Ayurvedic Marman
Select Page: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12

There is evidence of Chinese channel theory in the form of a lacquer figurine, from the second century BC, recently found in tombs excavated at the edge of the foothills of Tibet (Lo, 1998). This supports the possibility of the cross pollination of medical ideas, including those of Indian marman and Chinese acupoints. The early northern Dravidian shamanic medicine is thought to have given rise to the eventual development of Ayurveda as a medical system and to have brought about the spread of traditional Indian medical thought to other countries, including Tibet and China.

The extant Ayurvedic texts, plausibly dated to around the 2nd Century BC, define marman as the “107 marman according to Susruta” (Thatte, interview, 21/9/98). This view was accepted by all Ayurvedic practitioners interviewed during field research.

The Dravidian practitioners in the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu have maintained the use of varman in their traditional medicine. Many techniques using varman are still practised in southern India today, however, these techniques and additional marman appear to be unknown to Ayurvedic practitioners. There are, therefore, two systems of marman to be considered:

1) Ayurvedic marman as recorded by Susruta (5th-2nd Century BC) in the classical text Susruta Samhita, (Sarirasthan, Chapters 6 and 7, trans Thatte, 1994) and later elucidated by such classical writers as Nagarjuna (1st Century BC), Charaka (1st Century AD) and Vagbhata (7th Century AD).

2) The Dravidian varman which is recorded in the undated Varman-adi Shastra (“the books of varman action”); a collection of writings attributed to a long line of teachers, including Agastya and Purusharama.

Both systems recognise 108 marman, including the 107 marman listed by Susruta, suggesting orthodoxy amongst Indian marman doctrines at some stage. The Dravidian varman model, however, claims to use an extra 720 therapeutic varman, in addition to the known marman of Ayurveda (Pillai, private communication, 26/11/99).

Classical Ayurvedic treatment of marman is concerned with recovery from physical trauma. There is no evidence to suggest that marman were considered suitable for therapeutic puncturing, as in the case of Chinese acupuncture. Indeed, marman are believed to contain the elements of life, including the life-force (prana) which supports consciousness. Disturbing the life-force of marman was thought to be detrimental to health, therefore cutting marman was, and still is, prohibited amongst traditional Indian surgeons who follow the precepts of Susruta Samhita. This view of marman has its origin in warfare, and much can be learnt about Indian marman as well as Chinese acupoints from the texts on traditional martial arts (Kasulis, 1993; Rocsu, 1981; Zarrilli, 1998). Further research regarding the vital points of martial arts may enable a better understanding of “secret” points and their little understood contra-indication within both the Chinese and Indian systems.

continued here