The Caraka Saṃhitā (ca. first century BCE–third century CE), the first classical Indian medical compendium, covers a wide variety of pharmacological and therapeutic treatment, while also sketching out a philosophical anthropology of the human subject who is the patient of the physicians for whom this text was composed. In this article, I outline some of the relevant aspects of this anthropology – in particular, its understanding of ‘mind’ and other elements that constitute the subject – before exploring two ways in which it approaches ‘psychiatric’ disorder: one as ‘mental illness’ (mānasa-roga), the other as ‘madness’ (unmāda). I focus on two aspects of this approach. One concerns the moral relationship between the virtuous and the well life, or the moral and the medical dimensions of a patient’s subjectivity. The other is about the phenomenological relationship between the patient and the ecology within which the patient’s disturbance occurs. The aetiology of and responses to such disturbances helps us think more carefully about the very contours of subjectivity, about who we are and how we should understand ourselves. I locate this interpretation within a larger programme on the interpretation of the whole human being, which I have elsewhere called ‘ecological phenomenology’.

该Caraka本集（约公元前一世纪，公元三世纪），第一古典印度医学汇编，涵盖多种药理和治疗，同时也勾画出了人类主体的哲学人类学谁是医生的病人此文本是由谁撰写的。在本文中，我概述了该人类学的一些相关方面，特别是对人类的“思想”和构成该主题的其他要素的理解，然后探讨了人类心理学处理“精神病”障碍的两种方式：一种是“精神疾病” '（mānasa-roga），另一个为'madness'（unmāda）。我专注于这种方法的两个方面。一个人关注的是美德与健康生活之间的道德关系，或者病人主观性的道德与医学层面。另一个是关于患者与发生患者干扰的生态之间的现象学关系。这种干扰的病因和对策有助于我们更仔细地思考主观性的轮廓，我们是谁以及我们应该如何理解自己。我将这种解释放在一个更大的程序中，即关于整个人的解释，我在其他地方将其称为“生态现象学”。