Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A Concise History of Science in India c8.s7: Spread of Āyurveda Outside India

A Concise History of Science in India c8.s7

Language
English

Contents

Spread of Āyurveda Outside India

The Āyurveda in Ancient Iran and the Hellenic Countries

c8.s7.t1.1

It has been noted earlier that there is a close analogy between the medical traditions of the two branches of the Indo-Aryan family in Iran and India. Even after the period of the Veda and the later *Āvestā*, many of the basic conceptions are found to be the same, due perhaps to close communication between the two, though the methods of treatment and theories of medicine differ.a

c8.s7.t1.2

An ancient Mesopotamian medical manual, possibly dating back to the Hammurabian period (c. 2000 B.C.), contains many medical concepts which reappear in changed but unmistakable forms in Indian *Āyurveda* and the Hippocratic tracts on medicine. The supposed special symptoms of imminent death, found in this work, are found in a modified form in *Pre-notions de cos*, *Coan prognoses* and *Prorrhelique I*. They are also found, though in a less archaic and empirical form, in practically all Āyurvedic texts.b This general concordance between the ancient Mesopotamian system and the later Indian and Greek ones is also strikingly observed in the case of symptoms of demonic possessions, specially of children.c But, in this case, the *On the Sacred Diseases* of the Hippocratic collection gives examples and symptoms but rejects the theory of supernatural origin. As far as these and some other common ideas are concerned, there is no reason to believe that such ideas originated in Indian medicine and was transmitted to Greece or vice versa.

c8.s7.t1.3

But many other concepts of Greek medicine are extremely likely to have been Indian in origin and development and are likely to have been propagated by the spread of Indian medical ideas in many countries, by direct contacts, and by indirect communications. In the case of Greece there was communication from very early times, at least as far back as the fourth century b.c., even before Alexander the Great invaded the Indus valley (327 b.c.). His army physicians did not know any cures for snake-bites and other diseases endemic to the area. Indian doctors were called in and some of them later accompanied the returning army back to Greece.a Thus began the spread of *Āyurveda* in the Hellenic Empire, though fragments of *Āyurveda* knowledge must have found their way earlier through Iran and the maritime trade routes, as shown by the fact that substances like pepper, cardamoms, musk-root plant, indigo and cane-sugar, indigenous to India at that time, are found among the earliest exports of India to Greek ports.

c8.s7.t1.4

a Elgood, pp. 19 ff.

c8.s7.t1.5

b *Bhela Saṃhitā*, *Indriya*, 12; *CS.* *Indriya*, 12; *SS.* *Sū.*, 29–33; *Kāś. S.* *Sū.*, 8; *Aṣṭ. Hṛ.* *Śā.*, 5 and 6; *Aṣṭ. Saṃ.* *Śā.*, 9–12.

c8.s7.t1.6

c *SS.* *Uttara*, 27–37.

c8.s7.t1.7

The clear enunciation of the theory of an internal and vital organic breath (akin to the cosmic wind) as the cause of all motor activity of the living body and its involuntary muscles, as well as that of movements of fluids circulating inside the body, is part of the ancient works *Bhela Saṃhitā*b and *Agniveśa Saṃhitā*. A much less precise version of this thesis is found in the Hippocratic texts *On Breaths*, where bodily wind is simply stated to be ‘the cause of the principal phenomenons which accompany the fevers, shivering, trembling, yawning, resolution of articulation, transpiration, etc.’c The Hippocratic tracts had their origin mainly between the fourth century b.c. and third century a.d., and do not antedate the *Bhela Saṃhitā* and the *Agniveśa Saṃhitā*. The treatment of this theme in the *Caraka* and the *Suśruta* is much more elaborate and sophisticated, showing a gradual local development. Many scholars trot out the theory of later interpolations or even past forgeries when Indian texts show a higher development in any concept compared to later or contemporary Greek texts. These arguments, however, can cut both ways. Again, the typically Indian concept, found in many basic Indian philosophies of ancient origin, of the creation of the embryo at the moment of conception, by the simultaneous congress of the *puruṣa* (self-existent eternal soul), the vital breath, the parental semen and the maternal seed, is found in a somewhat changed form in the Hippocratic text, *On the Nature of a Child*. In this latter work, the mention of a maternal ‘semen’ is unique in Greek medicine, though the idea is very common in Āyurvedic texts. The reference to *puruṣa* as an ingredient is also lacking. The ideas of the vital breath starting at the moment of conception to build up the anatomy and physiology of the foetus from the fundamental elements is also found in the texts *On the Embryo of Eight Months* and in *On Flesh*. But the details about the instantaneous commencement and the ingredients are lacking. The idea of the mother’s vital breath, found in all Āyurvedic texts, circulating also through the embryo is also found in the *Embryo of Eight Months*, but the details about the embryonic heart, embryonic blood-circulation and nutrition are lacking. The attribution of diseases of the nervous system to obstructed and vitiated wind is a special and remarkable theory of *Āyurveda*. In *On Diet in Acute Diseases*, only a few such diseases like sudden loss of speech, giddiness, convulsions, etc., are attributed to obstructed wind without formation of any coherent theory. It is logical to suppose that these ideas which are found developing progressively in Indian medical literature were not Greek in origin and further that they were imported into Greece along with many other Āyurvedic concepts, some clearly discernible, others changed beyond possible recognition.

c8.s7.t1.8

a Arrian, p. 229.

c8.s7.t1.9

b *Bhela Saṃ., Sū.*, 16.

c8.s7.t1.10

c Filliozat (2), p. 222.

c8.s7.t1.11

The humoral theory of origin of diseases is another instance in point. There is a steady development of this concept, beginning with a mere mention in the *Ṛgveda*; followed by the enumeration of the three humours in the *Atharvaveda*; then a visible and clear formation of the theory in the *Atharvaveda-pariśiṣṭa* (a later appendage of the *Atharvaveda* in the latest period of Vedic literature); then its emergence as a comprehensive theory of causation, symptoms and treatments of diseases in the *Bhela Saṃhitā*; and finally its all-embracing form in the *Caraka* and *Suśruta Saṃhitās* as a complete explanation of all vital processes, their imbalances and their cure. It is possible that the Greek development of the theory was independent of India. But as it is found in Greek texts in less sophisticated and less complete forms in all comparable periods, the presumption that it travelled from India to Greece is justified. The time lag explains the lacunae and imperfections in the Greek theory and also the somewhat irrational addition of blood, one of the visible bodily fluids, as the fourth humour.

c8.s7.t1.12

Megasthenes, the Greek ambassador to India towards the end of the fourth century B.C., tells us how the diseases of elephants are to be cured, and gives prescriptions which are clearly borrowed from the *Hastyāyurveda* of Pālakāpya.a The Āyurvedic dry *pippalī* (long pepper), used in prescriptions for the eyes, is metamorphosed in the Greek manual, *On Woman's Diseases*, as the Median medicine *peperi* for the eyes, and in *On the Nature of Woman* it is *midikhoi* medicine and not acknowledged as *indikhot* (Indian). Other passages in the former text confirm that Median is a wrong reading for Indian.b These and many other facts and logical inferences prove that *Āyurveda* spread into Greece and the Greeks were perhaps unaware that they were using borrowed concepts and data. The reverse process has also probably occurred in many instances.

The Āyurveda in the Arabic World

c8.s7.t2.1

The spread of *Āyurveda* in Arabic countries is well authenticated and not based on inferences. Due to the meticulous habit of Arabian scholars of keeping complete records of historical and cultural events, it has been possible to get a clear picture of the prestige and popularity of Indian medicine in this area from historic times. The considerable amount of surviving literature in Arabic and Persian on medicine contains many translations from Indian treatises and much material that is directly utilized from them. The medical scholars of the two lands, who travelled freely from one country to the other before and after the Islamic conquest of India, have contributed much to a mutual enrichment of knowledge. The science that the Arabs carried with them in their far-flung empire must have contained a fair amount of Indian contribution, specially in medicine, just as they brought much of Syrian and Greek science to their Indian Empire.

c8.s7.t2.2

a Filliozat (1), pp. 194-95.

c8.s7.t2.3

b Filliozat (2), pp. 253 ff.

c8.s7.t2.4

The Arabs established trading centres in the Malabar Coast of South India in the seventh century and carried away spices, dyes, drugs and scent materials to their other centres in Asia, Asia Minor, Africa and Europe. This made the world of Arab trade conscious of the quality of Indian drugs. In the eighth century the Arabs conquered the Indian province of Sind. The cultural genius of the Abbāsid rulers, curious about the long reputation of Indian science and specially Indian medicine, began to send scholars to India and invite Indian scholars to visit them. Thus began an exchange of scientific ideas, by direct contact, between the two countries in philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, metallurgy and medicine.a A later Abbāsid Caliph, Harun al-Rashid, was famous for his patronage of learning and science. He actively encouraged the learning of the Indian system of medicine and caused some of the classical treatises of India to be translated into Arabic. An emigrant Indian medical scholar became the physician-in-chief of the State dispensary after he was ‘successful in curing his royal patient of a long-standing stomach trouble’. This Indian scholar translated the *Suśruta Saṃhitā* into Arabic under the title of *Kilal-Samural-hind-i* of ‘Susrud’. The famous scholar Ali ibn Zain translated the *Caraka Saṃhitā* into Arabic as the treatise of ‘Sarag’. In later years the *Nidāna* of Mādhava was translated under the title *Badan* and the *Aṣṭāṅgahṛdaya* as *Astankar*. These Arabic works were also retranslated into Persian. The *Āyurveda* thus became a well-known science in Arabia whence it spread into Persia, Turkey, Egypt and the Mediterranean countries, which passed under Arab domination in later ages.

c8.s7.t2.5

Nearer home, the influence of Āyurvedic system in Iran, even before its conquest by the Arabs, has been clearly established. The Iranian king, Chosroes I (a.d. 531–579), had a physician named Burzūya who had brought a version of the *Pañcatantra*, the Indian Book of Fables, into Iran after a journey to India. The autobiography of this physician contains a summary of embryology which has been recognized by Hertel as containing typically Indian notions. Burzūya, for example, says that delivery is caused by a wind—and this is ‘precisely the teaching of classical Indian medicine’. It is, of course, not unlikely that this Indian idea was not introduced by Burzūya, but had reached Iran even before his time, for there is positive evidence of the Indian influence on the famous medical school established in the fifth century a.d. at Gundesapur in Susiana by the Nestorians expelled from the Byzantine Empire. It is interesting to note in this connection that in the chapter dealing with the functions of the ‘wind’ in the existing text of the *Caraka Saṃhitā*, mention is made of the presence of Kāṅkāyana, the physician from Bāhlika (*Bāhlikabhiṣaj*), in an assembly of learned men gathered round Master Ātreya. Bāhlika or Bactria, on the other side of the Hindu Kush mountains, was included in the dominions of Chosroes I. Apart from the writings of Burzūya, this Indian legend has preserved the reminiscence of the close contact between the Iranian and Indian doctors.a

c8.s7.t2.6

a Reinbold, pp. 315-87; Majumdar (R. C.), II, pp. 276–77.

c8.s7.t2.7

There is more direct evidence of the influence of *Āyurveda* further east in Central Asia. Modern archaeological excavations have unearthed the remains of a large number of ancient cities that lay buried deep under the sands for more than a thousand years, along the trade route from Bactria to China passing between the Tien Shan mountains in the north and the desert of Taklamakan in the south. Many of these old cities were Indian settlements in the early centuries of the Christian era. One of them—Kuchi or modern Kucha—was an important centre of Buddhism and, according to Chinese records, there were nearly 10,000 *stūpas* and temples in this kingdom at the beginning of the fourth century A.D. An Indian became the preceptor of the local king. Music and other arts and sciences of India flourished in this region. The famous manuscript, known after its founder as Bower Manuscript, was recovered from this region.b It contains seven Sanskrit texts, of which three are medical treatises. The first deals with the wonderful properties of *lasuna* and other roots and herbs, particularly in curing eye-diseases. The second, *Navanītaka*, is a voluminous text divided into 14 chapters. The third text contains medical formulas in 72 verses. Another work dealing with spells and charms as antidote against snake-bite is also of semi-medical character.c Several other manuscripts of medical texts have also been found, including a Kuchean translation of a collection of Sanskrit text and a part of a bilingual manuscript (original Sanskrit text with Kuchean translation) of *Yogaśataka* ascribed to Nāgārjuna or Vararuci.

c8.s7.t2.8

The influence of *Āyurveda* is also clearly traceable in Tibet. A large number of medical texts in Sanskrit were translated into Tibetan in the eighth century A.D., and there is no doubt that the medical system in Tibet was derived mainly from *Āyurveda*. To mention only a few similarities, reference may be made to the nine openings and 900 nerves in a body, the theory of three humours, the injury caused by taking together fish and milk, and the use of certain herbs and plants as drugs. Several Tibetan medical works were translated into Mongolian, and the Tibetan medical system, based on *Āyurveda*, was adopted by various hill tribes of the Himalayas near Tibet.d Indian drugs were known in China, Korea and Japan.

c8.s7.t2.9

The Hindus who established colonies, kingdoms and empires in Indo-China and Indonesia during the first millennium of the Christian era also introduced the knowledge of *Āyurveda* in these regions. The medical treatise of Suśruta is referred to in an inscription of Cambodia (Kambuja)

c8.s7.t2.10

a Filliozat (1), pp. 198 ff.

c8.s7.t2.11

b Majumdar (R. C.), II, pp. 276–77,

c8.s7.t2.12

c Keith (3), p. 509.

c8.s7.t2.13

d Filliozat (4), p. 69.

c8.s7.t2.14

in the last decade of the ninth century A.D. The Grand Monarch Jayavarman VII of Kambuja (A.D. 1181–1281) established 102 hospitals (*Ārogyaśālās*) in his kingdom, and an inscription gives in 23 Sanskrit verses a detailed account of diet and medicinal herbs supplied to these hospitals.

c8.s7.t2.15

The Burmans also adopted the Āyurvedic system to a large extent. Though the *Suśruta* and other Āyurvedic works were not translated from Sanskrit into Burmese before the eighteenth century A.D., the Burman technical terms in medicine were derived from Sanskrit.

c8.s7.t2.16

The Āyurvedic system was introduced into Ceylon by the Buddhist missionaries in the early centuries of the Christian era, or possibly even earlier. But, apart from the mention of *Sāratthasaṃgraha* in the *Cūlavaṃśa*, the oldest medical work, *Yogārṇava*, belongs to the thirteenth century. The modern printed works and manuscripts of medical texts in the British Museum are all based on Sanskrit works on *Āyurveda*.

Cites (15)