Jerrold E. Levy's comments on my article on the Sanni Demons in the April 1969 issue of this journal betrays serious misconceptions regarding the nature of Ayurvedic medicine. Levy says that Ayurveda makes no distinction between mental and physical illnesses, that it has little preoccupation with symptoms, and that it has little actual efficacy. The first is concerned with the doctrine of Ayurveda; the second with its practice; and the third with its effects. I shall demonstrate that these three views of Ayurveda are false.

This article documents the practices of pharmaceutical creativity in Ayurveda, focusing in particular on how practitioners appropriate multiple sources to innovate medical knowledge. Drawing on research in linguistic anthropology on the social circulation of discourse—a process called entextualization—I describe how the ways in which Ayurveda practitioners innovate medical knowledge confounds the dichotomous logic of intellectual property (IP) rights discourse, which opposes traditional collective knowledge and modern individual innovation. While it is clear that these categories do not comprehend the complex nature of creativity in Ayurveda, I also use the concept of entextualization to describe how recent historical shifts in the circulation of discourse have caused a partial entailment of this opposition between the individual and the collectivity. Ultimately, I argue that the method exemplified in this article of tracking the social circulation of medical discourse highlights both the empirical complexity of so-called traditional creativity, and the politics of imposing the categories of IP rights discourse upon that creativity, situated as it often is, at the margins of the global economy.

India is home to some of the oldest civilizations, during which period the local communities domesticated indigenous plant species for food and agriculture and medicinal uses. In this process, they also bio-prospected and/or absorbed potentially valuable exotic plant species, making them integral part of Indian culture, including the traditional medicinal system, the Ayurveda. The present paper discusses the absorption of 26 plant species of exotic origin, before 8th century, as evidenced by archaeological sculptural or botanical remains and documentation of such plants in Sanskrit, the Vedic language. Occurrence and/or introduction of such plants at such distant places in ancient times is visualized as a result of geographical continental fragmentation followed by drift, natural or man-made transoceanic movement, and cultural and trade exchange of plant material over time and space.

This paper advocates a new science of intelligence, one that is holistic, multi-disciplinary, oriented to crucial values as health and well-being and able to contribute to the solution of real-world problems. As a starting point we study the interplay between two research disciplines that until now have been hardly related to each other: Ayurveda and multi-agent systems. We consider some possible results of the cross fertilisation like for instance the application of ayurvedic knowledge to improve the skills of practical reasoning agents.

In today’s globalized and flat world, a patient can access and seek multiple health and disease management options. A digitally enabled participatory framework that allows an evidence-based informed choice is likely to assume an immense importance in the future. In India, traditional knowledge systems, like Ayurveda, coexist with modern medicine. However, due to limited crosstalk between the clinicians of both disciplines, a patient attempts integrative medicine by seeking both options independently with limited understanding and evidence. There is a need for an integrative medicine platform with a formalized approach, which allows practitioners from the two diverse systems to crosstalk, coexist, and coevolve for an informed cross-referral that benefits the patients. To be successful, this needs frameworks that enable the bridging of disciplines through a common interface with shared ontologies. Ayurgenomics is an emerging discipline that explores the principles and practices of Ayurveda combined with genomics approaches for mainstream integration. The present review highlights how in conjunction with different disciplines and technologies this has provided frameworks for (1) the discovery of molecular correlates to build ontological links between the two systems, (2) the discovery of biomarkers and targets for early actionable interventions, (3) understanding molecular mechanisms of drug action from its usage perspective in Ayurveda with applications in repurposing, (4) understanding the network and P4 medicine perspective of Ayurveda through a common organizing principle, (5) non-invasive stratification of healthy and diseased individuals using a compendium of system-level phenotypes, and (6) developing evidence-based solutions for practice in integrative medicine settings. The concordance between the two contrasting streams has been built through extensive explorations and iterations of the concepts of Ayurveda and genomic observations using state-of-the-art technologies, computational approaches, and model system studies. These highlight the enormous potential of a trans-disciplinary approach in evolving solutions for personalized interventions in integrative medicine settings.

In recent years an increasing number of state-based heritage protection schemes have asserted ownership over traditional medical knowledge (TMK) through various forms of cultural documentation such as archives, databases, texts, and inventories. Drawing on a close reading of cultural disputes over a single system of TMK—the classical South Asian medical tradition of Ayurveda—the paper traces some of the problems, ambiguities, and paradoxes of making heritage legible. The focus is on three recent state practices by the Indian government to protect Ayurvedic knowledge, each revolving around the production of a different cultural object: the translation of a seventeenth-century Dutch botanical text; the creation of an electronic database known as the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL); and the discovery of an Ayurvedic drug as part of a bioprospecting benefit-sharing scheme. Examined together, they demonstrate that neither TMK, nor Ayurveda, nor even the process of cultural documentation can be treated as monoliths in heritage practice. They also reveal some complexities of heritage protection on the ground and the unintended consequences that policy imperatives and legibility set into motion. As the paper shows, state-based heritage protection schemes inspire surprising counterresponses by indigenous groups that challenge important assumptions about the ownership of TMK, such as locality, community, commensurability, and representation.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: My grateful thanks first to Vijayendra Rao and Gayatri Reddy for invaluable discussion and intellectual support; Debra Diamond, Jane Anderson, Lalitha Gopalan, Michael Sappol, Alexander Bauer, and two anonymous referees for extremely useful interdisciplinary insights; and to the Rockefeller Foundation and the Smithsonian's Center of Folklife and Cultural Heritage, particularly Richard Kurin, Carla Borden, James Early, and Peter Seitel, for the ideal fellowship and venue to get this paper written.

Maulana Ashraf `Ali Thanawi, a reformist Islamic scholar, was very much part of his times in his urgent concern with women’s potential role in individual and societal “improvement,” the goal of the enormously successful encyclopedic work that included the chapter considered here. Thanawi’s teachings included generic elite male “best practices” on health and ethics, undergirded by Greco-Arabic humoral medicine in its Indian form. His text caught a historical moment when medical treatments were more craft than industrial, and when the professionalization of discrete Muslim and Hindu “systems” of Unani Tibb and Ayurveda, with Ayurveda increasingly incorporated into majoritarian Hindu nationalism, was only incipient. Health maintenance in Thanawi’s hands was a matter of empowering women to both spiritual and practical competence and responsibility, freeing them from resort to (as he saw it) quacks, ignorant midwives, and untrained women, along with dubious healers and holy men, Muslim or Hindu or any other. In its description of challenges, strategies, and resources related to health, his text offers a window into women’s everyday world. But it also raises comparative questions about the history of medicine, the history of emotions, ethnicity in a colonial context, and the potentially empowering implications of Islamic socio-religious reform for women.