Ayurevda Gurukulum Published

The gazette notification for launching the scheme of Ayurveda Gurukulam by the NCIM gave me a feeling of taking Ayurveda back to school in the Sanskrita Pathashala. It appears the policy makers have decided that Ayurveda can only survive if presented in its ancient form. That may be the cause for bringing down the admission eligibility to 10th standard and affiliating the colleges to Sanskrita University. But the policy makers must realize that being ancient by age gets you respect and being ancient by thought leaves you behind the times. Therefore, both these decisions are not justified and will not stand test of time and will ultimately prove detrimental to the growth of Ayurveda in near future.

Admitting 10th standard students to the professional course will be a big mistake. 10th standard student is not an adult. Even the nation's law doesn't permit him to take any decisions affecting his future life. Asking him to take a decision about his career at this tender age is ethically wrong. Legal question apart, intellectually also the 10th standard student is not ready to bear the brunt of professional knowledge like medical science. Professional education like medical, engineering etc. needs to be built on the foundation of basic sciences like physics, chemistry, biology etc. In the past, prior to the establishment of CCIM, the admission eligibility to Ayurveda courses was 10th standard in most of the states. However, in few states where courses of Ayurveda integrated with modern medicine were affiliated to the University, the admission eligibility was 12th standard, then referred as B.Sc. 1st year. Soon after establishment of CCIM in 1970s, integrated Ayurveda courses were closed and 5-year Shuddha Ayurveda course B.S.A.M. was introduced, lowering the standard of admission to 10th standard. The decision could not stand for two years. The course was soon changed to BAMS with 7year duration which included first two years of pre-Ayurveda. This decision also had to be changed within two three years compelling the CCIM to remove two years of pre-Ayurveda and upgrade admission eligibility to 12th standard. Thus, lowering the admission eligibility to 10th standard had been repeatedly proven a failed model on all grounds. On this background it is not understandable why the proponents of Ayurveda Gurukul are trying to bring back this model.

12th standard is a universal gateway for all professional courses. This stage was earlier rightly referred as 'inter' meaning inter changing stage, where academic path can be changed to take up professional training. For science faculty, the stage was referred as inter-science. This was done with a thinking that at this stage the students become ready to absorb higher knowledge required for acquiring higher professional skills. This requires rigorous intellectual inputs. Such inputs are gradually achieved after crossing the school boundaries. During the first two years after 10th standard, the student readies himself to take up rigorous tasks. This readiness is tested in his 12th standard examination. Getting through this examination, ensures his readiness to grasp higher professional knowledge. Lowering the admission eligibility to 10th standard will bring immature students to Ayurveda who are not ready grasp any professional knowledge. Moreover, currently in its own land, Ayurveda is a foreign subject for school students. Therefore, the subject becomes more complicated after stepping in Ayurveda college just after school days. Secluding a 10th pass student in an atmosphere where he will be denied exposure to the basic science subjects will permanently cut him off from the society which is every day dependent on such subjects. Such students will always shy away from societal enquiry and will remain secluded in the society for their life time.

Some of my friends defend lowering of admission standard to 10th class, explaining that the 12th standard students are not accustomed with Sanskrita. Therefore, they fail to read and interpret Sanskrita texts in original Samhitas. They argue that in the first two years of pre-Ayurveda, the students will learn Sanksrita. Thereafter they will easily read Sanskrita texts. I feel sorry for their line of thinking. First, for their wishful thinking that within two years students will start reading complex Sanskrita text in Samhitas. Secondly, Sanskrita is not a language in daily use. Our policy makers are trying to introduce respective mother tongue languages as medium of teaching for all branches of science including professional science. In such a situation, why Ayurveda should be an exception to this policy. Why Ayurveda Gurukul proponents are barricading Ayurveda in Sanskrita and making its teaching and learning harder. Is it not a better option to get all Sanskrita Samhitas translated appropriately by selected scholars in various Indian languages? It is true that even after 100 plus years of institutionalization of Ayurveda, good translations of Samhitas are a rarity. But still, it is not a difficult task. It can be done with appropriate efforts. At least it will be easier to get good translations of Sanksrita text by Sanskrita experts than to make 10th pass student ready to read Sanskrita Samhitas within two years. Everybody interested in learning Ayurveda will be benefited by such an attempt.

Affiliation of Ayurveda course to Sanskrita University will be another grave mistake. This decision indicates that the proponents of this suggestion do not consider Ayurveda as a medical science, instead they consider Ayurveda as a philosophy. Such an attempt will rob away the professional spirit and enthusiasm from the students and teachers. Ayurveda students and faculty will not get professional ambience in Sanskrita University. Today also Ayurveda is blamed for its lack of practical applicability and its dependence on lexiconic hypothetical postulations. Affiliation of Ayurveda to Sanskrita University will forever brand Ayurveda as a theoretical pseudoscience. In fact, the policy makers should think of colocation of all academic institutes of all medical systems. Such an attempt will be completely in line with the current education policy.

Last but not the least issue is the course content of Ayurveda Gurukulam course. Ayurveda Gurukulam, if implemented in the right perspective excluding the lowering of admission eligibility and affiliation to Sanskrita University will be a novel idea if implemented with completely new structure of core curriculum. However, provision of big budget for raising the infrastructure and beautifying the campus in the scheme will not improve the core quality of academics. The root cause of disorder in the present curriculum, is the absence of soul of academics required to establish Ayurveda as a science. Adoption of such disordered curriculum will defeat the purpose of this scheme from its root. The present curriculum is a fractured and a disfigured replica of modern medicine in every respect. Unless, this is changed nothing is going to change. Another deficiency faced today is scarcity of good quality teachers having profound knowledge of Ayurveda updated with sound foundation of scientific attitude and ability to understand the relevance of current knowledge with respect to application of Ayurveda. Currently barring few respectable exceptions, we find two types of teachers one totally corrupt with half cooked knowledge of modern medicine, which is a majority. The other harbouring ignorance and hence hatred of modern science as a whole, may be that is why emotionally attached to Ayurveda although poor in its core knowledge. This category is totally devoid of scientific attitude forget about acumen. Today this category is receiving lot of societal and Govt attention. Both these varieties are useless for establishing Ayurveda as a science. If present curriculum is to be followed, there is no need of Gurukulum or any such scheme. Presently also good students develop themselves as good Ayurveda professionals on their own. But this is not sufficient to produce a good scientist. We are killing the spirit of good scientist in the name of Ayurveda in the presently run system. Today in the name of research we are making a mockery of research in solely academic and designated Ayurveda research institutes as well. It appears, by launching the Gurukul scheme, policy makers have shown that there is dearth of ideas and lack of people with a potential and courage to do anything good for Ayurveda. As on today, institutes like ITRA, Jamnagar and NIA Jaipur are nothing but Gurukulam in every sense. They have academic autonomy giving them freedom to design their own curricula. They should encouraged to use this freedom appropriately. Instead of launching new schemes like Ayurveda Gurukulam, why can't we use all our innovative ideas in these institutes and make them Nalada and Takshasheela of current times. But for that we have to adopt advance knowledge to establish and strengthen Ayurveda as a profound science. While doing so, we should neither use technology for overpowering principles of Ayurveda nor we should project Ayurveda as a philosophy dependent on lexiconic hypothetical postulations.