[Reader-list] Ayurveda- 'home to factory'

[harilal madhavan]

M S HARILAL/ SARAI INDEPENDENT FELLOW 2007/ SECOND POSTING/APRIL 6TH/
AYURVEDA- HOME TO FACTORY

In the first posting, I have given an overview of my proposal to Sarai.

In the current posting, I will very briefly stating the periodization
of production relations from the literature work on early
manufacturing aspects of Ayurvedic sector in India and adding a note
on the types of Ayurvedic medicine and product manufacturers. Period
of concern here is 1830s onwards, since this is the period where the
process for initial efforts for institutionalization kick- started.

PERIODIZING THE EARLY PRODUCTION RELATIONS IN AYURVEDA: From the
analysis of structure of production and the elements of transformation
in production relations, the period of early transformation can
perhaps be divided into three breaks, not in strict sense of the term
but for convenience of analysis and it may not provide linearity in
classification, but more of parallel existence.

(1) UNTIL 1830S – SERVICE DOMINATED PRODUCTION: The period before and
including the 1830s was dominated by home based system, in which the
medicine was never considered as a good to be sold in the market and
the use value of the same has been relevant than the exchange value.
In short, there were three types of relations: one, distribution of
the service and medicine without any remuneration, two; no
remuneration for the service that physician render, but only a small
price of the medicine and thirdly and finally the home-based
production and distribution of the medicines and service exactly at
the price equal to cost of production. The inefficiency of the modern
system to cater to the health care needs of a large number of villages
helped the indigenous systems to remain significant through out the
period. But the period was stagnant in a way for traditional medicine
because of several reasons like the lack of institutional efforts,
adverse policies from the state, self preparation of the medicines by
the patients, lack of professionally qualified physicians etc.

(2) FROM 1830S TO 1880S- PERIOD OF PETTY COMMODITY PRODUCTION: A
number of dispensaries, which sold medicines at a lower price compared
to allopathy, were started and the state policy in this period
remained hostile to the indigenous system. Though large scale
production was still away from its inception, some efforts at regional
village levels are visible in the form of home outlets and temple
outlets . The ashtavaidyas  in Kerala has opened Oushadhasalas
(hospitals which supplies medicines) in various parts of the state.
E.T.M Oushadhasala is one of the examples . Especially different
dispensaries or units, which provide Vishachikitsa (ailment for
poison, a preliminary form of toxicology) were common at that time.
Most of the units started this period, were serving to the domestic
demand. This was a period of drug substitution efforts too. During
these periods, the protagonists of indigenous medicine, for instance,
funded the Kavirajas of Bengal to manufacture and sell indigenous
drugs, which made them wealthy and gave impetus to start the mass
production. This was enhanced by the increasing professionalisation in
modern medicine and generated an immediate need within the ayurvedic
community to catch up in professionalism and mass production. This
period might be named as the period of proto industrialization,
because the efforts for production at least to cater the domestic
demand were active at least in some part of nation side.

(3) FROM 1880S TO 1920- PERIOD OF SHIFT FROM SERVICE TO INDUSTRY: This
is the period in which capital entered into the production of
ayurvedic and other Indian medicinal formularies. As mentioned
earlier, mass scale production had been recognized as a potent way of
revitalizing  the tradition from sulky withdrawal. This had been
initiated in both the northern and southern parts of India. The
investment made for this purpose was purely voluntary in nature. This
development occurred due to many reasons: increasing domestic demand
due to the tensions created by First World War, nationalist
initiatives of Swadeshi in the beginnings of 20th century and realized
inefficiency of the modern medicine to reach out to the hands of all.
The supply constraints during this time made many to think about a
centralized production. This did not mean that this mass scale
production completely replaced the former mode of production. But on
the other hand, the household production and distribution remained in
most of the villages. But one visible result is that the indigenous
physicians started buying their medicines from these large producing
companies, and the advertisements made by these factories started
appearing in many Ayurvedic journals very frequently at that time.
Thus a dual market, one to cater the local demands completely, the
other, modernized large scale production to cater the national and
international demand has been formed in the beginning of the 20th
century. But even these mass manufacturers mainly produced traditional
ayurvedic combinations suggested in the accepted texts of ayurveda.
The only patent drug, which introduced in the beginning of the 20th
century, was Dabur's Pudin Hara. A conversion from a service oriented
production to an industrial oriented production had its beginning
during the same period.

TYPES OF MANUFACTURERS IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO - SELECTION FOR CASE ANALYSIS

In the current scenario, from 1920s the growth of Ayurvedic industry,
especially of the major vendors is mainly in three different, but
mutually complementing, directions:

1.	The pure classical traditions as followed by Arya Vaidya Sala
Kottakkal (AVS), Arya Vaidya pharmacy, Coimbatore, which revolve
around a physician and his/ her prescription. The growth of this
sector is very slow but steady.
2.	The growth pattern using classical as well as patent and
proprietary medicines (PP) and OTC (Over the Counter) products.
Probably Dabur is the best example. Their classical side is rather
slow in growth and expansion where as their PP products are popular.
3.	The growth pattern of PP and OTC alone with a focus on the modern
medicine practitioners as well as new ayurvedic generation physicians.
Himalaya Drug Company makes such preparations and perhaps its fast
growth in the last few decades is an indicative of this trend.

My analysis for the study, will form one firm from the first and third
category in the organized sector. Unorganized sector will include a
few traditional Vaidyas located in Kerala.

------------------------------------------
some notes on the text
----------------------------
  1. Temple was the centre of all beliefs and the knowledge that
controlled the social life in south India, especially in Kerala during
these periods. Christian and Muslim centres of worship later copied
this tradition of Hindu temples (Varier, 2005). In other words, temple
outlet formed through a historical process, when the Ashtavaidyas
showed some willingness to teach their close dependents and who
belonged to the Ambalavasi (those like Variers who served in temples)
community, especially under Guru Kula system and later outlets might
have formed from this tradition.
 2. The ashtavaidya families functioned as traditional institutions
for studying, teaching, practicing, popularizing and extending
services in ayurveda (Varier, 2005).
 3.  E.T. Narayanan Mooss established this centre, where the medicines
were prepared and given. ETN Mooss was a member of Thaikkattussery
ashtavaidya family, situated in Ollur, Thrissur.
 4. David Kopf (1970) uses the word revitalization as a practical
response from Ajmal khan and Varier that is revitalizing those parts
of tradition that is salvageable from the past.

Best,
Harilal
--------------------------------------
alternative email: harims at cds.ac.in