Im/possibility of Self-control and Self-mastering

“It’s actually terribly simple. But the complexity for us is to receive it [Ayurveda]

when you’re thinking about why something is a certain way, or how to specifically help when you have a sore throat ... . I just had surgery, so what does that actually mean? I mean, it makes all the sense in the world, and our job is to accept it, the whole wide range of influences and qualities, and somehow look for them. And that’s obviously difficult”. (interview, Dana, 11/2016)

Suddenly, the body becomes significantly more vulnerable, and its boundaries become more permeable. It is almost at the mercy of all internal and external influences. It is dependent on many variables here, which, on the one hand, is intelligible and logical if one has been dealing

with it for some time. On the other hand, it is not entirely easy to get to the bottom of the difficulty if such a wide range of influences is to be taken into account.

“It’s hard, but it’s about forcing oneself to think about it precisely. Just like I had a sore throat, and I was like, "Oh my throat hurts." And then I was like, "No, no no.

Why do you have a sore throat?" And, now, I didn't really know. Should I have ginger and honey? Or should I gargle turmeric? What do I want? And then I was like, "Yes, my throat hurts, but it's actually burning, so what's burning there. Why is it there? Well, I'll just cool it down." But I still haven't quite figured out why it's, like, burning... . It's still like taking one step and thinking about why it happened”.

(ibid.)

About a year after I conducted the interview with Dana, she told me that she often finds it frustrating, but also motivating, when she does not find a solution to a problem, even though she has all the tools to solve it (fieldnotes 1/2017). Practitioners gain access to prevent the emergence of dis-ease and, when it happens, to heal it. They have learned what all body conditions affect and, therefore, know what to “watch out” for. They have gained certain expertise in recognizing their bodies and, with this, access to self-control or self-management (cf. Baarts and Pedersen 2009). But, of course, just because they have access to it in theory does not mean they use it. Why not? Do they not want to? Or are they unable to? In her analysis of herbalist treatment, Nissen (2013) finds this kind of CAM beneficial for her clients because it allows them to self-realize. However, this self-realization is not feasible for all informants, as it involves a certain “taking care of oneself” that is very time and energy-consuming (ibid.). In my research, too, practitioners do not always want to “get to the bottom of it” as they are unwilling or unable to devote the necessary amount of time or energy to the cause of the health problem. It is precisely for this reason that many factors need to be considered. Together with Mol and Law, I ask: “How might complexities be handled in knowledge practices, non- reductively, but without at the same time generating ever more complexities until we submerge in chaos”? (Mol and Law 2002, 1)

Both the diagnosis and the treatment are usually very time-consuming in Ayurveda. As a result, rather than speak of gaining expertise, we must speak about gaining access to expertise, or more precisely to theoretical expertise, the application of which can be difficult in practice. The following excerpt from an interview with Ladislav illustrates this point:

“For example, if I am flatulent, I know that I have thrown my vata around, and I know that maybe I have talked too much or travelled too much or thrown my regime around or eaten irregularly. Yeah. Or somehow, I've increased the vata.

Even if I’m traveling and I go to Brno, and I have buttons in my stool, I can understand that it is not caused by food but by the fact I have travelled by train for several hours”. (interview, 5/ 2017)

It is clear from the previous quote that Ladislav does not just want to “get to the bottom of it”

like Dana. He is not “only” interested in knowing the cause of the problem in order to know more. It is not just about deciphering the effects on his own body but recognizing where he went wrong. Lada sees his own agency as central here. Either practitioners can observe, perceive and become aware of their bodies in their interconnectedness, or they can embrace

reflection on this new way of being their body as an imperative of their everyday life. Thus, in the process of discovery, Ladislav got to know what influences the state of his body. However, with that comes the knowledge that it mostly depends on his actions. Indeed, what practitioners eat, listen to or what area of skin they expose to the wind or cold can, or rather should, be controlled. Moreover, because they know that environmental influences affect the body, they can usually manipulate them and interact with these influences so that they help, or at least not hurt. The other side of this coin suggests, as the opening quote also shows, that this also means they feel responsible for most of these things. It is not always possible to control how much one talks or how far one travels when, for example, the job demands it. Lada does everything he can to stay well. Thus, when well-being becomes an achievable norm, but one is unable to enrich it for whatever reason, it is neither empowering nor liberating. On the contrary, it can bind the individual and produce anxiety, anxiety about not achieving an attainable state of well- being. The following fieldnotes depicting a self-reflection on my own practice illustrates the complexity of this process:

I can now explain everything that happens to me through Ayurvedic principles.

I know that I can influence most of my actions and feelings and change my mind and body if I balance external influences correctly. But influencing, and therefore having some control over myself, is not always easy. In fact, according to Ayurveda, our body and mind react with everything it comes into contact within any way. But I don’t have the capacity to watch over everything. Weather, food, exercise, the right amount and time to eat and move, travel, etc. In fact, I don’t even aspire to live completely according to Ayurveda. But it is true that its practice, which I initially did for purely research reasons, has gradually turned into a kind of automatic practice and results in occasional reproachful thoughts.

(autoethnographic note, 5/2017)

Recalling how Ladislav reproached me on the phone about being sick, which, as he suggested bluntly, does not make much sense for a person who practices Ayurveda:

We both cough at the same time while walking together from the train station to his house. He starts filling me in on what he does, advising “not only turmeric, but boil long-pepper⁹¹ in milk, that’s something”. But when I ask him why he’s still coughing, he says it’s elsewhere, that he’s just sad, and he won’t do anything about it until the family situation calms down. (fieldnotes 5/2017)

For Ladislav, it is incomprehensible for someone who does Ayurveda to be sick. In fact, he finds dis-eases unnecessary, and when someone suffers from them (especially mild ones), it is instead a sign of laziness and negligence in following Ayurvedic principles. With this attitude, it is, of course, not easy for him to be sick himself. Indeed, knowing how the body works and all that relates to and affects it does not always guarantee a successful solution to the problem.

As has been said already, the body in Ayurveda is interdependent with many things. Not only the body itself but also other entities thus acquire considerable agency here. As a result, their agency is equal. Therefore, if a person is exposed to an unpleasant situation, it can take a toll

91 Pippali pepper.

on her well-being. If she cannot or will not change the situation, the difficulty persists. As the last passage implies, despite knowing the body, it is impossible for Ladislav to manipulate it.

Here, environmental factors override the body’s agency, making it impossible to control it, to empower oneself or any other positively perceived effect of Ayurveda. We, therefore, arrive to a place where the agency of other entities acting upon one’s body is greater than one’s own agency, than one’s own ability to solve the problem. This situation may then inhibit self- mastery.

Awareness of the body in Ayurvedic practice, that is, awareness of its internal interconnectedness and interdependence with the external environment, does not, therefore, automatically imply knowing the bodily dis-ease experienced—precisely because it is dependent on so many factors. At the same time, the body-centrist approach adopted often produces a sense of primacy concerning one's agency and, thus, the potential to solve almost any bodily problem, contrary to the discourse implying equal agency among all actors bound to the interdependency of a specific situation. Here a parallel is offered to the conquest-like narrative of Western science about the subjugation of nature. Still, even Ayurvedic theory need not overlap with empirical reality. If one fails to address dis-ease successfully, such a situation may produce unpleasant feelings. For example, when considering all the different options, Dana often cannot recognize the origin of her bodily struggles or the strategy for solving them. At the same time, she feels that she could, as she has potential access to all the relevant information and knowledge. The auto-ethnographic notes illustrate more extremely that this situation can cause anxiety about one's misconduct. Nevertheless, if, on the other hand, the individual does not gain a sense of primacy of his own agency but is convinced his body is in an interdependent relationship with an almost infinite number of other existences, responsibility for himself among these existences may become completely diluted.