Is Sadhguru Against Allopathy?

Devil’s Advocate
4 min readMar 24, 2024

There are a few people who are posting a quote from Sadhguru saying he is trivializing Allopathy and hence he is against Allopathic medicine.

But that is because most people are missing the context in which he has spoken. This is a talk with a renowned cardiac surgeon, Dr Devi Shetty.

I would say allopathic system is at its best, when there is an emergency. When there is time, definitely other systems are way better if you ask me, in many ways. Particularly this is something hardly known to people, in southern most part of India, largely in Tamil Nadu we have what is called as Siddha — Siddha Vaidya. It’s a most incredible medical system. So comprehensive, there are over three hundred thousand formulations. I don’t think even modern pharmacopeia has that, over three hundred thousand formulations elaborately written down. And the fundamental difference between Ayurveda and Siddha is — Ayurveda is herb based, Siddha is elemental. The only thing is the skill level that it demands from the doctor is a challenge in modern world. This is something that you have to live, then only it works. The person who administers it is as important at (as?) what is administered. so who administers it is important, not just what is administered. But the nature of modern medicine is, you write a prescription some chemist who knows nothing about it gives it, and they take it. It’s only purely chemical and it works. But when there are chronic ailments, if there is infection, killing it with whatever you know chemical bombing it, is the way to do it. But when you are generating an illness from within, correcting it from within is most important. If there is an emergency, you have to intervene more aggressively, that’s different. But these systems have such a comprehensive knowledge about health and well-being. But the problem is it needs a lifelong involvement and dedication to become something good with this kind of system. It is not something that you can acquire as a profession and do it.

He has spoken about it in detail in another blog also.

Essentially the difference between Ayurveda and siddha and allopathy is just this — allopathy is purely chemical, chemical manipulation of the system. When it’s an emergency, you must use it. But if it’s a long… you know if it’s a chronic ailment which is going to be with you for a long time and you’re going to take some medicine for a long time, definitely popping pills for long periods of time is not a good thing.

So Ayurveda is herbal; herbs are also chemicals but in natural form. It’s way better than taking it in a synthetic form. Ayurveda needs a certain amount of application and knowledge because there are over three hundred thousand… okay? Three hundred thousand Ayurvedic formulations according to the ancient texts. Three hundred thousand formulations you have to understand if you have to really prescribe Ayurveda.

So prescribing or practicing Ayurveda is a… it needs a lifelong involvement. These days I see people come from outside the country; they study Ayurveda for one-and-a-half months and they are certified ayurvedic teachers or doctors, practitioners, which is a very dangerous thing to do. Three hundred thousand formulations, how to give it, to whom to give it, when to give it is not a simple thing to understand, it takes a lot. Above all you need a phenomenal understanding of the body to be able to prescribe this.

Siddha is very different in the sense, siddha is essentially elemental in nature. This… there are herbs but essentially it’s elemental in nature. It comes more from the yogic science because the fundamental of yogic science is in Bhuta Shuddhi or in cleansing of one’s elements. This is an evolution from the yogic science and siddha vaidya was essentially formulated by Agastya Muni and they say Adiyogi himself practiced it and Agastya brought it to the south and only in the south, it lived; nowhere else. And it’s elemental in nature, which… which needs less study but more internal mastery for the person, who practices it, which is again a problem today. We hope these young people, who are starting their sadhana at the age of six and they are going to be in sadhana throughout their growing period, these kind (kinds?) of people can take to siddha very effortlessly because the necessary sadhana is there within them.

Siddha vaidya cannot happen without sadhana. Today they have set up colleges for siddha vaidya, which… it will not work like that. They’re picking up bits and pieces from the text and trying to practice that — quackery… siddha quackery is happening; siddha vaidya is not happening because siddha vaidya has to be practiced by a siddha. It is a siddha who can practice siddha vaidya. Siddha means an established one; one who is firmly established within himself because it’s elemental in nature. Because it’s elemental, it’s not really a medicine as such. You are dealing with the fundamental material which makes the body — you are not trying to infuse some other medicine into it.

If you have read this fully, you can very well see that he is suggesting people to go for Allopathic treatments in case of something that needs urgent intervention. He is suggesting Ayurveda or Siddha for treatment over long durations. But he is also against how Ayurveda and Siddha are being practiced today and that it needs to be conducted better.

--

--

Devil’s Advocate

Seeker for life. Looking to make technology simpler for everyone.