The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine: Its Origins and its Greek Parallels c8.49

c8.49

² In a rectoral discourse published by M. Alsdorf after his death (die magische Kraft der Wahrheit im alten Indien, in ZDMG, 1944, pp. 1-14), Lüders has tried to give a new interpretation to the sense of ṛta. He maintains that in the post-Vedic epoch, when the word tends to disappear, it denotes "verity" and that this sense and this alone was the one which prevailed in the Veda. Its antonym anṛta would have always signified falsehood. The importance given to ṛta would come from the belief in the magical power of truth. This thesis appears to be unacceptable. Of course, truth has an eminent magical power in the Vedic ideas and the translation of ṛta by verity is satisfactory for the large part of the context. But this is due to the fact that the universal Norm is generally true, authentic. Otherwise it would not be the Norm in nature. If it were to happen that the moon were to rotate in the wrong direction, it will follow anṛta, it will make the Norm false, but as long as it does not happen, the Norm remains what it is and retains its permanent verity. The Norm is, therefore, precisely verity, but verity itself borrows its magic force from the Norm because all that is true fits in with it and works by its power. Darmesteter (Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 17), had well seen that the Vedic ṛta and the Avestan asa are simultaneously order and truth. Beside the opinion that in classical Sanskrit ṛta means only "verity" is not exact. This is the opinion of Indian lexicographers, because in the classical language, the sense has