# Srotas (the channel system) and srotodushti

> Canonical version of this page: https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/concept/srotas-system/

## How much weight this concept bears

Srotas is a well-developed and internally coherent classical doctrine whose modern empirical base, within the searches recorded in searchRecord, is very small. PubMed E-utilities on 2026-10-06 returned 19 records for 'srotas AND ayurveda' and 21 for 'srotas' alone, 5 for 'srotodushti', and 0 each for 'srotorodha' and 'dosha dushya sammurchana'; the query translations and PMIDs are logged so these can be re-run. Screened by title and type, the srotas set is mostly single-patient case reports, small uncontrolled studies of herbs or procedures indexed under a channel heading, and narrative reviews that restate the classical account in modern vocabulary. DHARA, which indexes the Indian Ayurveda journals PubMed does not, returned 23 records for 'srotas', 6 for 'srotodushti' and 1 for 'srotorodha'; the srotodushti set was screened in full and the srotas set only on its first page. The AYUSH Research Portal, the largest relevant index, failed server-side on every attempt and has not been searched, which is the largest boundary on every negative statement here. Within what was searched: one study operationalises a channel-level construct, the 2026 Medovaha Srotas Dushti questionnaire (PMID 42181430), which agreed with metabolic-syndrome criteria at kappa 0.84 in 90 participants but measures one channel's vitiation, not any of the four srotodushti modes, and reports agreement with a biomedical criterion rather than between clinicians. No record located operationalises atipravritti, sanga, siragranthi or vimargagamana as a measurable variable, and none located reports inter-rater reliability for assigning a patient to a channel. The hospital survey that counted purishavaha srotodushti in 42% of 235 patients (PMID 22529647) used unstated assignment criteria. The one data-collecting study that tests the framework's clinical use, the 2024 case-vignette survey of 141 experienced practitioners (PMID 39183608), found significant disagreement about the pathophysiology to assign to the same case. Outside srotas, the Ayurgenomics work on prakriti (PMIDs 18782426, 26511157) shows that a classical construct can be put against molecular measures; nothing comparable was located for srotas, and the record's negative is bounded to srotas accordingly. As of this record, the srotas system rests on classical exegesis and clinical convention, with one recent channel-level instrument whose independent validation is pending.

Srotas are the transport channels of the body in Ayurvedic physiology: the passages through which the dhatus (tissue substrates), the malas (wastes) and the doshas move and in which the transformation of one dhatu into the next is said to occur. Charaka's Vimana Sthana 5 says the body's phenomena are all modifications of channels (Ca.Vi.5/3), rejects the view that a person is nothing but channels (5/4), records that some hold them innumerable and others countable (5/5), and then enumerates thirteen gross channels 'yathasthulam', as a teaching subset (5/6-7). For each it names a moola of two seats (5/8: for example hridaya and mahasrotas for pranavaha; vrikka and vapavahana for medovaha). For six of the thirteen (prana, udaka, anna, mutra, purisha, sweda) it gives a channel-specific sign-set in the same passage; for the seven dhatuvaha channels it refers the reader to the dhatu-vitiation signs of Sutra Sthana 28 rather than giving separate channel signs. Thirteen verses (5/10-22) list the dietary and behavioural causes that vitiate each channel, with a general rule at 5/23. Vitiation (srotodushti) is characterised by four signs (5/24): excessive flow, obstruction, nodular swellings of the vessels, and diversion of contents into a wrong path. The text's universal statement is the converse one at 5/7: a body whose channels are in their natural state is not afflicted by disorders. The teaching position that every disease involves at least one of the four derangements is a later generalisation of 5/24, and this record cites no classical sentence that states it in that form. Sushruta's account differs on the count (eleven channels taken in pairs), on the roots assigned (kati and vrikka for medovaha), on whether srotas is distinct from sira and dhamani (Su.Sha.9 says it is; Chakrapani says Charaka intends no such distinction), and Sushruta Sutra 24/9 uses a three-fold scheme (sanga, atipravritti, ayathapravritti) for disorders of the mala receptacles where Charaka's srotas scheme has four.

## At a glance

| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Subject area | How disease is held to arise |
| Domain, as recorded | Ayurvedic theory of health and disease: pathology of transport |
| Contested questions | 4 |
| Stated as not known | 12 |
| Classical citations | 17, 16 quoting the text |
| Research papers assessed | 9 |
| Citations checked | 2026-10-08 |

## What is contested, and by whom

These are the questions on which the sources genuinely disagree. Each position is given as
its source states it. No position is presented as the settled answer, because none of them is.

### How many srotas are there, and what are their roots?

This is contested.

- Charaka Vimana 5/7 enumerates thirteen, taken singly, including asthivaha, majjavaha and swedavaha, and gives no artavavaha channel; 5/29 confirms 'trayodashanam mulani srotasam'. Source: classical entries for Ca.Vi.5/5-7 and 5/8.
- Sushruta Sharira 9 enumerates eleven taken in pairs (twenty-two), includes artavavaha, and omits asthivaha, majjavaha and swedavaha. Source: Bhishagratna sections 11-12, quoted.
- Both texts say the channels are in truth innumerable (Ca.Vi.5/5 'aparisankhyeyani' as one view; Su.Sha.9 'several authorities assert that the Srotas are innumerable'), and Charaka says the named list is given 'yathasthulam' for teaching (5/6), which makes the enumeration a pedagogical convenience rather than an anatomical census.
- The assigned roots also differ. CORRECTED on revision: for medovaha, Charaka's own text gives vrikka and vapavahana (Ca.Vi.5/8, 'medovahanam srotasam vrikkau mulam vapavahanam ca'), not his commentators; Sushruta gives kati and vrikka (Su.Sha.9/12, Bhishagratna: 'the region of the Kati (waist) and the Vrikkas (kidneys)'); and Chakrapani on 5/8 quotes the Sushruta reading and declines to resolve the difference. Other differences: Charaka's rasavaha root is hridaya and ten dhamanis, Sushruta's is the heart and the rasa-carrying dhamanis; Charaka's shukravaha root is vrishana and shepha, Sushruta's is the breasts and the testes.

### Is srotas the same category as sira and dhamani?

This is contested.

- Charaka Vimana 5/9 lists srotamsi, sirah and dhamanyah among thirteen names for the same spaces of the body's dhatus, treating them as synonyms. Chakrapani on 5/3 states this explicitly: 'in Charaka, unlike in Sushruta, no distinction between dhamani, sira and srotas is intended' (classical entry on the Ayurvedadipika).
- Sushruta Sharira 9/13 defines srotas as the vessels emanating from the heart cavity OTHER than siras and dhamanis, making them a distinct third class; and at the opening of the same chapter (Bhishagratna section 2) he records the view that the three are one kind of vessel differently modified, rejects it 'inasmuch as they have got different natures, origins and functions', and then concedes that adjacency, authoritative dicta, functional similarity and minuteness make them appear homologous.
- Kaviratna's own 1890s footnote glosses srotas as the arterial and venous system and possibly the nervous system; this is a translator's interpolation, not the text.
- ADDED on revision. Sushruta's separate counts are the structural evidence for his position: seven hundred siras (Sha.7), twenty-four dhamanis rooted at the navel (Sha.9/2-3), and eleven paired srotas (Sha.9/12). Charaka gives no separate counts and uses 'dasha dhamanyah' only as the root of rasavaha. Whether this is two anatomies or one anatomy described at two levels of resolution is not decidable from the texts.

### What does 'kha' or channel space denote physically?

This is contested.

- A gross tubular structure, so that srotas maps onto vessels, ducts and hollow viscera.
- A functional unit comprising the channel wall, the dhatvagni situated in it and the dhatu flowing through it, so that 'channel' is not primarily anatomical at all.
- An irreducibly subtle category: Charaka's own words are 'lakshya-alakshyanam' (visible and invisible, 5/9) and one school holds them 'aparisankhyeyani' (uncountable, 5/5), which some argue makes any one-to-one anatomical mapping a category error. Bhishagratna's bracketed identifications in Su.Sha.9 (bronchi, pulmonary arteries, oesophagus, capillaries) are the earliest such mapping in the record and are the translator's, not the text's.

### Is the four-mode srotodushti scheme exhaustive and mutually exclusive?

This is contested.

- The standard teaching position is that one or more of the four is present in every disease, which makes the scheme universal. The record locates no classical sentence stating this in that form; Ca.Vi.5/24 calls the four 'dushti-lakshanam', and the universal statement in the chapter is the converse at 5/7, that a body with channels in their natural state is not afflicted.
- The universality claim is untestable as stated: no paper located defines a case in which none of the four applies, so the scheme cannot be falsified by any clinical observation reported in the literature searched.
- ADDED on revision. Sushruta uses a different and three-fold scheme where Charaka uses four. Su.Su.24/9 classifies disorders of the mala receptacles as sanga, atipravritti or ayathapravritti, and disorders of the sense-organ seats as apravritti or ayathapravritti. It shares sanga and atipravritti with Ca.Vi.5/24, has ayathapravritti where Charaka has vimargagamana, and has no counterpart to siragranthi. It is a scheme for receptacles rather than for srotas by name, so it does not contradict Charaka directly, but it shows that the four-fold list was not the only classical way of carving up derangement of flow, and the later literature that treats the four as canonical does not usually cite it.
- ADDED on revision. The one instrument located (PMID 42181430) operationalises medovaha srotodushti as a whole and does not distinguish the four modes, so the question whether the modes are separable in patients has not been put to data.

## What is not known

Stated rather than left out. Where a negative has actually been searched for rather than
assumed, the entry says so.

- No operational definition of any of the four srotodushti modes was located: no published threshold, instrument or protocol by which two clinicians would independently decide that a given patient has sanga rather than atipravritti. The 2026 Medovaha Srotas Dushti questionnaire (PMID 42181430) operationalises one channel's vitiation as a 13-item score but does not separate the modes, and its items were not retrieved for this record. Bounded by the searches in searchRecord; the AYUSH Research Portal and the thesis literature were not searched.
- Inter-rater reliability for assigning a patient to an affected channel was not located in any record searched. The kappa of 0.84 reported for the medovaha questionnaire is agreement with a biomedical case definition, not between raters. The reliability figures that do exist in Ayurveda (kappa near 0.07 for pulse, 0.17 for tongue) concern other diagnostic acts entirely and cannot be transferred to channel assignment.
- Whether any proposed physiological correlate of a named channel holds. Within the material located, one correlate has been tested against an independent measure: medovaha dushti, as scored by a questionnaire, against metabolic-syndrome criteria in 90 people, cross-sectionally and without independent replication. The mappings asserted for rasavaha (lymphatic or plasma compartment), majjavaha (marrow or nervous tissue) and pranavaha (bronchi) were found only as argument, not as tests.
- Whether the count is thirteen, twenty-two, or some other number is not resolvable from the texts, which say in the same breath that the channels are innumerable.
- It is not known whether channel-directed reasoning changes treatment outcome. No trial found randomised patients to channel-guided versus non-channel-guided management.
- Whether srotodushti, or any srotas-based pattern, is encoded in the ICD-11 Traditional Medicine Module 2 (Chapter 26, released in the 2025-01 version). The critic reports that a downloaded copy of the Chapter 26 text contains zero occurrences of 'srotas' or 'srota'. This revision could not reproduce that check: the ICD-11 API (id.who.int) requires an OAuth bearer token and returned 401, and the public browser at icd.who.int is a JavaScript application whose search endpoints return the shell page, so the chapter text was not retrievable by HTTP on 2026-10-06. The critic's negative is therefore recorded as reported and not as verified here. What is confirmed independently is only the module's existence; its 529 categories and the 1,941 NAMASTE morbidity codes mapped to it are figures from the record's original gathering and were not re-checked.
- The relationship between srotas and agni is asserted (dhatvagni is said to be situated in the channel) but the texts do not state whether channel defect causes agni defect, follows from it, or is the same event described twice.
- ADDED on revision. Whether Kaviratna's English omission of the medovaha and asthivaha root clauses in Vimana 5/8, present in both scans consulted, reflects his Bengali source text or a loss in printing. His Bengal-text footnotes elsewhere in the Lesson show him working from a text he regarded as 'vicious', so a textual cause is possible, but the record has not seen his Bengali edition.
- ADDED on revision. The Sanskrit of Sushruta Sharira 7 and 9 was not retrieved. The NIIMH e-Samhita Sushruta reader could not be driven to the Sharira Sthana by HTTP POST (it returned Sharira chapter 1 for every chapter requested), the GRETIL Sushruta plain-text URL returned 404, and no other Sanskrit edition was consulted; the Sharira citations therefore rest on Bhishagratna's English alone, with Chakrapani's quotation of Sushruta's medovaha reading as the one Sanskrit witness for that root.
- ADDED on revision. What DHARA's remaining 13 'srotas' records and the whole AYUSH Research Portal contain. The first is a screening gap (titles on the first page only); the second is an unsearched index that holds about 30,000 Ayurveda records. Either could contain a reliability or operationalisation study that would change notKnown items 0 to 2.
- ADDED on revision. Whether the Medovaha Srotas Dushti questionnaire's items are independent of the metabolic-syndrome criteria it was compared with, and whether its 2025 validation paper (DOI 10.64252/xb8esd67, not retrieved) reports inter-rater or test-retest reliability. If the items are anthropometric and symptomatic restatements of the criteria, the reported agreement is circular.
- ADDED on revision. What the commentators beyond the two Chakrapani sentences quoted here say about the srotas count, roots and the sira/dhamani question. Dalhana on Su.Sha.9 was not consulted, and Chakrapani on Vi.5 was read only at 5/3 and 5/8. The record quotes commentary where it had it and does not generalise from it.

## The terms this concept is built from

| Term | What it names |
| --- | --- |
| [Srotas](https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/lexicon/srotas/) | Channel, duct or passage; in Charaka's account the conduit through which body constituents move while being transformed |
| Moola (root) | The two seats assigned to each channel (Ca.Vi.5/8 gives two for each of thirteen; Su.Sha.9 gives two for each of eleven); disorder or injury at the moola is held to disorder the whole channel. Charaka's and Sushruta's assignments differ for several channels, medovaha among them |
| Sroto-mula-viddha lakshana | The sign-set given per channel: in Charaka (Ca.Vi.5/8) the signs of a vitiated (pradushta) channel, stated for six channels and referred to Sutra 28 for the seven dhatuvaha channels; in Sushruta (Su.Sha.9/12) the syndrome produced when a channel is pierced (viddha) at its root |
| [Atipravritti](https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/lexicon/atipravritti/) | Excessive or unchecked flow through the channel (first mode of srotodushti) |
| [Sanga](https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/lexicon/sanga/) | Obstruction, stasis or arrest of flow (second mode) |
| [Siragranthi](https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/lexicon/sira-granthi/) | Knot or nodular swelling in the vessel wall (third mode) |
| [Vimargagamana](https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/lexicon/vimarga-gamana/) | Diversion of the channel's contents into a channel not its own (fourth mode) |
| Sroto-vaigunya / normal srotas lakshana | The stated normal attributes of a channel: colour of the dhatu it carries, round, thick or fine, long, shaped like a creeper stem; deviation from these is channel defect |
| Srotodushtikara nidana | The channel-specific causative factors listed for each channel (diet, activity, suppression of urges, trauma, agni weakness) |

## The classical passages

Each citation gives its address so a reader can check it in a printed edition, our account
of what it establishes, and the result of reading it against its source.

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5 (Sroto Vimana):Ca.Vi.5/3-4 (standard Trikamji numbering; carakasamhitaonline and NIIMH e-Samhita agree). Kaviratna prints his aphorism number 2 after a block that runs to the end of standard 5/4, checked against the source

> यावन्तः पुरुषे मूर्तिमन्तो भावविशेषास्तावन्त एवास्मिन् स्रोतसां प्रकारविशेषाः| सर्वे हि भावा पुरुषे नान्तरेण स्रोतांस्यभिनिर्वर्तन्ते, क्षयं वाऽप्यभिगच्छन्ति| स्रोतांसि खलु परिणाममापद्यमानानां धातूनामभिवाहीनि भवन्त्ययनार्थेन||३||

Sanskrit mūla

> Whatever embodied phenomena occur in a person, are all only especial forms (or conditions) of the ducts. All phenomena (visible) in a person never make their appearance, or never disappear (subside) without the (action of the) ducts. Verily, the ducts are the conduits of the ingredients of the body, for bearing them (from one place to another), during the process of their development (or transformation).

tr. Avinash Chandra Kaviratna (1896-1913), public domain

The foundational claim: no bodily phenomenon, normal or pathological, arises or subsides without the channels, and channels are defined by transport of dhatus undergoing transformation (parinamam apadyamananam dhatunam abhivahini) rather than by anatomy alone. The same Kaviratna block continues into standard 5/4, where the view that a person is nothing but channels is rejected: 'This, however, is not so.'

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/5-7 (first part). Kaviratna's aphorism 3 covers standard 5/5 (innumerable versus countable), 5/6 (the promise to expound some channels 'roughly', with their roots and the signs of their provocation) and the enumeration and dosha sentence of 5/7, checked against the source

> अतिबहुत्वात् खलु केचिदपरिसङ्ख्येयान्याचक्षते स्रोतांसि, परिसङ्ख्येयानि पुनरन्ये||५|| तेषां तु खलु स्रोतसां यथास्थूलं कतिचित्प्रकारान्मूलतश्च प्रकोपविज्ञानतश्चानुव्याख्यास्यामः; ये भविष्यन्त्यलमनुक्तार्थज्ञानाय ज्ञानवतां, विज्ञानाय चाज्ञानवताम्||६|| तद्यथा प्राणोदकान्नरसरुधिरमांसमेदोस्थिमज्जशुक्रमूत्रपुरीषस्वेदवहानीति वातपित्तश्लेष्मणां पुनः सर्वशरीरचराणां सर्वाणि स्रोतांस्ययनभूतानि...

Sanskrit mūla

> Indeed, some, in consequence of their exceedingly large number, say that the ducts are uncountable. Others, again, say that they are countable. Of those ducts, roughly, some varieties we shall expound, with reference to their roots as also to the knowledge we have of their excitement. ... There are ducts for bearing life-breaths, water, food-juice, blood, flesh, adeps, bones, marrow, vital seed, urine, stools, and sweat. Of wind, bile, and phlegm, again, which move through every part of the body, all the ducts are conduits.

tr. Kaviratna

Three things: (a) the text itself records disagreement over whether the channels are countable; (b) the enumeration is explicitly 'yathasthulam', a rough teaching subset chosen for its roots and recognisable provocation, so the count of thirteen is a pedagogical choice the text announces as such; (c) the three doshas have no channels of their own and travel through all of them. Note on the count: the retrieved Kaviratna page as scanned names twelve, apparently dropping annavaha, while Kaviratna's own abstract of contents for the same Lesson calls them 'the three and ten kinds of ducts' and his aphorisms 19 and 20 treat the food-bearing and food-juice-bearing ducts separately. The Sanskrit of 5/7 gives thirteen, and the summary verse 5/29 says 'trayodashanam mulani srotasam'.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/7 (closing sentence). Kaviratna's aphorism 4, checked against the source

> तदेतत् स्रोतसां प्रकृतिभूतत्वान्न विकारैरुपसृज्यते शरीरम्||७||

Sanskrit mūla

> If the ducts are all in their normal state, the body cannot be affected by any disease.

tr. Kaviratna

The strong form of the doctrine, stated as a conditional: when the channels are in their natural state (prakritibhuta) the body is not afflicted by disorders. This is the sentence that makes channel integrity a sufficient condition for health in the text. The converse teaching, that every disease involves a channel derangement, is not stated here or at 5/24 in that form; see contested[3].

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/9 (first sentence). Kaviratna's aphorism 13, checked against the source

> स्रोतांसि, सिराः, धमन्यः, रसायन्यः, रसवाहिन्यः, नाड्यः, पन्थानः, मार्गाः, शरीरच्छिद्राणि, संवृतासंवृतानि, स्थानानि, आशयाः, निकेताश्चेति शरीरधात्ववकाशानां लक्ष्यालक्ष्याणां नामानि भवन्ति|

Sanskrit mūla

> Srotas, Siras, Dhamani, Rasavahini, Nadi, Pantha, Marga, Cariracchidra, covered and uncovered Sthana, Ayaya, Kshaya, and Niketa, — these are the names by which are known the passages or conduits, visible and invisible, of the dhatus (or constituent elements) of the body.

tr. Kaviratna

That the text treats srotas as a cover term overlapping sira and dhamani, and explicitly includes invisible as well as visible (lakshya-alakshya) spaces of the body's dhatus. Note that the Sanskrit lists thirteen names including rasayanyah, which Kaviratna's English drops; his 'Ayaya' corresponds to ashayah. This is the textual basis for the dispute about whether srotas denotes vessels, spaces, or a functional abstraction, and it is the passage Sushruta Sharira 9 implicitly argues against (see classical entries on Su.Sha.9/2-3 and 9/13).

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/9 (remainder). Kaviratna's aphorisms 14-16, checked against the source

> तेषां प्रकोपात् स्थानस्थाश्चैव मार्गगाश्च शरीरधातवः प्रकोपमापद्यन्ते, इतरेषां प्रकोपादितराणि च| स्रोतांसि स्रोतांस्येव, धातवश्च धातूनेव प्रदूषयन्ति प्रदुष्टाः| तेषां सर्वेषामेव वातपित्तश्लेष्माणः प्रदुष्टा दूषयितारो भवन्ति, दोषस्वभावादिति||९||

Sanskrit mūla

> In consequence of the excitement of those ducts, the constituent elements of the body, which dwell and pass through them, become themselves excited. ... After the same manner, the ducts that become vitiated, vitiate other ducts. Similarly, those constituent elements that become vitiated, vitiate other constituents (of the body). Of all those ducts and constituent elements vitiated wind, bile, and phlegm become vitiators in consequence of their very nature as faults.

tr. Kaviratna

A propagation model: disorder is transmitted channel-to-dhatu, channel-to-channel and dhatu-to-dhatu, with the doshas as the general vitiating agents.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/24 (standard). Kaviratna prints 31 after it; in this chapter his numbering runs seven ahead of the standard numbering from standard 5/10 onward (see classicalNote), checked against the source

> अतिप्रवृत्तिः सङ्गो वा सिराणां ग्रन्थयोऽपि वा| विमार्गगमनं चापि स्रोतसां दुष्टिलक्षणम्||२४||

Sanskrit mūla

> Excessive generation (or flow, of food-juice, blood, and other ingredients of the body), or stoppage or attenuation (of these), or cystic tumours, or diviations (of the elements from their own into other channels), are regarded as indications of the vitiation of the ducts.

tr. Kaviratna

The four signs of srotodushti in a public-domain English rendering, with the Sanskrit. The verse calls them 'dushti-lakshanam', the sign of vitiation; it does not say that every disease exhibits one of them. Kaviratna's 'stoppage or attenuation' renders the single word sanga, and his 'cystic tumours' renders siranam granthayah, nodes of the vessels; both are translator's expansions.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/25 (standard). Kaviratna prints 32 after it, checked against the source

> स्वधातुसमवर्णानि वृत्तस्थूलान्यणूनि च| स्रोतांसि दीर्घाण्याकृत्या प्रतानसदृशानि च||२५||

Sanskrit mūla

> The ducts should be of the colour of the elements they respectively bear, round, gross or subtle, long, and of the form of the stem of a creeping plant.

tr. Kaviratna

The stated normal attributes of a channel. Departure from this list is what later literature calls guna-vaigunya of the srotas. Within the passages this record retrieved (Ca.Vi.5, Su.Sha.7 and 9) this is the one positive description of channel morphology; no concordance search of the rest of the two Samhitas was run, so the record does not claim it is the only such description.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Sushruta Samhita Sharira Sthana 9 (Dhamani-vyakarana):Bhishagratna's section numbers 11-12 (printed after the paragraph). Bhishagratna prints no Sanskrit verse numbers; the standard Sanskrit verse address for this passage was not retrieved for this record and is not claimed, checked against the source

> The ducts or channels respectively conveying the life, the food, the water, (the organic principle of) the Rasa (serum), the blood, the muscles, the fat, the urine, the stool, the semen, and the catamenial blood, naturally fall within the scope of Surgery (Salya-tantra). Several authorities assert that the Srotas (vessels) are innumerable, and perform different functions in their different aspects.

tr. Kunja Lal Bhishagratna (1907-1916), public domain

Sushruta's list is eleven channels taken in pairs, framed surgically as structures whose puncture produces a specific syndrome (quoted in full in a later entry). It includes artavavaha and omits asthivaha, majjavaha and swedavaha, so it does not match Charaka's thirteen. The second sentence records the view that srotas are innumerable; Bhishagratna's footnote adds that surgery 'does not take any cognisance of them' because injury to such fine channels must be slight, which is the translator's gloss and not the text.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/englishtranslati00susruoft/englishtranslati00susruoft_djvu.txt

### Sushruta Samhita Sharira Sthana 9:Bhishagratna's section number 13, labelled 'Metrical Text'. No Sanskrit verse number is printed; the standard address Su.Sha.9/13 used elsewhere in this record is the conventional one and was not independently verified against a Sanskrit edition, checked against the source

> The ducts emanating from the cavity of the heart, other than the Siras (veins), Dhamanis (arteries), and found to course through the whole body, are called Srotas (lit. channels or currents).

tr. Bhishagratna

Sushruta defines srotas by exclusion from sira and dhamani, which directly contradicts Charaka Vimana 5/9 where sira and dhamani are listed among the names for the same spaces. This is a textual disagreement, not a translation artefact, and Sushruta argues it explicitly at the opening of the same chapter (see the Su.Sha.9/2-3 entry).

Source: https://archive.org/stream/englishtranslati00susruoft/englishtranslati00susruoft_djvu.txt

### Ashtanga Hridaya Sutra Sthana 11 (Doshadivijnaniya):Sutrasthana 11/34-35 (GRETIL numbering, which here matches the numbering cited in the secondary literature), checked against the source

> sva-sthāna-sthasya kāyāgner aṃśā dhātuṣu saṃśritāḥ | teṣāṃ sādāti-dīptibhyāṃ dhātu-vṛddhi-kṣayodbhavaḥ || 34 || pūrvo dhātuḥ paraṃ kuryād vṛddhaḥ kṣīṇaś ca tad-vidham | doṣā duṣṭā rasair dhātūn dūṣayanty ubhaye malān || 35 ||

Sanskrit mūla

Verified against the Sanskrit on revision; the verse address given by the IJFMR 2023 review (DOI 10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i04.5456) is correct. What the verses say: portions of the body-fire reside in the dhatus, and their weakening or over-kindling produces dhatu increase or decrease (34); a preceding dhatu, increased or decreased, makes the following one likewise, and vitiated doshas vitiate the dhatus through rasa, and both vitiate the malas (35). The verses speak of dhatus, agni, doshas and malas; the word srotas does not occur in them. They support the dhatu-chain propagation claim and are cited in secondary literature as the mechanism behind channel propagation, but that link is the secondary literature's, not Vagbhata's. The record previously described this as 'the mechanism by which channel defect is said to propagate'; that was too strong and is corrected here.

Source: http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/corpustei/sa_vAgbhaTa-aSTAGgahRdayasUtra.xml

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/8 (standard). Kaviratna splits this one aphorism into his 5 through 12, printing each number after its sentence, checked against the source

> तत्र प्राणवहानां स्रोतसां हृदयं मूलं महास्रोतश्च, प्रदुष्टानां तु खल्वेषामिदं विशेषविज्ञानं भवति; तद्यथा- अतिसृष्टमतिबद्धं कुपितमल्पाल्पमभीक्ष्णं वा सशब्दशूलमुच्छ्वसन्तं दृष्ट्वा प्राणवहान्यस्य स्रोतांसि प्रदुष्टानीति विद्यात्| उदकवहानां स्रोतसां तालुमूलं क्लोम च ... अन्नवहानां स्रोतसामामाशयो मूलं वामं च पार्श्वं ... रसवहानां स्रोतसां हृदयं मूलं दश च धमन्यः| शोणितवहानां स्रोतसां यकृन्मूलं प्लीहा च| मांसवहानां च स्रोतसां स्नायुर्मूलं त्वक् च| मेदोवहानां स्रोतसां वृक्कौ मूलं वपावहनं च| अस्थिवहानां स्रोतसां मेदो मूलं जघनं च| मज्जवहानां स्रोतसामस्थीनि मूलं सन्धयश्च| शुक्रवहानां स्रोतसां वृषणौ मूलं शेफश्च| प्रदुष्टानां तु खल्वेषां रसादिवहस्रोतसां विज्ञानान्युक्तानि विविधाशितपीतीये; यान्येव हि धातूनां प्रदोषविज्ञानानि तान्येव यथास्वं प्रदुष्टानां धातुस्रोतसाम्| मूत्रवहानां स्रोतसां बस्तिर्मूलं वङ्क्षणौ च ... पुरीषवहानां स्रोतसां पक्वाशयो मूलं स्थूलगुदं च ... स्वेदवहानां स्रोतसां मेदो मूलं लोमकूपाश्च, प्रदुष्टानां तु खल्वेषामिदं विशेषविज्ञानं भवति; तद्यथा- अस्वेदनमतिस्वेदनं पारुष्यमतिश्लक्ष्णतामङ्गस्य परिदाहं लोमहर्षं च दृष्ट्वा स्वेदवहान्यस्य स्रोतांसि प्रदुष्टानीति विद्यात्||८||

Sanskrit mūla

> Amongst these, of the ducts that bear the life-breaths, the root is the Chest and the Great duct. Of those ducts, when vitiated, the following are the especial indications. Beholding a person inhaling and exhaling long breaths, or breathing obstructedly or breathing furiously, or drawing short, or incessant breaths, or breathing with noise or pain, the physician should understand that those ducts of the man that bear the life-breaths have become disordered. [5] Of the ducts that bear water, the root is the palate as also the bladder. When vitiated, the especial indications are these: Beholding the dryness of the tongue, the palate, the lips, the throat, and the bladder, as also an excess of thirst, the physician should understand that those ducts which bear water have become disordered. [6] Of the ducts that bear food, the root is the amacaya as also the left side (of the stomach). When vitiated, these are the especial indications: Beholding a disgust for food, nausea, absence of digestion, as also vomiting, the physician should understand that those ducts which bear food have become disordered. [7] Of the ducts that bear the food-juice, the root is the chest and the ten principal dhamanis (arteries). Of the ducts that bear the blood, the root is the liver as also the spleen. Of the ducts that bear the flesh (i. e. the substance which develops into flesh), the roots are the muscles or tendons, as also the skin. Of the ducts that bear the marrow, the roots are the bones and cartilages. Of the ducts that bear the vital seed, the roots are the testicles and the male organ of generation. [8] ... Verily, those symptoms which indicate the vitiation of the Dhatus (or constituent ingredients of the body) are indications of the (vitiation of the) ducts themselves that bear those Dhatus. [9] Of the ducts that bear urine, the root is the bladder as also the pubic and iliac regions. ... Beholding a person having copious discharges of urine or obstructed discharge, or with irritation of the urethra, or with scanty or frequent discharge, attended with pain, the physician should understand that the urine-bearing ducts of the individual have become vitiated. [10] Of the ducts that bear stools, the root is the Pakkacaya as also the gross (i. e., visible) anus. ... Beholding a man passing stools with difficulty, or a little at a time, or with pains, or having very liquid motions, or with the anal canal irritated, or with bowels constipated, the physician should understand that the stool-bearing ducts of the individual have become vitiated. [11] Of the ducts that bear sweat, the roots are the adeps or the pores of the body. ... Beholding the stoppage of sweat, or copiousness of sweat, or roughness (of the skin), or excessive oiliness (of the skin), or burning sensation (all over the body), or a general horripilation (of the skin), the physician should understand that the sweat-bearing ducts of the individual have become vitiated. [12]

tr. Avinash Chandra Kaviratna (1896-1913), public domain

ADDED on revision. The moola of each channel and the channel-specific signs, which the summary asserted and the record had not quoted. Three points for the reader. (1) Charaka gives channel-specific signs for six channels only (prana, udaka, anna, mutra, purisha, sweda); for the seven dhatuvaha channels the text says the signs are those of dhatu vitiation given in Vividhashitapitiya (Sutra 28), and Kaviratna's footnote reads this as the Rishi declining to give separate indications. (2) Kaviratna's printed English, in both scans consulted (BIU Sante 47357 and its flat text), passes from the flesh-bearing ducts to the marrow-bearing ducts and omits the medovaha and asthivaha clauses that the Sanskrit contains; the roots of those two channels (vrikka and vapavahana; medas and jaghana) are therefore cited here to the Sanskrit alone, and whether the omission is in Kaviratna's Bengali source text or a printing loss is recorded in notKnown. (3) Several of Kaviratna's renderings are translator's choices rather than the text: 'Chest' for hridaya, 'bladder' for kloma, 'cartilages' for sandhayah (joints), and 'pubic and iliac regions' for vankshanau. The Sanskrit is given so that the reader is not dependent on them.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita Vimana Sthana 5:Ca.Vi.5/10-23 (standard). Kaviratna's aphorisms 17-30, printed after each verse; seven ahead of the standard numbering throughout this block, checked against the source

> क्षयात् सन्धारणाद्रौक्ष्याद्व्यायामात् क्षुधितस्य च| प्राणवाहीनि दुष्यन्ति स्रोतांस्यन्यैश्च दारुणैः||१०|| ... गुरुशीतमतिस्निग्धमतिमात्रं समश्नताम्| रसवाहीनि दुष्यन्ति चिन्त्यानां चातिचिन्तनात्||१३|| ... अव्यायामाद्दिवास्वप्नान्मेद्यानां चातिभक्षणात्| मेदोवाहीनि दुष्यन्ति वारुण्याश्चातिसेवनात्||१६|| ... सन्धारणादत्यशनादजीर्णाध्यशनात्तथा| वर्चोवाहीनि दुष्यन्ति दुर्बलाग्नेः कृशस्य च||२१|| व्यायामादतिसन्तापाच्छीतोष्णाक्रमसेवनात्| स्वेदवाहीनि दुष्यन्ति क्रोधशोकभयैस्तथा||२२|| आहारश्च विहारश्च यः स्याद्दोषगुणैः समः| धातुभिर्विगुणश्चापि स्रोतसां स प्रदूषकः||२३||

Sanskrit mūla

> Through waste (of the elements), through suppression of the urgings of nature, through dryness, through (excessive) physical exercise, and through hunger also, the ducts that bear the life-breaths become vitiated, as also through other causes of a powerful nature (which aggravate wind, bile and phlegm). [17] ... Through eating food that is heavy or cold or exceedingly oily, or beyond the proper measure, or through thinking hard on subjects of thought, those ducts that bear food-juice become vitiated. [20] ... Through absence of physical exercise, through sleep by day, through excessive eating of such food as produces fat, and through excessive indulgence in the wine called Varuni, the ducts that bear the adeps become vitiated. [23] ... From suppression (of stools), from excessive eating, from eating before the food last taken has been digested, those ducts that bear stools become vitiated; Those very ducts of persons also that are of weak digestive fire, or that are exceedingly lean, become vitiated. [28] ... Such food, and such practices, as correspond with the qualities of the faults, and as are hostile to the ingredients (dhatus) of the body, are vitiators of the ducts. [30]

tr. Kaviratna

ADDED on revision. The channel-specific causative factors (component #9), one verse per channel for all thirteen, followed by the general rule that food and conduct similar in quality to the doshas and contrary to the dhatus vitiate the channels. This is the textual support for the summary's statement that Charaka 'lists the dietary and behavioural causes that vitiate each'. Kaviratna's footnote to 5/23 notes a variant reading 'ritu-vigunah' (unsuited to the season) for 'dhatu-vigunah'; that is a textual variant he reports, not a doctrine.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/BIUSante_47357/BIUSante_47357_djvu.txt

### Charaka Samhita, with Chakrapanidatta's Ayurvedadipika commentary Vimana Sthana 5:Commentary on Ca.Vi.5/3 and 5/8, checked against the source

**Quotation withheld:** no English translation of this passage has been cleared for reproduction, and the text held here is not the Sanskrit itself. The passage is at https://niimh.nic.in/ebooks/ecaraka/?mod=read

ADDED on revision. Two things the record's contested section needed a source for. First, the classical commentator himself states that Charaka does not intend the sira/dhamani/srotas distinction that Sushruta draws, which turns contested[1] from a modern reading into a disagreement the tradition recognised. Second, the medovaha root discrepancy (vrikka and vapavahana in Charaka; vrikka and kati in Sushruta) was noticed by Chakrapani, who declines to adjudicate it. The record's earlier attribution of the Charaka reading to 'Charaka's commentators' was wrong: it is in Charaka's own text at 5/8, and the commentator's contribution is the comparison, not the reading.

### Sushruta Samhita Sharira Sthana 9 (Dhamani-vyakarana):Bhishagratna's sections 11-12 (the puncture syndromes), printed after the paragraph; no Sanskrit verse numbers are printed, checked against the source

> Now we shall describe the symptoms produced by a Srota (duct or channel) pierced at its root or starting point. ... The two Srotas (channels) of Prana (bronchi) have their roots in the heart and the Rasa-carrying Dhamanis (pulmonary arteries). An injury to any of these Srotas (vessels) produces groaning, bending down of the body, loss of consciousness (Moha), illusion, and shivering, or may ultimately prove fatal. The food-carrying Srotas (Esophagus) have their roots in the Amasaya (stomach) and in the food-carrying Dhamanis (intestines). ... There are two water-carrying (Udaka-vaha) ducts or channels which have their roots in the palate and the Kloma, and a piercing of any of these makes the patient thirsty and ends in his instantaneous death (i. e., within seven days). ... The blood-carrying Srotas (channels) are two in number and have their roots in the spleen and the liver, and the blood-carrying Dhamanis ... The fat-carrying Srotas (ducts) are two in number and have their roots in the region of the Kati (waist) and the Vrikkas (kidneys). An injury to any of these bring in (a copious flow of) perspiration, oily gloss of the skin, parched condition of the palate, extensive swelling (of the affected locality) and thirst. The two urine-carrying Srotas (channels) have their roots in the bladder and the penis (urethra). ... The two stool-carrying Srotas (ducts) have their roots in the Guda (anus) and the Pakvasaya (intestines) ... The two semen-carrying Srotas (ducts) have their roots in the breasts and the testes. ... The two Artava-carrying Srotas (ducts) have their roots in the uterus as well as in the Dhamanis which carry the Artava (ovarian product). An injury to any of these brings on sterility, suppression of the menses and incapacity for copulation. ... A physician may take in hand the medical treatment of a case of a Srota which has been pierced, but he shall not necessarily entertain any hope of ultimate success.

tr. Kunja Lal Bhishagratna (1907-1916), public domain; Vol. II, Calcutta 1911, printed pages 213-215

ADDED on revision. The puncture syndromes the record had described in prose, now quoted, and Sushruta's own root assignments, including kati and vrikka for medovaha, which is the second half of the discrepancy in contested[0]. Note the pattern and note its limit. Six of the eleven channels have one of their two roots given as a class of dhamanis: prana-vaha in the heart and the rasa-carrying dhamanis, anna-vaha in the amasaya and the food-carrying dhamanis, rasa-vaha in the heart and the serum-carrying dhamanis, rakta-vaha in the spleen and liver and the blood-carrying dhamanis, mamsa-vaha in snayu and tvak and the blood-carrying dhamanis, and artava-vaha in the uterus and the dhamanis that carry artava. The other five name bodily sites only and no dhamanis at all: udaka-vaha in the palate and the kloma, medo-vaha in the kati and the vrikkas, mutra-vaha in the bladder and the penis, purisha-vaha in the guda and the pakvashaya, and shukra-vaha in the breasts and the testes. So the passage is consistent with Sushruta treating dhamani and srotas as related but distinct structures, since he can pair a channel with a class of dhamanis at all; it does not make that pairing a rule, and no inference should be drawn from it about the five channels where he does not. The bracketed modern identifications (bronchi, pulmonary arteries, oesophagus, intestines, capillaries) are Bhishagratna's and are not in the Sanskrit; the record does not adopt them.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/englishtranslati00susruoft/englishtranslati00susruoft_djvu.txt

### Sushruta Samhita Sharira Sthana 9 (Dhamani-vyakarana):Bhishagratna's sections 2-3 (opening of the chapter); no Sanskrit verse numbers printed, checked against the source

> There are twenty-four Dhamanies (ducts) in all, and all of them have their origins in the naval region. Several authorities assert that no arbitrary distinctions should be made among the Siras (veins), Dhamanis (arteries), and the Srotas, (channels), since Dhamanis and Srotas are but different modifications of one original kind of Sira (vessels). But this opinion is not a sound one inasmuch as they have got different natures, origins and functions and as being described so in the Ayurveda. But owing to their adjacent positions, the existence of several authoritative dicta (Apta-vak) regarding the oneness of their character, similarity of their functions, and the minute nature of their shape, they appear to be homologous in their action, even amidst the real diversities in their work and office. [2] Of the twenty-four Dhamanis, which (originally) have their roots in the naval region (Nabhi), ten have upward course, ten have downward course, and four flow laterally or transversely. [3]

tr. Bhishagratna; Vol. II, printed pages 209-210

ADDED on revision. The passage that adjudicates contested[1] from Sushruta's side: he records the view that sira, dhamani and srotas are one kind of vessel differently modified, rejects it on the grounds of different nature, origin and function, and then concedes why the three look alike. He also fixes the dhamani count at twenty-four, rooted at the navel, against Charaka's 'ten dhamanis' as the root of rasavaha (Ca.Vi.5/8). Read with Chakrapani's remark that Charaka intends no such distinction, this is a disagreement both traditions were aware of.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/englishtranslati00susruoft/englishtranslati00susruoft_djvu.txt

### Sushruta Samhita Sharira Sthana 7 (Sira-varnana-vibhakti):Opening paragraphs of the chapter; Bhishagratna's section number 5 closes the tally paragraph. No Sanskrit verse numbers printed, checked against the source

> There are seven hundred Siras (vessels) in the human organism (except those which cannot be counted for their extremely attenuated size). The vessels (Siras) by their contractibility and expansibility &c., sustain and nourish the organism in the same manner as streamlets and canals serve to keep a field or a garden moist and fruitful. ... thus making a total of seven hundred in all. [5]

tr. Bhishagratna; Vol. II

ADDED on revision. Sushruta's sira count as Bhishagratna renders it: seven hundred siras, sustaining and nourishing the body as streamlets and canals keep a field or a garden moist, the tally built from forty principal siras each branching into one hundred and seventy-five. The same figure recurs bare in his summary of body constituents at Sharira 5 ('There are seven hundred S'ird (veins) ... twenty-four Dhamanis (arteries etc.)'). It does NOT establish that Sushruta attaches to sira the 'uncountable fine ones excepted' qualification that the srotas passages carry. The parenthesis '(except those which cannot be counted for their extremely attenuated size)' is Bhishagratna's own; the root text at Su.Sha.7/3 reads only 'sapta sirAshatAni bhavanti; yAbhiridaM sharIramArAma iva jalahAriNIbhiH kedAra iva ca kulyAbhirupasnihyate~anugRuhyate cAku~jcanaprasAraNAdibhirvisheShaiH', and the exception is Dalhana's gloss on that sutra ('tAsAmaNusho~aparisa~gkhyAtAnAmapi bhUyastvAshrayAM samudAyasa~gkhyAM nirdishannAha- saptetyAdi'). This is the bracketed-translator defect that classical[13] of this record already flags, caught here before Dalhana's qualification was recorded as Sushruta's. What the passage does carry for contested[1] is narrower: Sushruta gives sira and dhamani separate counts (700 and 24), which is only coherent if they are distinct classes, and Charaka gives no such separate counts.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/englishtranslati00susruoft/englishtranslati00susruoft_djvu.txt

### Sushruta Samhita Sutra Sthana 24 (Vyadhi-samuddeshiya):Su.Su.24/9 (NIIMH e-Samhita numbering; the verse marker ||9|| follows the passage). Bhishagratna's rendering falls in his Chapter XXIV, printed page 235, between the Shukra-doshaja paragraph and the 'Authoritative verse', checked against the source

> tvagdoShAH sa~ggo~atipravRuttirayathApravRuttirvA malAyatanadoShAH; indriyANAmapravRuttirayathApravRuttirvendriyAyatanadoShAH; ityeSha samAsa uktaH ||9||

Sanskrit mūla

> tvagdoShAH sa~ggo~atipravRuttirayathApravRuttirvA malAyatanadoShAH; indriyANAmapravRuttirayathApravRuttirvendriyAyatanadoShAH; ityeSha samAsa uktaH; vistaraM nimittAni caiShAM pratirogaM vakShyAmaH ||9||

tr. Sanskrit from the NIIMH e-Samhita (phonetic transliteration, quoted as served); English from Bhishagratna Vol. I (1907), public domain

ADDED on revision. Sushruta's rival derangement scheme: disorders of the mala receptacles (malayatana) are of three kinds, sanga (arrest), atipravritti (excessive passage) and ayathapravritti (wrong or abnormal passage), and disorders of the sense-organ seats of two. This is a scheme for the receptacles of wastes, not for srotas by name, so it is a parallel rather than a direct contradiction of Ca.Vi.5/24; but it shares two of Charaka's four terms, lacks siragranthi, and has ayathapravritti where Charaka has vimargagamana. Bhishagratna compresses the three Sanskrit terms into 'constipation or looseness of the bowels', so his English cannot be used to establish the scheme; the Sanskrit is what carries it.

Source: https://archive.org/stream/englishtranslati01susruoft/englishtranslati01susruoft_djvu.txt

## What the research actually shows

Every paper located for this concept, with what it measured and what it does and does not
establish. The assessment is ours.

### Myth and reality of "theory-driven individualised practice" in Ayurveda: Mapping physicians' approaches using case-based scenarios.

Indian J Med Ethics · 2024 · PMID 39183608 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39183608/)

An emailed case-vignette survey of 141 experienced registered Ayurveda practitioners across India found a significant lack of consensus on clinical diagnosis, on the pathophysiology (samprapti) assigned to the same case, and on treatment. Theoretical constructs did not uniformly determine prescriptions or individualisation. The authors raise as an open ethical question whether this reflects an inherently weak theoretical framework.

**How much it shows.** The strongest empirical item found for this whole cluster, and it cuts against the framework rather than for it. Limitations are real: convenience sampling, emailed self-report, hypothetical vignettes rather than observed practice, and no formal inter-rater statistic reported. It is nonetheless a data-collecting study, not a narrative review.

### Critical appraisal of Doshavaha Srotas.

Ayu · 2012 · PMID 23723638 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23723638/)

Proposes a category of 'doshavaha srotas' by treating sira as a synonym of srotas and mapping vatavaha/pittavaha/kaphavaha sira onto channels. States that 'manifestation of a disease occurs in the body as a result of the defective Srotas favoring the Dosha-Dushya conglomeration.'

**How much it shows.** Narrative textual appraisal with no data, no measurement and no validation. It is an argument from synonymy between two classical terms that Sushruta Sharira 9/13 explicitly distinguishes. Useful as evidence of what the field asserts, not as evidence that the assertion is true.

### Understanding hypertension in the light of Ayurveda.

J Ayurveda Integr Med · 2018 · PMID 29153383 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29153383/)

Maps essential hypertension onto dosha and srotas categories as an explanatory framework.

**How much it shows.** Narrative review. Restates classical doctrine in modern vocabulary, proposes correspondences, and offers no measurement, no operational definition of the channel involvement it posits, and no test of the mapping. Representative of the dominant publication type in this area.

### Pathophysiology of Covid-19 and host centric approaches in Ayurveda.

J Ayurveda Integr Med · 2022 · PMID 33519134 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33519134/)

Frames COVID-19 pathophysiology in terms of pranavaha srotas involvement and host susceptibility, as a host-centric Ayurvedic account.

**How much it shows.** Narrative review written during the pandemic. Proposes correspondences between channel pathology and known respiratory pathophysiology; presents no data and validates no correspondence. Illustrates the recurring pattern of retrofitting srotas language onto an already-characterised disease.

### Prevalence of Adhyashana in patients attending IPGT and RA Hospital and its effect on health.

Ayu · 2011 · PMID 22529647 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22529647/)

A hospital survey of 235 patients reported 62.98% habituated to adhyashana (eating before the previous meal is digested) and recorded purishavaha srotodushti as the most frequent channel derangement, in 42%.

**How much it shows.** This is one of the very few studies that actually counts srotodushti in patients, so it is worth naming. But the channel assignment was made by the investigators using unstated criteria, there is no comparison group, no blinding and no reliability check, so the 42% figure measures the investigators' classification habit rather than a validated finding.

### Untitled

2025 · doi:10.21760/jaims.10.6.39 (https://doi.org/10.21760/jaims.10.6.39)

Self-described systematic review categorising channel pathology into the four classical modes and proposing pathophysiological correlates for each.

**How much it shows.** Published in a non-PubMed-indexed Ayurveda journal. Despite the 'systematic review' label, the abstract describes a review of classical texts plus contemporary writing with no stated search strategy, no inclusion criteria and no risk-of-bias assessment. It is a narrative review.

### Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Utility of an Ayurvedic Questionnaire for Predicting Metabolic Syndrome.

Cureus · 2026 · PMID 42181430 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42181430/)

A cross-sectional study at an Ayurveda hospital in Nagpur (218 screened, 90 enrolled, ages 31-60) administered a 13-item 'Medovaha Srotas Dushti' (MSD) questionnaire, scored dichotomously with a cut-off of 9 of 13, and compared the result with NCEP-ATP III 2005 metabolic syndrome criteria measured in the same participants. Reported sensitivity 95.56%, specificity 88.89%, accuracy 92.22%, Cohen's kappa 0.844 against the biomedical criterion.

**How much it shows.** This matters for the record because it is the first item located in which a channel-level dushti construct is operationalised as a scored instrument and tested against an independent measure; it therefore bounds the record's earlier negatives, which are rewritten accordingly. Its limits are real. The kappa is agreement between the questionnaire and a biomedical case definition, not inter-rater agreement between clinicians, so it says nothing about whether two Ayurveda physicians would assign the same patient to medovaha dushti. The construct is one channel's vitiation, not any of the four srotodushti modes, which remain unoperationalised in the material located. The questionnaire items are not listed in the abstract, and the authors themselves flag the cross-sectional design and the need for independent validation; if the items overlap the features that define metabolic syndrome, the high agreement is partly circular. Single centre, 90 participants, Cureus. The 'validated' questionnaire it relies on is a 2025 paper located via Crossref (DOI 10.64252/xb8esd67, 'Development And Psychometric Validation of Questionnaire to Assess Medovaha Srotas Dushti', International Journal of Environmental Sciences), which was not retrieved for this record and whose venue is outside the medical literature.

### Whole genome expression and biochemical correlates of extreme constitutional types defined in Ayurveda.

J Transl Med · 2008 · PMID 18782426 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18782426/)

Ayurgenomics comparator, added because the critic asked that the record's negative framing be tested against the strongest case where a classical construct has been put against molecular measures. Prasher, Mukerji and colleagues (CSIR-IGIB) phenotyped healthy individuals of the three extreme prakriti types by classical criteria and compared genome-wide expression, biochemical and haematological parameters across the groups, reporting differences in liver function tests, lipid profiles, haemoglobin and differential expression enriched in transport, immune response and coagulation categories.

**How much it shows.** This is about prakriti, not srotas; nothing in it bears on channels, roots or the four modes. Its value to this record is methodological: it shows what putting a classical construct against an independent measure looks like, and that it has been done for one construct in Ayurveda. Sample sizes are not given in the abstract and were not checked against the full text for this record. Exploratory design, no pre-registration, and the classification of participants into prakriti types rested on the classical criteria whose reliability is itself unestablished.

### Genome-wide analysis correlates Ayurveda Prakriti.

Sci Rep · 2015 · PMID 26511157 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26511157/)

Second Ayurgenomics comparator. Govindaraj and colleagues performed genome-wide SNP analysis of 262 male individuals classified into the three prakriti types after screening 3,416 subjects, reported 52 SNPs significantly different between prakriti groups without a confounding effect of population stratification, found that principal components of these SNPs separated the groups, and reported that PGM1 correlates with the pitta phenotype as described in the Caraka Samhita.

**How much it shows.** Again prakriti, not srotas. The design is stronger than most of the srotas literature by a wide margin: large screening pool, genome-wide data, permutation testing, and a replication sample for ancestry. It has not been established for this record whether the 52-SNP finding has been independently replicated, and the record does not claim it has. The honest use of this item is to bound the record's statement about validation: the claim that nothing in Ayurveda's theoretical framework has been tested against molecular measures would be false, and the record now says instead that no such test was located for srotas specifically.

## Citation

Age Ayurveda Nighantu, "Srotas (the channel system) and srotodushti", https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/concept/srotas-system/, CC BY 4.0.
Whole concept set: https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/concepts.json and https://nighantu.ageayurveda.com/concepts.csv.

Educational reference only. This page describes what a body of theory claims and how well it
is evidenced. Nothing here is advice, and nothing here describes how any condition should be
treated.