The Student of Āyurveda (4): System of assessment

There is no indication in our two medical classics of the duration of the course. The baffling complexity and vastness of the subject is acknowledged by both Caraka^[1] and Suśruta.^[2] Since the ability to grasp the preceptor’s instructions depended on the intelligence level of the student, it would be prudent to surmise that the graduating period may not have been the same for all students. We know that Jīvaka (belonging to 5^th century BCE) studied the subject for seven years^[3] before taking a test given by his preceptor.

The method of assessing the student’s performance is not mentioned in our treatises. Caraka gives eight topics on which one physician can examine another: the treatise (trantra), the sections (sthāna), the chapters (adhyāya) and the topics (praśna) along with the scope of each of these. The ability to recite the relevant portions from the text, give the interpretation and the summary is considered the hallmark of a true scholar of Āyurveda.^[4] Caraka says that the competence of the physician can be gauged from the following qualities: knowledge of medical texts in their entirety; practical experience; skill; purity; infallibility of prescriptions; possession of normal sense faculties and all the requisite equipments; knowledge of the various manifestations and presence of mind.^[5] It is probable that qualifying students were examined on these grounds.

Suśruta also mentions the ability to quote meaningfully from the texts as one of the determinants of the student’s level of learning along with skill in performing procedures.^[6] Here we may again refer to Jīvaka’s case. When he asked his preceptor when the learning process would come to an end, he was given a spade and told to search in the vicinity of Takṣaśilā for plants without medicinal value whatsoever. Jīvaka searched a yojana all around the place but could find none. The preceptor was satisfied with his reply and declared that he had done his learning.^[7] This test appears wholly inadequate but is an indication of some form of assessment of medical students.

Scholarship for the medical student, however, was a continuous process. Even after he had gained the knowledge of the entire scripture, he should persistently strive to achieve depth in the scriptures, a good grasp of its terminology (abhidhānasya sauṣṭhava), comprehension of the various concepts (vijñāna), and the power of oration (vācanasya śakti).^[8] Suśruta has similar recommendation: The scholar should continue to study regularly even after the completion of the course in order to refine the language, to grasp the depth of meaning, to gain confidence and expertise in practical work and to keep it in constant practice as well as to achieve success.^[9] Some scholars believe that this is an indication of the encouragement given to the pursuit of post-graduate studies in medicine.^[10] We may envisage that practitioners returned to their preceptors for enhancement of knowledge and skills.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 15.5.

[2]:

Suśruta Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 4.5.

[3]:

Mahavagga VIII.1.6.

[4]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 30.30.

[5]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.86.

[6]:

Suśruta Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 10.3.

[7]:

The Mahavagga VIII.1.7.

[8]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.5.

[9]:

Suśruta Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 3.56.

[10]:

G.D. Singhal et al., Fundamental and Plastic Surgery Considerations in Ancient Indian Surgery, Vol. I, p. 73, fn 1; P.V. Sharma, Suśruta-Saṃhitā with English Translation of Text and Ḍalhaṇa’s Commentary along with critical notes, p. 54.