies in allopathy and gentler therapies in ayurveda was not always clear. In
the past, treatments were used in ayurveda that were more analogous to ECT.
Dr. Rajendra Varma of the Vaidyarathnam Oushadhasala ayurvedic clinic
explained that “in the olden days,” “instead of this psychiatric treatment—shock
treatment—we used to take the patient to the execution room and we would
bring in an elephant and ask the elephant just to show its leg as if to squeeze
the head, to press the head of the patient.” Th e elephant would raise its leg
over the patient’s head as if to crush it. Th e patient would become frightened,
and then the elephant’s leg would be removed. Alternately, Dr. Varma said
uniformed men would drag the patient before the king who would accuse the
patient of a crime and demand that he be executed. Th e trial would then be
revealed as a hoax. Th ese procedures are also described, along with suggestions
to beat patients with certain kinds of mental illnesses, in the classical ayurvedic
medical text Caraka Samhita (1998: 436–437 [Cikitsāsthānam, Ch. IX, Verses
79–84]).
Francis Zimmermann’s (1992) analysis of what he refers to as the contem-
porary “fl ower power of ayurveda” claims that abrasive therapies have been
discontinued in modern ayurvedic practice as ayurveda redefi nes an identity
for itself in relation to allopathic medicine. Classical ayurveda, Zimmermann
explains, featured some violent and cathartic procedures, but in the context of
competition with allopathy—recognizing that allopathy has essentially cor-
nered the market on invasive procedures such as surgery—ayurveda empha-
sizes the balanced, gentle and nonviolent aspects of its practice.
Addressing the government of Travancore (the colonial princely state that
later formed the southern portion of Kerala) in 1926 to contest the fact that
the state’s Ayurveda Department was receiving much less funding than the
Allopathy Department, T. K. Velupillai argued that: “Although, Allopathic
medicines are powerful and useful, Ayurvedic medicines are found to be keep-
ing with our mode of life (sic).” Th e meaning of this is a little cryptic, but
later he added “Europeans live on beef, ham, apricots and champagne. Th ey
have the habit of smoking cigarette. But we live on rice, tapioca [a starchy
root vegetable], pickles and perhaps a little milk or buttermilk. We have the
habit of taking oil bath (sic)” (quoted in Nair 2001: 228). Th is may have been
part of an eff ort to highlight the “gentle” nature of ayurveda in the face of
the growing infl uence of allopathy, which at the time had strong support
from the colonial and princely governments, Christian missionaries and the
Rockefeller Foundation. In his association between allopathic medicine and
European culinary habits Velupillai mentions beef and alcohol which, like