Todd Caldecott wrote the following interesting message on AyurvedaOnline recently.
1. I am skeptical of the current state of Ayurvedic pulse diagnosis.
You cite a quote that pulse diagnosis is “the centrepiece of a
classic Ayurveda examination”. If this were true, then why is it
that in Kerala, which many call the center of Ayurveda in India, you
will be hard pressed to find a physician that actually practices it.
This is apart from the fact that pulse is clearly anumana, or
“inferential”, according to Charakas delineation of “trividha
pariksha”, or the “the sources of knowledge”. How should inference
be considered the centerpiece of any evidence? Walking home late at
night, a man is startled because he sees something on the road. Is
it a snake or a stick? Only close observation can discern the
difference. To my mind, the mark of a good practitioner is their
thoroughness in obtaining knowledge from all sources and integrating
these into a unified whole. Sometimes this means knowing what to pay
attention to and what to ignore, especially when it comes to inference. Continued…