Bhat Savitha D et al / IJRAP 3(3), May – Jun 2012
Review Article
www.ijrap.net
EXPLORING THE CONCEPT OF VACHA (ACORUS CALAMUS LINN.)
SHODHANA IN AYURVEDA
Bhat Savitha D1*, BK Ashok2, Acharya Rabinarayan3
1
Lecturer, Department of Dravyaguna, Muniyal Institute of Ayurveda Medical Sciences, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Research Assistant, Pharmacology laboratory, IPGT & RA, Gujarat Ayurved University, Jamnagar, India
3
Associate Professor, Department of Dravyaguna, IPGT & RA, Gujarat Ayurved University, Jamnagar, India
2
Received on: 06/03/12 Revised on: 11/04/12 Accepted on: 09/05/12
*Corresponding author
Dr. Savitha Bhat, Lecturer, Department of Dravyaguna, Muniyal Institute of Ayurveda Medical Sciences, Manipal, Karnataka, India
ABSTRACT
Ayurveda advocates Shodhana (Purificatory procedures) for poisonous substances to render it safe and effective for therapeutics. But mentioning of
Shodhana for a non poisonous plant like Vacha is a matter of great curiosity with regards to the purpose of Shodhana. In this review an attempt has
been made to analyse the concept and relevance of Vacha Shodhana in view of both classical and modern thoughts.
Keywords: Shodhana, Vacha, Carcinogenic, Chakradatta, Purification.
INTRODUCTION
Vacha (Acorus calamus Linn.), an indigenous drug of
India belongs to family Acoraceae. It is delineated under
various therapeutical groups like ‘Lekhaneeya’,
‘Triptighna’, ‘Arshoghna dashemani’ etc., by Acharya
Charaka1, ‘Pippalyadi’, ‘Vachadi’ etc., ganas by Acharya
Sushruta2 and ‘Mustadi’, ‘Vatsakadi’etc., gana by
Vagbhata3. The pharmacognostical characters of Vacha
are described through various synonyms like
‘Shadgrantha’ (Having six nodes), ‘Ugragandha’ (Having
strong aroma), ‘Lomasha’ (Having small hairs), ‘Golomi’
(Having small hairs like cow) etc. It has important
pharmacological properties like Deepana (Appetizer),
Pachana (Digestive), Vamaka (Emetic), Medhya (brain
tonic), Kanthya (Good for throat), Sanjnasthapana
(Restores lost conciousness), Vedanasthapana (Anodyne)
etc., and hence used extensively in therapeutics4-6.
Classics like Chakradatta and Bhaishajya Ratnavali have
given emphasis on Shodana (purification process) of
Vacha using different media like Gomutra (Cow’s urine),
Mundi Kwatha (Decoction of Sphaeranthus indicus
Linn), Gandhodaka (Decoction of six aromatic herbs) etc7,
8
. Some folklore traditions of Karnataka and Kerala also
practise Vacha Shodhana through Goksheera (Cow’s
milk) and Mastu (Curd whey) respectively. The concept
of Shodhana for Vacha is further supported by the
references from Ayurvedic Pharmacopeia of India and
Herb directory of Indian System of Medicine and
Homeopathy, that it should be used after Shodhana for
therapeutics9, 10.
Concept of Shodhana
The Shodhana concept is prevalent in two contexts, be it
the human body or a dravya, it literally refers to
‘Purification’ or ‘to purify’11. Shodhana for the body
refers to removal of excess and vitiated doshas through
different routes of the body. Similarly Shodhana of a
dravya refers to removal of unwanted properties or
impurities from a substance through different
pharmaceutical procedures12. There are references in
Charaka Samhita where Shuddhi (purification) of Dhatu
and Ratnas are carried out using hairbrush, washing with
water and cloth which indicate that procedures involving
cleaning and processing also mean Shodhana13.
Shodhana procedures have been advocated for both herbal
as well as mineral drugs based on their toxic nature.
Poisonous plants like Vatsanabha (Aconitum ferox Wall.),
Kupilu (Strychnos nux-vomica Linn.) etc are effectively
used for medicinal purpose after passing through a series
of purification (Shodhana)14. The classical quotes also
reveal that Shodhana not only refers to purification
procedures but also to different samskaras through which
there is ‘gunaantardhana’ (transformation in properties) in
the primary substance rendering it safe as well as many
desired qualities are imbibed in it15. For example,
Shodhita Guggulu (Commiphora mukul Engl.) was found
to be more effective than Ashodhita Guggulu in inhibiting
the spasms induced by acetylcholine in experimental
models16. Studies have shown that Shodhana can reverse
the pharmacological actions of a drug by altering its
phytoconstituents. The raw Kupilu seeds showed
convulsions in experimental animals while convulsions
were absent in animals administered with Ksheera
Shodhita Kupilu17. It is true in case of Vatsanabha also
where Shodhita Vatsanabha (aconite detoxified in cow's
urine) is converted into cardiac stimulant, whereas crude
Vatsanabha is claimed to be cardiac depressant18. Hence
the ultimate objective of the Shodhana process is to
increase the biological availability of the drug further
potentiating the biological efficacy.
Shodhana in Modern Perspective
Though there is no clear concept of Shodhana found in
modern pharmacy, certain procedures are adapted to
detoxify or to modify the quality as well as the quantity of
the phyto constituent. Various methods like sifting,
elutriation, lixiviation, acidification, precipitation,
alkalization
etc
are
adopted.
With
column
chromatography the required percentage of phyto
constituent could be achieved and thereafter, the drug can
be used as medicine. Recent advances in analytical
techniques such as spectroscopy, electron microscopy,
crystallography etc. can provide useful information about
structural as well as compositional change in the raw
341
Bhat Savitha D et al / IJRAP 3(3), May – Jun 2012
material during the different steps of Shodhana and its
end product19, 20.
Importance of Media in Shodhana
It is an amazing fact that even in olden days; classical
texts have advocated particular media for each herb to be
converted into a potent therapeutic agent without the aid
of analytical or spectroscopic methods. Most of the toxic
constituents are said to be transferred when the drug is
processed in a particular media. It is also evident in the
recent researches that toxic alkaloids like Scopalamine
and Hyosciamine in Dattura (Datura metel Linn.) were
transferred to the milk (taken as a media) thereby
rendering it safe21. Similarly Triphala kwatha Shodhita
Guggulu showed better antispasmodic activity than
distilled water Shodhita Guggulu14. In another
experimental study, better antimicrobial activity was
observed in Kanji Shodhita Gunja seeds than other
media22. For drugs like Vatsanabha, Kupilu and
Bhallataka (Semecarpus anacardium Linn.) a number of
media have been used for purification indicating that
particular media were selected so as to obtain a desired
pharmacological action23.
Need of Vacha Shodhana
Shodhana has also been advocated for certain plants and
plant materials even though they do not come under the
classical Visha varga (group of poisonous drugs). Some
of them are Vacha, Hingu (Ferula narthex Linn.),
Lashuna (Allium sativum Linn.) and Haridra (Curcuma
longa Linn.)24. References pertaining to Shodhana of
these dravyas are not mentioned in Brihatrayees
(Foremost classical texts like Charaka Samhita, Sushruta
Samhita and Ashtangasangraha) leading to a debatable
question whether Shodhana is required or not for these
commonly utilized, rather safe drugs.
Even though Acorus calamus Linn. is used extensively in
Indian medicine, U.S food and Drug administration has
considered it to be unsafe for human consumption since
1968, based upon cancerous tumours found in laboratory
animals when treated with β-asarone - an active
constituent of the plant25, 26. Also, some adverse effects
like disturbed digestion, gastroenteritis, persistent
constipation followed by diarrhoea and passage of blood
into the faeces were observed in some studies27. In 1981,
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives
evaluated β-asarone and did not establish an acceptable
daily intake but recommended that calamus oil used in
food should contain lowest possible amount of β-asarone.
Scientific Committee on Food evaluated beta asarone in
2001 and concluded that beta asarone has a weak
carcinogenic effect but did not rule out the possibility of
genotoxicity28, 29. The Council of Europe Committee of
Experts on Flavouring substances recommended limits of
β-asarone as 0.1mg/kg in foods and beverages with the
exceptions of 1mg/kg in Alcoholic beverages containing
Acorus calamus30. European Medicines Agency has
suggested an exposure limit of 115 μg/day (2 μg/kg
bw/day) for β-asarone in herbal medicinal products29. In
view of the toxicity of β-asarone, attempts are being done
to reduce its concentration in herbal medicinal products to
a minimum extent and diploid varieties like American
diploid variety of calamus without β-asarone is always
preferred for therapeutics and other industries31, 32.
Methods of Vacha Shodhana
Shodhana for Vacha has been mentioned in Chakradatta
for the first time and later in Bhaishajya Ratnavali. As per
the classical reference, the rhizomes are to be boiled
successively in Gomutra (Cow’s urine), Alambusha and
Panchapallava kwatha followed by bashpa swedana
(fomentation) using Surabhitoya33.
As per the views of commentator Shri Nischalakara of
Ratnaprabha commentary for Chakradatta, Alambusha is
considered as Mundi and Surabhitoya as Gandhodaka. A
detail method for preparation of Gandhodaka is also
described in the same chapter. Several herbs like
Twakpatri (Cinnamomum zeylanicum Breyn.), Patraka
(Cinnamomum tamala N.), Ushira (Vetiveria zizanoides
Linn.), Musta (Cyperus rotundus Linn,) and Balamula
(Sida cordifolia Linn.) are taken in the amount of 25 pala
(1250g) each. Kushta (Saussurea lappa C. B. Clarke.) is
taken in the amount of ardhapala (612g). They are boiled
in 25 prastha (18.750litres) of water and reduced to half to
obtain Gandhodaka34.
Other than classical methods of Shodhana, there are
certain folklore methods practised in states like Karnataka
and Kerala. In Sirsi taluk of Uttara Kannada district in
Karnataka, Vacha rhizomes are soaked in appropriate
amount of Cow’s milk for overnight, then washed in
warm water and dried in sun. A similar method is
followed in Ottappalam (Kottayam) of Palakkad district,
Kerala state where Vacha is soaked in Dadhi mastu for
overnight, then washed in warm water and dried in sun.
DISCUSSION
Vacha was known to mankind before 3000 years and its
growing popularity by the passing years is evident by the
fact that there are numerous therapeutic utilities involving
the drug35. This popularity was tainted in European
countries because of some carcinogenicity reports in
experimental animals due to administration of an isolated
compound called β-asarone and ban on Vacha
henceforth25. However, it was revised by several
committees but none of them ruled out the possibility of
carcinogenic and genotoxic potential of β-asarone28, 29.
In India, the scenario is different; Vacha is frequently
used in clinical practice without any reports of adverse
effects or toxicity. It is commonly used in the form of
powder and occasionally decoction. The herb is composed
of
several
active
principles
with
divergent
pharmacological activities. There is possibility that these
principles act in a synchronized fashion and exert a
cumulative beneficiary effect on the human system. But
the isolated constituents of the plant drug may not give
the same clinical response as the crude preparation of that
plant drug. Very often, they produce side effects. For
example, ephedrine an isolated herbal constituent has the
well-known side-effect of speeding up the heart rate, but
the whole plant Ephedra sinica Staph. does not has this
effect as, apart from ephedrine, it contains other alkaloids
that slows down the heart rate. Also toxicity could largely
be due to misidentification and overdosing of certain
constituents36.
In case of Apasmara (Epilepsy), it is advised to take
Vacha for a longer duration of time indicating that
prolonged administration may not cause adverse effects37.
342
Bhat Savitha D et al / IJRAP 3(3), May – Jun 2012
Also, Vacha Shodhana has not been noted in Brihatrayees
(1500BC-550AD) but was mentioned for the first time in
Chakradatta (11th century), a text devoted to therapeutic
formulations, whereas it is also observed that many texts
or Nighantus (Material medica) concerned with the drug
profile have not reported its contraindications or
Shodhana. These facts make us to assume that intension
of Acharyas behind explaining the Shodhana methods,
probably were meant to reduce any toxicity observed
when Vacha was given for a long time or some other
plant having toxicity potential was being used in the name
of Vacha during that period. It is also possible that
Shodhana was intended to reduce the Teekshnata
(Sharp/irritant nature) of the drug so that it can be
administered safely in children or was aimed to increase
its potency without increasing the dose because increase
in the dose of Vacha will cause emesis38.
Most of the ingredients used in Shodhana have similar
properties that of Vacha. Gomutra has been proved to be
anti cancerous39 and using it as one of the media might
restrict the chances of carcinogenicity if any. Mundi, well
known for its Mutrala (diuretic), Shothahara (reducing
oedema) and Medhya properties40, may potentiate Vacha
further. Panchapallava is used in the Kshalana
(washing/cleaning) of Gandha dravya (aromatic herbs)
which can be considered as a type of Shodhana. These
Gandha dravyas have Vacha as ingredient41 and hence it’s
cleaning or processing done by Panchapallava kwatha
suggests that Panchapallava is capable of doing Shodhana
of Vacha as a single entity. Gandhodaka contains most of
the drugs which are aromatic and having essential oils.
Bashpa swedana with Gandhodaka might be aimed to
imbibe certain essential oil components into the drug
which might have been lost after Shodhana. The
Gandhodaka also contain herbs like Bala and Musta
which are vatahara further potentiating vatahara karmas
of Vacha42.
The reason to select milk as one of the media by the
folklore practitioners might be that, Vacha is administered
to children for improving speech and milk is compatible
to most of the children since birth. Mastu, another media
of Shodhana, has been used as an ingredient along with
Vacha in several yogas indicating its compatible nature
when mixed with Vacha43. This also shows that folklore
method of Shodhana which involves both Mastu and
Vacha may not produce any adverse effects when
combined. Also Mastu is Kaphavatahara44, 45 which
further potentiates the action of Vacha.
CONCLUSION
Shodhana for Vacha seems to be an uncommon procedure
in the Ayurvedic armamentarium because of its only
reference in Chakradatta. Also lack of therapeutic
indications particularly for Shodhita Vacha makes us to
assume that Shodhana was not particularly intended to
reduce the toxicity, but alter its pharmacological activity
desirably. Since there is lack of reported data suggesting
the methods for Shodhana of Vacha or its outcome, it can
be considered as one of the essential subject to be
scientifically evaluated through modern parameters and
clinical trials to establish these facts.
REFERENCES
1. Agnivesha. Charaka Samhita. Part I. In: Kashinatha Shastry &
Gorakhanatha Chaturvedi (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukambha Bharati
Academy; 2001. p. 72, 80, 81, 83, 94 and 791.
2. Sushruta. Sushruta Samhita. Part I. In: Kaviraja Ambikadatta
Shastri (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan; 2002. p.
143, 145 and 147.
3. Vagbhata. Ashtanga Samgraha. In: Kaviraja Atrideva (ed.).
Varanasi: Chaukhambha Krishnadas Academy; 2005. p. 140,138
and 139.
4. Bhavamishra. Bhavaprakasha nighantu, Hareetakyadi varga/103. In:
G. S. Pandey (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Bharati Academy;
2006. p. 43-45.
5. Dhanvantari nighantu. Shatapushpadi varga/7-8. In: Sharma PV.
(ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia; 2005. p. 71.
6. Kaiyadeva. Kaiyadeva nighantu. Oushadhi varga/1215-1217. In:
Sharma PV (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia; 2001. p. 224225.
7. Chakrapanidatta. Chakradatta. In: Ramanath Dwivedi (ed.).
Varanasi: Chaukamba Sanskrit Samsthan; 2005. p. 155.
8. Govind Das. Bhaishajya Ratnavali. In: Brahmashankar Mishra (ed.).
Varanasi: Chaukhambha Surabharati Prakashan; 2008. p. 570.
9. Anonymous. The Ayurvedic pharmacopoeia of India, Part I, Vol
2nd. 1st edition. New Delhi: Ministry of health and family welfare,
Govt of India; 1999. p. 168-170.
10. Anonymous. Herb directory, Annual Report: Department of ISM &
H. 1998; 1(X): 18-25.
11. Sir Monier Monier-Williams. A Sanskrit English dictionary. Amen
house, London: Oxford university press; 2008. p. 1118.
12. Sadananda Sharma. Rasatarangini 2/42. In: Kashinath Shastri (ed.).
Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas; 2000. p. 735.
13. Agnivesha. Charaka Samhita, Sutrasthana 5/18. In: Kashinatha
Shastry & Gorakhanatha Chaturvedi (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukambha
Bharati Academy; 2001. p. 114.
14. Anjana Chaube, Prajapati PK., Dixit SK. On the Technique of
Shodhana. Ancient Science of Life 1996; 16(1): 67-73.
15. Agnivesha. Charaka Samhita, Vimanasthana 1/22. In: Kashinatha
Shastry & Gorakhanatha Chaturvedi (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukambha
Bharati Academy; 2001. p. 680.
16. Rachana Kamble, Sadhana Sathaye and Shah DP. Evaluation of
antispasmodic activity of different Shodhit guggulu using different
shodhan process. IJPS, May-June 2008; 368 -372.
17. Alex Hankey and Geetha Krishnanan. Ayurveda news from Europe,
News and Comments. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative
Medicine, April 2010; 1(2):161-167.
18. Prasanta Kumar Sarkar. Evaluation of Shodhana process and
antidotal study on Vatsanabha. Ph.D. thesis submitted to I.P.G.T
and R.A, Gujarat Ayurveda University, Jamnagar. 2008.
19. Sastry JLN. Dravyaguna Vijnana, Part I. Varanasi: Chaukhamba
orientalia; 2001. p. 327.
20. Pankaj Rai, Vikas M. Gupta, Richa Pathak, Laxmi Narayan Gupt,
Neeraj Kumar and Singh RS. Importance of Media in the
Pharmaceutical Processing of Metals and Minerals Scanning Electron Microscopy Study and Energy Dispersive X ray Analysis
Of Abhraka (Biotite). Int J Pharm Pharm Sci, 2010; 2(4): 121-126.
21. Patel Yogesh, Bhat Savitha D., Acharya Rabinarayan, Ashok BK.,
Shukla VJ. Role of Shodhana on Analytical parameters of Datura
innoxia Mill and Datura metel Linn seeds, IJRAP 2010; 1(2):249254.
22. Sudipta Roy. A comparative phytopharmacognostical and
antimicrobial evaluation of raw and Shodhita Gunja (Abrus
precatorius Linn.) seeds. M. Pharm thesis submitted to Gujarat
Ayurveda University, Jamnagar. 2012.
23. Ilanchezhian R., Roshy Joseph C., Rabinarayan Acharya.
Importance of media in Shodhana (purification / processing) of
poisonous herbal drugs. Ancient science of life 2010; 30(2): 54-57.
24. Ramnarayan Vaidya. Ayurveda Sara Sangraha, 12th edition.
Baidyanath Ayurved Bhavan, Jhansi.1982; 237-240.
25. United state food and drug administration, Code of Federal
Regulations, 3(1): 2010; 21.
26. Gianfranco Patri and Silano V. Plants in Cosmetics: Potentially
Harmful Components. Committee of Experts on Cosmetic products,
Council of Europe publishing, F67075, Strasburg codex, September,
3: 2006; 15-17.
27. Pammel LH. A manual of poisonous plants, 1911. In: Timothy J.
Motley. The ethno-botany of Sweet Flag, Acorus calamus
(Araceae), Economic Botany, 48(4): 1994; 397-412.
343
Bhat Savitha D et al / IJRAP 3(3), May – Jun 2012
28. Anonymous. Evaluation of Medicines for Human use. European
Medicines Agency/ HMPC/139215/2005. Accessed from
http://www.emea.eu.int on 20.07.10.
29. Anonymous. Extracted Ratified Minutes, Complementary
Medicines Evaluation Committee 49, Australian Government 2004;
01-12.
30. Beta-asarone WHO Food Additives Series 16, 09-21-10, accessed
from
http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v16je04.htm.
31. Chu Chen, Daniela Spriano and Beat Meier. Reduction of β-asarone
in Acori Rhizoma by Decoction. Planta Med 75: 2009; 1448-1452.
32. European Food Safety Authority; Compendium of botanicals that
have been reported to contain toxic, addictive, psychotropic or other
substances of concern on request of EFSA. EFSA Journal 2009;
7(9): 281. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.281. Available online:
www.efsa.europa.eu.
33. Govind Das. Bhaishajya Ratnavali, 19th edition. In: Brahmashankar
Mishra (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Surabharati Prakashan; 2008.
p. 570.
34. Chakrapanidatta.
Chakradatta,
Nischalakara’s
Ratnaprabha
commentary. In, Sharma PV (ed.). Jaipur: Swami Jayaramdas
Ramprakash Trust; 1993. p. 392.
35. Timothy J. Motley. The Ethnobotany of Sweet Flag, Acorus
calamus (Araceae). Economic Botany 1994; 48(4): 397-412.
36. Giovanni Maciocia. Safety of Chinese herbal medicine.
Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom: Su Wen Press; 1999. p. 13-14.
37. Vagbhata. Astanga Hridaya, Uttaratantra 7/34. In: Brahmanand
Tripathi (ed.). Varanasi. Chaukhambha Sanskrit Pratishthan; 2003.
p. 933.
38. Bhavamishra. Bhavaprakasha, Part II, 6/40. In: Brahmashankar
Mishra (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan; 2000. p.
78.
39. Ambwani S. Molecular studies on apoptori in avian lymphocytes
induced by perticides. PhD thesis submitted to Department of
Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, College of Basic Sciences
and Humanities, GBPAUT, Pantnagar, India. 2004.
40. Bhavamishra. Bhavaprakasha nighantu, Guduchyadi varga / 215218. In: Pandey GS (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Bharati
Academy; 2006. p. 413-414.
41. Govind Das. Bhaishajya Ratnavali, 26/301-304, 19th edition. In:
Brahmashankar Mishra (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukhambha Surabharati
Prakashan; 2008. p. 557.
42. Sharma PV. Dravyaguna Vijnana, Part II. Varanasi: Chaukhambha
Bharati Academy; 2001. p. 250, 114, 370, 735 and 572.
43. Agnivesha. Charaka Samhita, Siddhisthana 7/18. In: Kashinatha
Shastry & Gorakhanatha Chaturvedi (ed.). Varanasi: Chaukambha
Bharati Academy; 2001. p. 1036.
44. Sushruta. Sushruta Samhita, Sutrasthana 45/81-82. In: Kaviraja
Ambikadatta Shastri (ed.). 13th edition. Varanasi: Chaukhambha
Sanskrit Sansthan; 2002. p. 175.
45. Pandit Narahari. Rajanighantu, Ksheeradi varga/53. In: Indrdeo
Tripathy (ed.). Varanasi: Chowkhambha Krishnadas Academy;
2003. p. 514-515.
344
View publication stats