[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Science, technology and education](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science) › [The Science of the Shulba: A Study in Early Hindu Geometry](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932) › c15.85 # The Science of the Shulba: A Study in Early Hindu Geometry c15.85 The Science of the Śulba: A Study in Early Hindu Geometry c15.85 - **Language:** English ### [c15.85](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932.c15.85) I think that the word \*jñeya\* should be explained quite differently. Its literal significance is, as has been explicitly stated by the commentators, "can be known" (\*jñātum śakyate\*). It comes from the same root \*jñā\*, as the word \*vijñāyate\*, meaning "is known." Hence both the words should be explained so as to exhibit the same relation. Now on many occasions in the \*Sulba\* in connexion with the statements of the measurements of altars, the description of the methods of constructing them, etc., we find the remark...\*iti...vijñāyate\*.² It implies that such and such thing "is known from the ancient holy scriptures." Indeed those things can be actually traced therein. I think the word \*jñeya\* also should be explained as implying a reference to the same ancient scriptures. Thus the expression \*tābhirjñeyābhir\*, etc., means "the method of construction (of the altars) has been described by means of those rectangles that can be known (from the ancient scriptures)." The other expression \*etāvanti jñeyāni\*, etc., will then mean "these only are the methods of construction of the (\*Mahā-\*) \*vedi\* which can be known (from the ancient scriptures)." - [Previous: c15.84](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932.c15.84) - [Next: c15.86](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932.c15.86) - [Up: c15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932.c15) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932.c15.85](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.datta-1932.c15.85) · Pramāṇa