Studies in the Medicine of Ancient India, Part I: Osteology, or the Bones of the Human Body c6.s3.t1.10

c6.s3.t1.10

1. A comparison of the statement of Vāgbhaṭa I with the Traditional Recensions of the statements of Charaka and Suśruta shows plainly that the former is a combination of the two latter. The list of Suśruta contains 300 bones; that of Charaka 360. Vāgbhaṭa I adopts the list of Suśruta, and enlarges it by adopting from the list of Charaka such items as appear to be omitted by Suśruta. He does not explain his reason for proceeding in this manner; but it may be surmised to have been something of this kind. It has been pointed out in § 30 that the traditional list of Suśruta is incomplete in respect of the shoulder-blades. The omission is too conspicuous to be easily overlooked; and it would seem that Vāgbhaṭa I had recognized it, and that he was thus caused to mistrust the exhaustiveness of Suśruta's list of 300 bones, especially as he knew that the list of Charaka included no less than 360 bones. Noticing that the list of Charaka contained several items which were absent from that of Suśruta, he concluded that the number 360 was the true total of the bones of the skeleton, and that this number might be secured by inserting, from the list of Charaka into that of Suśruta, all the apparently missing items. Of course, such a proceeding is altogether superficial and theoretical, and proves a total want of experimental knowledge of the composition of the skeleton; for, in reality (as will be shown in the Third Section, see the Table in § 46), both systems, of Suśruta as well as Charaka, are, from their respective points of view, exhaustive. The procedure, here imputed to Vāgbhaṭa I, may seem strange; but the evidence for it, set out in the sequel, is very strong.