The classical types of shilajit are four varieties named in the Charaka Samhita after metals: gold, silver, copper and iron. The Sushruta Samhita adds tin and lead, making six. These are traditional classifications, not grades anyone measures, so a label saying "gold grade" or "red shilajit" is a name, not a laboratory result.
Search for the types of shilajit and you will find mostly sellers' guides, each with its own ranking of colours and grades. This article separates three things those guides tend to blend together: what the classical texts actually list, what that classification was based on, and what a buyer can verify about a jar today. It describes a tradition and a testing question. It makes no health claims.
At a glance
- A 2019 review in the Journal of Ayurveda and Integrated Medical Sciences reports that the Charaka Samhita lists four types, Swarna, Rajata, Tamra and Loha, and names Loha (iron) the best.
- The same review reports that the Sushruta Samhita describes six types, adding Vanga (tin) and Naga (lead) to Charaka's four.
- That review says the classification is based on the origin and colour of the material, not on any measured composition.
- A 2025 analysis in ACS Omega of one native shilajit specimen from Uttarkashi found copper and iron missing or present only at negligible levels.
- A 2008 study in JAMA found lead, mercury or arsenic in 20.7 per cent of 193 Ayurvedic products bought online.
What are the types of shilajit in Ayurveda?
The Charaka Samhita lists four types of shilajatu, the classical name for shilajit: Swarna, Rajata, Tamra and Loha. A 2019 review of the classical texts by Borkar and Pagire reports this list, and also that Charaka names the Loha variety as the best of the four. Each name is the Sanskrit word for a metal.
Translated, the four are gold (Swarna), silver (Rajata), copper (Tamra) and iron (Loha). These are the same Sanskrit names the Charaka Samhita uses for the metals themselves, as a 2011 review of metals in that text by Galib and colleagues sets out. The 2019 review says the classification of shilajit into these types is based on the origin and colour of the material.
One detail is worth holding on to. In the classical ranking reported by the review, the best variety is iron, not gold. The review gives no basis for treating "gold" as the top grade of shilajit.
What did Sushruta and the later texts add?
The Sushruta Samhita describes six varieties, according to the same 2019 review. It keeps Charaka's four and adds Vanga and Naga, the Sanskrit names for tin and lead. Later Rasashastra texts, which deal mainly with medicines prepared from mercury, metals, minerals and herbs, use a different scheme again, with two varieties called Gomutragandhi and Karpura.
The review is explicit about what each scheme rests on. The Charaka and Sushruta types are, in its words, based on the origin and colour of the shilajatu. The two Rasashastra varieties are based on its smell. None of these schemes is a chemical assay. They describe where the material came from, how it looked and how it smelled.
The six-type list contains a point of modern interest. Lead, which Sushruta's scheme names as a variety, is today one of the heavy metals a shilajit report should measure as a contaminant. The classical name and the modern safety concern are separate questions, and only the second can be answered with a test.
Are the classical types grades that anyone tests for?
No. The classical types describe where the material came from and how it looked. None of the sources reviewed for this article gives a laboratory test, a threshold or a standard that would let anyone confirm that a sample is the gold, silver, copper or iron type. What a laboratory can measure is something else: metals present, fulvic acid content and contaminants.
| Classical type | Metal in the name | Listed in | What can be checked today |
|---|---|---|---|
| Swarna | Gold | Charaka, Sushruta | No test or threshold for the type in these sources; check fulvic acid and heavy metals |
| Rajata | Silver | Charaka, Sushruta | No test or threshold for the type in these sources; check fulvic acid and heavy metals |
| Tamra | Copper | Charaka, Sushruta | No test or threshold for the type in these sources; check fulvic acid and heavy metals |
| Loha | Iron | Charaka (named the best), Sushruta | No test or threshold for the type in these sources; check fulvic acid and heavy metals |
| Vanga | Tin | Sushruta | No test or threshold for the type in these sources; check fulvic acid and heavy metals |
| Naga | Lead | Sushruta | Lead itself is a contaminant a heavy-metal report should measure |
A recent analysis shows why the metal in the name and the metals in the jar are different things. In 2025, Basavaraja and colleagues published a chemical analysis in ACS Omega of a single native shilajit specimen from Uttarkashi. Potassium, calcium and magnesium were the predominant elements. Copper and iron were missing or present only at negligible levels, and lead and arsenic were below detectable levels. One specimen proves nothing about a classification, but it does show that the composition of real shilajit is a matter for measurement, not naming.
What do "gold grade", "red" or "black" mean on a label today?
They mean whatever the seller intends. None of the sources reviewed here defines a "gold grade", a "silver grade", or a colour grade for shilajit. These terms borrow the classical names, or simply describe colour, and attach them to a product without a stated test behind them. Treat them as branding unless a report says otherwise.
Colour is a particularly weak signal. A 2010 review in the International Journal of Ayurveda Research describes shilajit as a pale-brown to blackish-brown exudate. That is a wide range for genuine material. The 2025 ACS Omega paper notes that the chemical make-up of shilajit varies with its geographic origin and environmental conditions. With that much variation, the sources give no single correct colour for shilajit. How the resin is collected, purified and dried is covered in how shilajit is collected and purified.
So a jar labelled "black" or "red" tells you what colour the seller says it is. It does not tell you which classical type it belongs to, how much fulvic acid it contains, or whether it is clean.
What can a buyer actually check?
Three things carry real information: whether the resin behaves like shilajit, what its fulvic acid content is and how it was measured, and what a batch-coded heavy-metal report shows. All three can be checked against a specific jar, unlike a type or a grade.
- Basic behaviour. Our guide to the home checks, including warm-water solubility, is how to identify pure shilajit. No home check can detect heavy metals.
- Fulvic acid, with its method. The 2010 review in the International Journal of Ayurveda Research names fulvic acid among the main carrier molecules in shilajit, which is why a report should state its content. A percentage means little without the method used to measure it; why label figures differ is explained in fulvic acid in shilajit.
- Heavy metals. Shilajit comes out of rock, and contamination is the risk you cannot see. In 2008, Saper and colleagues analysed 193 Ayurvedic products bought online and found lead, mercury or arsenic in 20.7 per cent of them; Rasa shastra medicines, which deliberately combine herbs with metals, minerals or gems, had a higher rate, 40.6 per cent against 17.1 per cent. What a report should cover, and which limits apply, is in shilajit heavy-metal testing.
The useful question to ask a seller is not "which grade is this?" but "may I see the report for this batch?" A report that matches the batch code on the jar, covers lead, arsenic, mercury and cadmium, and states fulvic acid content with its method is worth more than any grade name.
Why do the classical types still matter?
They record how the classical texts sorted shilajit: by origin, colour and smell, as a material that differs from one source to another. Modern analysis agrees with the second part: the 2025 ACS Omega paper reports that composition varies with geographic origin.
Where the tradition and the market part ways is in what the names are used for. The classical texts used them to describe and sort raw material. A modern label uses them to sell a jar. Reading the texts as they are reported in the reviews, the types are descriptions, not certificates, and the classical ranking does not even put gold first. If you are thinking of using shilajit and take any medication, are pregnant or have a health condition, follow your doctor's advice first.
The short version
The Charaka Samhita lists four types of shilajit, named for gold, silver, copper and iron, and ranks iron as the best. The Sushruta Samhita adds tin and lead, and later texts sort shilajit by smell. These classifications rest on origin and colour, not on any test, and no source here defines a modern "gold grade". What you can check is a jar's behaviour in warm water, its fulvic acid content and method, and a batch-coded heavy-metal report.
Sources
Further reading behind the figures above. Himdhara's own numbers — yields, batch results — come from our production records and the batch reports on the lab reports page.
- Borkar K, Pagire B (2019). Shilajatu Shodhana - A brief review. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrated Medical Sciences.
- Galib, Barve M, Mashru M, Jagtap C, Patgiri BJ, Prajapati PK (2011). Therapeutic potentials of metals in ancient India: A review through Charaka Samhita. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine.
- Basavaraja D, Katkar R, Dhaka P, et al. (2025). Chemical Analysis of Native Himalayan Shilajit: An Evaluation of an Ayurvedic Formulation. ACS Omega.
- Meena H, Pandey HK, Arya MC, Ahmed Z (2010). Shilajit: A panacea for high-altitude problems. International Journal of Ayurveda Research.
- Saper RB, Phillips RS, Sehgal A, et al. (2008). Lead, mercury, and arsenic in US- and Indian-manufactured Ayurvedic medicines sold via the Internet. JAMA.