Art by Aaron Ananta Staengl: AyurvedaPosters.com
As the education and clinical practice of āyurveda continue to grow throughout the world, one may ask: what constitutes the “classical” study of āyurveda? The term classical āyurveda can be understood or interpreted in various ways. One perspective sees it as an approach deeply rooted in the study of the classical texts (śāstra), where rigorous study with the original source material leads to the emergence of siddhānta—a well-established, authoritative conclusion and insight based on scriptural evidence, logical reasoning (yukti), and experiential validation (anubhava).
Another perspective on the study of śāstra involves the distillation of its essential principles, which are then brought to life through the guidance and transmission of a qualified teacher or guru, whether within a traditional gurukula or a modern academic setting. The teacher, having internalized and skillfully embodied the tradition, serves as a living extension of these teachings. Through oral transmission, the teacher expands upon the pithy and often condensed verses found in the texts. Their role is not only to interpret but also to adapt and present the teachings in a way that remains relevant to the time, place, and circumstance, as well as to the needs and aptitude of the student—and ultimately, to those whom the student will go on to serve through their clinical practice.
Another perspective that complements rather than contradicts the above is that classical āyurveda is not only rooted in textual study and paramparā (lineage), but is also deeply embodied in the clinician. It becomes the primary lens through which the physician views the world and renders cikitsā (treatment). From this orientation, all tools, including modern diagnostic methods, laboratory tests, or imaging, may be utilized, but they are interpreted through the core principles of āyurveda. These principles remain the central guiding intelligence, not secondary considerations.
If these core principles are only partially digested or insufficiently internalized, there is a tendency to lean too heavily on surface-level diagnosis and biomedical labels. This can lead to neglecting the nuanced and dynamic expressions of the tridoṣa and their associated guṇas (qualities), which, when undergoing pathogenesis, manifest through lakṣaṇa(symptoms) that tell the deeper story of the patient’s imbalance. Rather than merely identifying a disease and matching it with a standardized remedy, the classical practitioner listens for the patterns, interactions, and qualities at play within the living book of life.
As my primary teacher, Vaidya Vasant Lad, often says: “I am not telling you what to think, but how to think.” By this, he suggests that each case is unique, and no two diseases will manifest or express themselves in exactly the same way, regardless of the shared features of a particular illness. Likewise, each person has a unique constitutional makeup, which must also be taken into careful consideration.
Āyurveda allows us to select substances such as herbs, formulations, or therapies, that best match the clinical picture, which is textured by an understanding of the interplay between doṣa, dhātu, srota, agni, āma, the mind, and the senses. In essence, every case is unique, even when there may be an established line of treatment for a particular condition. For example, a patient may present with a condition that calls for a specific combination of medicinal herbs or formulations. Yet, our deeper understanding allows us to offer appropriate secondary support, monitor for shifting imbalances, and adjust treatment when needed.
Even when medicines are safe and well selected at a given time, their inherent qualities and long-term effects must be understood and observed. Oversight through follow-up visits is essential. For instance, in modern medicine, a patient with GERD is often prescribed acid-blocking medications. However, if diet and lifestyle are not addressed, the patient may become dependent on the medication long term, with potential rebound effects upon discontinuation.
In contrast, āyurveda seeks to identify and remove the hetu (root causes or causative factors) of the condition, often relating to diet and lifestyle, and supports the patient with herbs and dietary adjustments when necessary. The core understanding remains that true healing is not simply the suppression of symptoms but the restoration of balance through discernment and individualized care, guided by the core tenets of classical āyurveda.