Carpe Diem in Ayurveda: A Call to Seize the Ancient Wisdom
Carpe Diem in Ayurveda: A Call to Seize the Ancient Wisdom
Carpe Diem in Ayurveda: A Call to Seize the Ancient Wisdom
Inspired by the transformative teaching philosophy of Mr. Keating in “Dead Poets Society” (1989), Dr. Aakash Kembhavi adapts this compelling approach to challenge both students and faculty in Ayurvedic education to think independently and embrace the true spirit of ancient healing wisdom.
A dialogue between Dr. Aakash Kembhavi, a student, and a teaching faculty about awakening authentic engagement in Ayurvedic learning
The library was unusually quiet for an evening when Dr. Aakash Kembhavi found both a student (XYZ) and a Teaching Faculty member hunched over the same table, both looking equally disheartened. Scattered around them were classical texts, research papers, and what appeared to be yet another standardized curriculum outline.
Dr. Kembhavi: “You both look like you’re attending a funeral rather than studying the science of life. What’s troubling you?”
Teaching Faculty: “We’re trying to align our Dravyaguna syllabus with the new competency requirements. Everything has to fit into predetermined learning outcomes and assessment matrices.”
XYZ: “And we’re supposed to memorize 500 drug formulations for the upcoming exam. I can’t see how this connects to actually understanding how herbs work.”
Dr. Kembhavi pulled up a chair and sat down, his expression thoughtful.
Dr. Kembhavi: “Tell me, when you both first encountered Ayurveda, what drew you to it?”
XYZ: “I was fascinated by how our ancestors understood the human body and nature’s healing power. It felt like discovering a lost treasure.”
Teaching Faculty: “I loved the philosophical depth – how Ayurveda sees health as harmony between individual and universal consciousness. It was poetry in the form of medicine.”
Dr. Kembhavi: “And now?”
Teaching Faculty: “Now I’m teaching students to fill in the blanks correctly on multiple-choice questions about Rasa and Guna.”
XYZ: “And I’m cramming formulations without understanding why Triphala works or when to modify classical prescriptions.”
Dr. Kembhavi stood up and walked to the shelf of ancient texts.
Dr. Kembhavi: “You know what Charaka would say if he walked into a modern Ayurveda classroom? He’d ask why we’re teaching students to be parrots instead of physicians.”
He pulled out the Charaka Samhita and opened it.
Dr. Kembhavi: “Listen to this – ‘A physician who has studied texts but lacks practical wisdom is like a coward in battle, confused and ineffective.’ Charaka wasn’t advocating for memorization. He was calling for transformation.”
Teaching Faculty: “But sir, we have accreditation requirements, standardized curricula, and assessment protocols. We can’t just throw out the system.”
XYZ: “And students who don’t conform to these patterns fail their exams, regardless of their actual understanding.”
Dr. Kembhavi: “Ah, so you’ve both accepted that authentic education and institutional success are mutually exclusive?”
He closed the book and looked at both of them.
Dr. Kembhavi: “Let me ask you something. When you’re alone with these texts, away from syllabi and exam patterns, what do you discover?”
XYZ: “I find connections between concepts that no one talks about in class. Like how Ojas isn’t just immunity but relates to spiritual well-being.”
Teaching Faculty: “I see how classical case studies reveal diagnostic thinking that’s far more sophisticated than our current protocol-based approach.”
Dr. Kembhavi: “Exactly! So why do you abandon these insights the moment you enter the classroom or exam hall?”
Teaching Faculty: “Because the system doesn’t reward that kind of thinking.”
XYZ: “Because it’s not what’s being tested.”
Dr. Kembhavi: “And this is precisely why both of you are feeling dead inside. You’re betraying your own intellectual curiosity to conform to mediocrity.”
He sat back down, leaning forward intently.
Dr. Kembhavi: “I want you both to try something. For the next month, I want you to approach Ayurveda like it’s the first time you’re encountering it. Question everything. Not to reject it, but to understand it freshly.”
Teaching Faculty: “What about the curriculum requirements?”
Dr. Kembhavi: “Fulfill them, but don’t let them limit you. When you teach Tridosha, don’t just explain Vata, Pitta, and Kapha. Help students discover why this model emerged and how it applies to their own constitution.”
XYZ: “And the exams?”
Dr. Kembhavi: “Master the expected answers, but develop your own understanding beyond them. When you study Panchamahabhuta, don’t just memorize the elements – explore how ancient seers perceived the fundamental nature of existence.”
He stood up and began pacing.
Dr. Kembhavi: “Both of you are complicit in reducing this profound science to academic routine. You!” he pointed to the faculty member, “You’re teaching students to pass exams instead of become healers. And you!” he turned to the student, “You’re studying to get grades instead of gaining wisdom.”
Teaching Faculty: “But what if this approach doesn’t prepare students for their careers?”
XYZ: “What if thinking differently makes me an outlier who doesn’t fit into conventional practice?”
Dr. Kembhavi: “What if conforming to mediocrity ensures that neither of you ever discovers what you’re truly capable of?”
He picked up a classical text and held it up.
Dr. Kembhavi: “These texts weren’t written by people who followed standardized curricula. They were created by individuals who dared to observe, think, and question. They seized the opportunity to understand life deeply.”
“Carpe Diem – seize the day. But in Ayurveda, I want you to seize something more profound. Seize the wisdom. Seize the opportunity to think originally. Seize the chance to be authentic practitioners and educators.”
Teaching Faculty: “And risk being seen as non-conformist?”
Dr. Kembhavi: “Risk being remembered as someone who helped preserve the true spirit of Ayurveda rather than its hollow shell.”
XYZ: “What if we fail?”
Dr. Kembhavi: “What if you don’t try and spend your entire career wondering what you might have discovered if you had the courage to think for yourself?”
He sat down one final time, his voice gentle but firm.
Dr. Kembhavi: “I’m not asking you to rebel against education. I’m asking you to reclaim it. Stop being passive recipients of information and become active seekers of understanding.”
“When you study Ayurveda, don’t ask ‘What will be on the exam?’ Ask ‘What can this teach me about the nature of health and healing?’ When you teach, don’t ask ‘What does the syllabus require?’ Ask ‘How can I help students discover the profound wisdom in these concepts?’”
Teaching Faculty: “And if the administration doesn’t appreciate this approach?”
XYZ: “And if other students think we’re being unnecessarily complicated?”
Dr. Kembhavi: “Then you’ll know you’re doing something right. Because authentic engagement with profound knowledge is never simple or popular. But it’s the only way to honor the tradition you’ve inherited.”
“The question isn’t whether others will understand your approach. The question is: Will you have the courage to pursue genuine understanding, or will you settle for sophisticated ignorance?”
The Moral of the Conversation
The exchange between Dr. Kembhavi, the student, and the teaching faculty reflects the central challenge of educational authenticity: the tension between institutional requirements and genuine learning.
Inspired by Mr. Keating’s philosophy in “Dead Poets Society,” Dr. Kembhavi challenges both educator and student to reclaim their intellectual curiosity and think independently about Ayurvedic knowledge. The core message is that conformity to standardized educational patterns, while institutionally safe, can kill the very spirit of inquiry that makes learning transformative.
The conversation reveals how both students and faculty can become complicit in reducing profound knowledge to routine academic exercise. When educators prioritize syllabus completion over understanding, and students focus on grades over wisdom, the essential depth of Ayurvedic knowledge gets lost.
Dr. Kembhavi’s “Carpe Diem” isn’t about rejecting structure – it’s about not allowing structure to constrain authentic engagement with knowledge. The examples of questioning, exploring, and thinking originally demonstrate that institutional success and intellectual authenticity need not be mutually exclusive.
The Key Questions:
- Will you have the courage to engage with Ayurvedic knowledge as a living, breathing wisdom tradition rather than just academic content?
- Will you risk being different in order to preserve what makes this knowledge truly valuable?
- Will you seize the opportunity to think for yourself, or will you remain a passive recipient of others’ interpretations?
The choice, as Dr. Kembhavi suggests, isn’t between success and failure – it’s between authentic engagement and intellectual conformity. In the end, the conversation challenges both educators and students to choose genuine understanding over convenient mediocrity, because that choice will determine whether Ayurveda remains a transformative science or becomes just another subject to be passed.
Share your thoughts in the comments below.
💬 Comments & Discussion