Studies in the Medicine of Ancient India, Part I: Osteology, or the Bones of the Human Body c6.s2.t5.1

c6.s2.t5.1

1. In the third place, the number one hundred and twenty, given in the Traditional Recension, as the aggregate of the bones of the four extremities, involves (as may be seen from the Table in § 27) the incongruity of counting four heels. That count is based on a misconstruction of the explanatory direction of Suśruta. He enumerates the bones of one lower extremity (*sakthi*) as amounting to thirty, and proceeds to explain that in the same way the count of the bones in the other lower extremity, as well as in the two upper extremities, must be made. Now his aggregate, thirty, of the lower extremity includes the heel bone, but it does not follow, therefore, that the same way of counting, when applied to the upper extremities, must also include a heel bone. In short, Suśruta intended his explanation to be understood *cum grano salis*. In the case of the lower extremities which contain a heel, the aggregate is thirty; but in the case of the upper extremities which do not contain a heel, the aggregate, of course, must be twenty-nine. This means that no more than two heels may be counted, in making up the aggregate of the bones of the four extremities.