As indicated by the jacket, “[t]he chapters in this volume were originally presented in the panels on Scientific Literature at the 12th World Sanskrit Conference in Helsinki, Finland,” held in 2003. They represent evolution in two areas: analysis of classical, medieval, and early modern algebraic and geometric works in Sanskrit and related commentaries and supercommentaries, along with investigations of “fundamental ayurvedic theories, ayurvedic rites for childbirth, the cultural history of medicine in the early modern period, the anthropology of spirit of one of the oldest surviving ayurvedic texts.”
Introduced by editor Dominik Wujastyk, with a disciplinary survey by K. V. Sarma, the book eulogizes the late David Pingree for his contributions to jyotihśastra, ayurveda, and other Indian sciences. This valuable tribute employs Sanskritic philological, codicological, and wider Indological methods, and contributes to “disciplinary neighbors” (p. 2) such as “mathematics, geometry, medical botany, social history, religious studies, anthropology and trans-cultural psychiatry” (p. 3). The Helsinki presenters offer these works to bolster studies in Sanskrit sciences, especially in interdisciplinary avenues of inquiry. Though Sarma perhaps overglorifies Sanskritic mathematical and medical materials, his survey provides a useful framework for each paper. Noting that sciences in India have been traditionally sutric, formulaic, and utilitarian, he suggests further avenues that the conference papers may stimulate (though 90 to 95 percent of these Sanskrit manuscripts remain unavailable for study), including bibliographic possibilities, researching linkages between modern sciences, ayurveda, modern astronomy, mathematics, arts, and architecture.
Mathematician A. K. Bag explores the “Solution of Second Degree Indeterminate Equations in Sanskrit Texts” (p. 21). Bag analyzes Brahmagupta's seventh-century Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta, which employs techniques such as the “pulverizer” (kuṭṭaka), use of zero (kha), negative/positive quantities (ṛna-dhana), unknown quantities (avyakta), unknown products (bhavita), one unknown (ekavarṇa), eliminating middle terms (madhya-haraṇa), and second-degree equations (varga-prakṛti). The last concerns Bag, especially as Brahmagupta leads eleventh- and twelfth-century mathematicians—Āchārya Jayadeva, Śrīpati, and Bhāskara II—to an innovative solution known as the cakravāla (cyclic) process.
The next paper is by Jean Michel Delire, who demonstrates, through a comparison of commentaries on two different Śulbasūtras by Sundararāja and Dvārakānātha, that Dvārakānātha (about whom little is known) copied from Sundararāja, and not the other way around. Both are commenting on ancient geometric texts associated with Vedic fire altar construction. Delire concludes that Dvārakānātha's terminus ante quem can be dated to the second half of the fifteenth century ce, and that his Śulbadīpikā commentary on the Baudhāyana Śulbasutra amounts to a supercommentary reworking of Sundararāja's earlier commentary on the Āpastamba Śulbasūtra.
Agathe Keller analyzes “Bhāskara I's Geometrical Diagrams in the Āryabhaṭīyabhāṣya” (p. 63). She uses intriguing clues in diagrams from Bhāskara I's seventh-century ce commentary on Āryabhata's fifth-century astronomical treatise, the Āryabhaṭīya, to “reach aspects of mathematical practices that are not transmitted through written speech” (p. 64). She teases out the “setting down” (nyāsa) portion of mathematical algorithms, which thereby enhances “showing the proof” (p. 97).
G. Jan Meulenbeld develops neglected aspects of ayurveda, particularly an anemic understanding of a gradual evolution of the three doṣas theory of bodily function and malady. Meulenbeld is especially concerned with outlining connections between the tridoṣavāda and the mahābhūtas. Of greater concern still is the relation between agni/fire, and pitta, with agni often emphasized over pitta in older ayurvedic works.
Dagmar Benner contributes an analysis of saṃskāra rites of passage in Vāgbhata's Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā, demonstrating that ayurvedic texts offer more than mere technical instruction. Benner outlines women's ritual practices that point to diffuse relations between life-stage practices and technical medical evaluation and treatment.
Wujastyk contrasts “Examples of Ayurvedic Creativity around 1700” (139). Three texts—Lolimbarāja's “Doctor's Livelihood,” Vīreśvara's “Debate on Illness and Health,” and Ṭoḍaramalla's Āyurvedasaukhyam—represent variously popular works that reveal a respectable level of creativity prior to British occupation, yet also show considerable debate about the stature of medical practitioners.
Antti Pakaslahti develops terminology for living healing traditions surrounding “science of spirits” (bhūtavidyā) and severe mental illness (unmāda). Through an analysis of healings at Balaji temple in Rajasthan, he outlines four useful clusters of “spirit terms” descending from general spirit afflictions, through cases specific to certain types of spirits and instances involving ancestors, to cases with helping spirits.
Finally, Tsutomu Yamashita provides a short series of notes on the Bheḍa(la)saṃhitā, wherein Yamashita points to an overinflation beyond the BhS of Bheda's authority in ayurvedic traditions.
The dust jacket says, “This book will be of interest to historians of science, students of classical Indian history and culture, and anyone wanting to know where the cutting edge of the history of early Indian science is today.” I agree, and would add that the papers contribute not only a worthy ode to Professor Pingree, but a worthy step toward providing significant further material to stimulate advancement of Sanskritic mathematical and medical texts. It is worth the read.
