Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Investigates Narasiṃha’s philosophical reconstruction of health in Āyurveda, suggesting a positive definition of well-being.
A bstract Background: The historical evolution of Ayurveda witnessed a shift from foundational ontological roots toward clinical pragmatism, particularly with the rise of Rasaśāstra (Ayurvedic iatrochemistry). This transition fostered a reductionist view where health ( Ārogya ) was perceived merely as the absence of illness rather than a holistic state. Objective: This paper investigates Narasiṃha’s (7th–8th CE) commentary on Bhadanta Nāgārjuna’s Rasavaiśeṣika Sūtra , focusing on his philosophical reconstruction of the concept of health. Analysis: Narasiṃha rigorously rejects the definition of health as a passive negation of disease, arguing such a definition lacks a positive ontological status. Utilizing Sanskrit grammatical principles regarding the negative particle nañ , he redefines health as vipakṣa —a dynamic state antagonistic to disease. He further distinguishes between bhiṣakparipālita Svasthas (those guarded by physicians) and yādr̥cchika Svasthas (healthy by chance), positing that true Ayurvedic science pertains only to the former. Conclusion: By establishing health as a positive, active force rather than a void, Narasiṃha’s exegesis counters the era’s drug-centric drift. This interpretation restores the soteriological relevance of Ayurvedic practice, presenting health as a disciplined goal essential for the four aims of life ( puruṣārtha ).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sankaranarayana et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: