The time has come t o ack n owl e d ge that mainstream mental health models, derived mostly from EuroAmerican paradigms, are not universally applicable. Their focus is often reductionist—diagnosis-oriented, symptom-centric, and limited to individual psychodynamics. In contrast, Bharatiya thought offers a holistic and integrated view of health—where manas (mind), sharira (body), buddhi (intellect), and atma (soul) are interconnected. This is not about revivalism but about epistemic justice—ensuring India’s civilizational thought systems are not dismissed as mythical or anecdotal but studied as shastra (systematised knowledge).
There is a global rethinking underway for Alternatives—from mindfulness apps to yogabased healing—but India risks becoming a consumer, not the author, of its own traditions unless universities and mental health professionals take the lead.
COUNSELLING ROOTED IN DHARMA, GUNA, AND SELF-INQUIRY
Indian philosophy never treated mental health as separate from ethical living. The concept of dharma— acting in accordance with one’s duties, nature, and time—provides a profound anchor for psychological wellbeing. Gunas—sattva, rajas, and tamas—offer a dynamic personality theory that recognizes inner flux and aims for equilibrium, not binary normal-abnormal labels.
Atma-vichara (self-inquiry), central to Vedanta and Yoga traditions, empowers individuals to engage in lifelong inner dialogue. It fosters viveka (discernment) and vairagya (detachment), which are therapeutic tools par excellence. Indian texts don’t separate the individual from the cosmos. They provide frameworks like pancha kosha (five sheaths of existence), kleshas (afflictions), and karma theory to understand human distress in deeply contextual ways. The Bhagavad Gita itself is a model of ethical counselling. Arjuna’s psychological paralysis is treated not with external validation, but through dialogue, introspection, and guidance towards swadharma. Krishna is counsellor, not commander.
DECOLONIZING PSYCHOLOGY
The very act of calling Bharatiya traditions “alternative” reinforces colonial hierarchies in knowledge. Why are Freudian models mainstream and Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras footnotes? Indian psychology has been colonised not just materially but also epistemically. Students are trained in CBT (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy) but rarely taught what smriti, shraddha, or dhyana mean outside Westernised translation. IKS does not reject scientific validation. It demands context-sensitive, culturally rooted, and experientially grounded models that reflect Indian life-worlds that are intergenerational family systems, collectivist moralities, spiritual pursuits, and ritual practices.
Even therapeutic ethics in IKS differ: confidentiality exists, but so does community-based healing. The guru-shishya parampara, ashramas, and satsangs were all proto-counselling spaces. We must frame decolonial psychology not as a rejection of Western models, but as a multipolar plurality where Bharatiya systems reclaim authority without mimicry.
TOOLS FOR HOLISTIC MENTAL HEALING
Indian knowledge is embodied and lived—not just cognitive or diagnostic. Hence, therapy is incomplete without including breath (pranayama), posture (asana), diet (aahara), and seasonal rhythm (ritu). Ayurveda’s tridosha theory is not superstition—it sees the body-mind as a fluid ecology where vata, pitta, and kapha imbalances affect mood, cognition, and energy. Practices like abhyanga (massage), shirodhara (oil therapy), and herbal rasayanas are part of a preventive, integrative mental health system. Yoga, as defined by Patanjali, is “citta vritti nirodhah”—calming the fluctuations of the mind. Its eight limbs (ashtanga) are a complete ethical-physicalmental-spiritual path. Buddhist Abhidhamma texts break down the workings of the mind into dharmas (mental factors), offering insights into perception, suffering, and impermanence. Vipassana, rooted in Buddhist mindfulness, is now used in prisons, schools, and therapy rooms—yet it originated as an IKS model of selfregulation and healing.
SIDDHA, TRIBAL AND ORAL SYSTEMS
Siddha medicine is an ancient, traditional medical system originating in South India, primarily practised by Tamil-speaking communities. It is one of the oldest medical systems in the world, predating even Ayurveda. The system’s roots are deeply intertwined with the ancient Tamil civilization and its culture. The term “Siddha” comes from the Tamil word “Siddhi,” meaning “perfection” or “heavenly bliss,” reflecting the system’s holistic approach to healing the body, mind, and soul. Siddha medicine is believed to have originated in pre-Ayurvedic times, with roots tracing back to the Indus Valley Civilization. The system’s development is attributed to the Dravidian culture, one of the oldest cultures in the world. According to Siddha tradition, the knowledge of the system was first revealed by the Hindu God Shiva to his consort Parvati, who then passed it on to Nandi Deva and the Siddhars. The Siddhars, spiritual masters with exceptional knowledge and powers (ashta siddhis), are considered the foundational figures of this system. Agastya (Agastyar) is often recognized as the prominent figure and the father of Siddha medicine.
FEMINISATION OF CARE
One of the most unacknowledged contributions to Indian mental health has come from women practitioners—dais, midwives, ritual specialists, and grandmothers—who held the community’s emotional fabric together. Bharatiya traditions are deeply relational. Healing was not medicalised but occurred through song, ritual, katha, prayer, and food—largely preserved and practised by women. Ahilyabai Holkar, for example, was not just a ruler but an institution-builder who believed in ethics-based governance and people’s spiritual upliftment. In the Bhakti tradition, women saints like Mirabai, Janabai, and Akka Mahadevi channelled grief and longing into poetry, spiritual resilience, and communal healing. Even in Buddhist nuns’ traditions (bhikkhunis) and tribal cosmologies, the feminine principle is central—not as patient but as healer. There is a need to elevate these forgotten histories and weave them into mainstream counselling and psychology pedagogy.
INSTITUTIONALISING BHARATIYA MODELS
Universities must lead in this process by: * Developing IKS-based counselling certification programmes * Creating text translation and application centres for key Sanskrit and Pali psychological works * Offering doctoral fellowships in Bharatiya Psychology and Comparative Therapies * Professional bodies like the Rehabilitation Council of India and National Medical Commission must support alternative, culturally embedded frameworks alongside allopathic ones. * Build interdisciplinary bridges: Ayurveda and Psychiatry, Yoga and Public Health, Buddhist Studies and Trauma Therapy, etc. Encourage empirical, outcome-based research, but redefine evidence to include lived wisdom, case histories, and community validation—not just clinical trials. India must also export, not just import—IKS models should be globally certified and available in humanitarian, educational, and postconflict settings.
RETHINKING MENTAL HEALTH
Mental health is not the absence of depression or anxiety. In Bharatiya traditions, it is the presence of sama (equanimity), santosha (contentment), and svatantrya (freedom of the soul). The purpose of counselling is not adjustment but inner transformation—moving from bondage to liberation, from confusion to clarity. Ethics are not add-ons— they are central. Whether it’s yama and niyama in Yoga, or dharma-vinaya in Buddhism, or karma-yoga in the Gita— mental wellness is about living rightly. As modern society struggles with loneliness, digital fatigue, and identity crises, Bharatiya frameworks can offer sustainability of the self. This is not soft power—it is intellectual leadership and becoming a knowledge power for Vikasit Bharat, rooted in a vision of lokasangraha (welfare of the world).
Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is the Vice-Chancellor of JNU.
