Term
What appeared to be the status of physicians in this culture? How specialized
were physicians, and what was their scope of practice? |
|
Definition
| There is a caste system in India. physicians could come from a number of castes but could not treat the very poor. Physicians were definitely specialized in surgery. |
|
|
Term
Describe some medical treatments of the vaidya. How effective were these
treatments? |
|
Definition
Rhinoplasty: very effective
Couching the catarack: effective in very shortsighted patients
snake bite ligatures and sucking out poison: effective
|
|
|
Term
What is the role of religious ritual in ancient Indian medical practices? How does
the role of religion in this culture compare to the other ancient cultures that we
have examined?
|
|
Definition
| Much greater emphasis on religion. It was intricately tied to medicine. Greek iatros would be shocked and put back by having religion tied to medicine (he had left religion to the Temple of Asklepios). The spiritual aspect is more similar to Chinese medicine but focus on religion is still unique. |
|
|
Term
What appears to be the conception of the body in this culture? What did the body
look like to the vaidya? |
|
Definition
| Almost no anatomical knowledge. Learned through observing. Arrow injuries helped to place the points of many marmas all over body. Did not do dissection or vivisection. |
|
|
Term
| Compare the Greek theory of the four humors and the theory of the three doshas. |
|
Definition
Three doshas: vayu (wind), pitta (bile), kapha (phlegm)
(and rakta-blood)
A dosha comes out of balance in disease (rakta always is imbalanced as well whenever a dosha was imbalanced)
This is nearly identical to the theory of the four humors. |
|
|
Term
Compare the vaidya with the iatros and the yang I. What are the similarities and
differences in their medical practices? What are some basic points of agreement
among all three? |
|
Definition
Treatments by the vaidya would have been about the same as in greece (starve, purge, bleed) with the local techniques fair but the general ones awful. Indian operations were less aggressive (no drain left in wounds and no oil injected into chests) BUT psychotherapy was much more developed. Iatros would be shocked by use of religion in medicine in India (he had left that to the temple of asklepios)
The vaidya often used chinese imports in their medicine such as chinese cloth to bind wounds and chinese silk for sutures. Both cultures also used numerology a lot and had similar notions of vital points (marmas vs meridians and accupuncture points)
All would agree on diet (but not on how to use it) on "draining out" some diseases (chinese also drained in) and also on the notion of "wind" as a cause of disease. In china, the internal ch'i was a breath not unlike wind and the Nei Ching reports wind as causing 100s of diseases. In India, vayu, the bodily wind, was an inner equivalent of external and cosmic winds and the Charaka claims that it causes 80 of the 140 diseases. In Greece, there is an entire Hippocratic treatise On winds and cites wind as the principle agent in all diseases.
Indian surgeries have no parallel. |
|
|
