The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine: Its Origins and its Greek Parallels c11.17

c11.17

In the *Bṛhadāraṇyaka*-and in the *Chāndogya*-the distinction of five breaths is clear (*Bṛh.*, III, 9, 26; *Chānd.*, III, 13, 1-5; V, 19-23) but it is not found alone, chiefly in the *Bṛhadāraṇyaka*. Sometimes three breaths are considered (*Bṛh.*, III, 1, 10; V, 14, 3; *Chānd.*, I, 3, 3), or four (*Bṛh.*, IV, 4, 1), or six (*Bṛh.*, I, 5, 4) or seven (*Bṛh.*, II, 2, 3); indeed ten (*Bṛh.*, III, 9, 4). Moreover, the precise doctrine of the localisation of five breaths is not formally enunciated therein. Several passages can be understood better on admitting that these localisations were already conceived as indicated in the classical doctrine but they are not described. On the contrary, later Upaniṣads clearly formulate the theory of five essential breaths with indications of their physiological rôle.