Become A Member

In the fourth chapter of Sutrasthana, Charaka arranges five hundred drug entries into fifty groups of ten, the mahakashaya, each named by a shared action such as jivaniya (vitalising), lekhaniya (scraping), shothahara (anti-inflammatory) or krimighna (anthelmintic). This action-based classification is a natural starting point for pharmacological research, because it specifies a testable effect for each group. This review examines how the mahakashaya have been studied and proposes a structured evidence map. Most published work has validated individual member drugs for the action of their group, often using single extracts in standard animal or in vitro models. Studies of a whole group as a single preparation are rare. Charaka’s Shothahara group corresponds to Dashamula; a study of two Laghupanchamula variants, half of that group, showed anti-inflammatory activity in rats without toxicity at 10 g/kg in mice. Reviews of other groups, such as Krimighna, have collated member-level studies rather than tested the group. Four obstacles hinder systematic validation. Action terms are not operationally defined. Many member drugs have disputed or unknown identities. The texts do not specify how a group is to be used as a combined preparation. Commonly used animal models do not always match the classical action. We propose an evidence map that charts, for each of the fifty groups, the operational definition of its action, the identity status of its members, member-level evidence, group-level evidence and clinical evidence. The map would show where the classification is supported, where it is untested, and where research should start.