Studies in the Medicine of Ancient India, Part I: Osteology, or the Bones of the Human Body c7.s4.t11: § 83. Exegetical Note

c7.s4.t11.1

Comparing the commentaries quoted in the preceding paragraphs 79-82, it will be seen that, in verse 85, Aparārka counts a total of 108, while Vijñāneśvara, who is followed by Śūlapāṇi and Mitramiśra, counts only 104. The cause of this difference is that in the text of that verse Aparārka read *tāsām*, of them (feminine), while Vijñāneśvara read *teṣām*, of them (masculine). The former form, being the feminine genitive plural, can refer only to the preceding feminine noun *śalākā*, long bone, while the latter form, being the masculine genitive plural, must refer to the preceding masculine noun *nakha*, nail. Accordingly, Aparārka understands the text to mean: ‘The nails number twenty; so also the long bones of the hands and feet (scl. number twenty); the bases of them (i.e. of the long bones) are four.' This interpretation enumerates three different items: (1) nails, (2) long bones, (3) bases of long bones. On the other hand, Vijñāneśvara understands the text to mean: 'The nails number twenty; so also the long bones of the hands and feet (scl. number twenty); the bases of them (i.e. of the nails) are four.' Seeing that the nails are fixed in the digits, and that the bases of the digits are the long bones of the hands and feet, it follows that the bases of the nails are identical with the long bones of the hands and feet. Hence Vijñāneśvara's interpretation admits only two items, namely: (1) nails, (2) long bones or bases of nails. The second item, as Mitramiśra explains, may be considered in two ways—either distributively, or in the aggregate. Considered distributively, the long bones number twenty; but considered as aggregates (samudāya), they number only four, that is, two hands and two feet. On the other hand, if, with Aparārka, we translate 'bases of the long bones', we obtain, of course, a third item, namely, the carpus and tarsus. The question arises: Which is the correct reading of the text; is it tāsām or teṣām; feminine or masculine? The answer cannot be doubtful: obviously the correct reading is the feminine tāsām, referring to śalākā, or the long bones. It is correct for two quite sufficient reasons: (1) with the reading teṣām, the bones of the carpus and tarsus drop out altogether; (2) with the same reading, the four aggregates of the long bones, that is, really the long bones themselves, are declared to be the bases of the nails; but obviously that is an incongruous view: the nails are fixed on the digits, and the digits are fixed on the long bones. As Aparārka rightly says, 'The long bones are the bases of the digits; and the bases of the long bones are four,' namely, the two carpi of the hands and the two tarsi of the feet. Hence the total of the bones, enumerated in verse 85, is 108, but not 104.