Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Positive Sciences of the Ancient Hindus c9.s4: Section 9. Heredity

The Positive Sciences of the Ancient Hindus c9.s4

Language
English

Section 9. Heredity

c9.s4.2

Transmission of specific characters—what parental characters are transmitted to offspring.—The question is raised in Charaka (and earlier still in the *Brâhmanas*) how specific characters are transmitted—why the offspring is of the same species as the parental organism, say, the human or bovine species, the equine species (Charaka), or the Asvattha species, Ficus religiosa (Śankara, Brihadâraṇyaka-bhâṣya). Species (योनयः) may be compared to so many moulds, as it were, into which the ovum is cast, even as molten metals are cast in moulds. This is of course only an illustrative analogy; the cause has to be investigated.

c9.s4.3

Now Charaka and Suśruta, following Dhanvantari, hold that the fœtus, or rather the fertilised ovum, develops by palingenesis (instead of epigenesis); in other words, all the organs are potentially present therein at the same time, and unfold in a certain order. As the sprouting bamboo-seed contains in miniature the entire structure of the bamboo, as the mango-blossom contains the stone, the pulp, the fibres, which appear separated and distinct in the ripe fruit, though from their excessive minuteness they are undistinguishable in the blossom, even such is the case with the fertilised ovum.

c9.s4.4

गर्भस्य हि सम्भवतः . . . सर्व्वाङ्गप्रत्यङ्गानि युगपत् सम्भवन्ति इत्याह धन्वन्तरिः । गर्भस्य सूक्ष्मत्वात् नोपलभ्यन्ते वंशाङ्कुरवत् चूतफलवच्च तद्यथा चूतफले परिपक्के केशरमांसास्थिमज्जानः पृथक् दृश्यन्ते कालप्रकर्षात् । तान्येव तरुणे नोपलभ्यन्ते सूक्ष्मत्वात् । तेषां केशरादीनां कालः प्रव्यक्ततां करोति एतेनैव वंशाङ्कुरोऽपि व्याख्यातः । एवं गर्भस्य तारुण्ये सर्वेषु अङ्गप्रत्यङ्गेषु सत्सु सौक्ष्म्याद-

c9.s4.5

नुपलभिः तान्येव फलप्रकर्षात् प्रव्यक्तानि भवन्ति । (*Suśruta*, *Śârîra sthâna*, Chap. III.).

c9.s4.6

The inheritance of specific characters is explained in accordance with this view. Charaka assumes that the sperm-cell of the male parent contains minute elements derived from each of its organs and tissues. (*Cf.* Darwin's gemmule and Spencer's "ids.") Śankara similarly states that the sperm-cell (or the seed in the case of a plant) represents in miniature every organ of the parent organism, and contains *in potentia* the whole organism that is developed out of it (शरोरधात्वात्मा शुक्रभूतः अङ्गादङ्गात् सम्भवति । Charaka, *Śârîrasthâna*, Chap. IV. ; *cf.* Śankara on *Brihadâraṇyaka*).

c9.s4.7

But if this is so, why are not congenital deformities of the parent, or constitutional diseases contracted in later life, invariably inherited? Congenital blindness, deafness, dumbness, stammering, lameness, or deformity of the spinal column or of the bony framework, or dwarfish stature, or constitutional diseases like madness, leprosy, or skin diseases in the parent, do not necessarily produce corresponding deformities or infirmities in the offspring. It cannot therefore be that the fertilised ovum represents in miniature every organ and tissue of the parental organisms. The solution of this difficulty Charaka ascribes to Âtreya. The fertilised ovum, it is true, is composed of elements which arise from the whole parental organism (समुदायात्मक, समुदायप्रभव), but it is not the developed organs of the parents, with their idiosyncracies or acquired characters, that determine or contribute the elements of the sperm-cell (or seed). The parental Vîja (seed, germ-plasm) contains the whole parental organism in miniature (or *in potentia*), but it is independent of the parents' developed organs, and is not necessarily affected by their idiosyncracies or deformities. In fact, the parental Vîja (seed, germ-plasm) is an organic whole independent of the developed parental body and its organs. In the parental Vîja an element representing a particular organ or tissue may happen (for this is accidental, दैव) to be defective or undeveloped, or otherwise abnormally characterised, and in this case the corresponding organ or tissue of the offspring will be similarly characterised. When constitutional diseases, acquired in later life, are found to be inherited, Âtreya would suppose that the Vîja of the parent has been affected, and this would explain the fact of the inheritance. In the case of leprosy, for example, it is transmitted to the offspring only when the germ-plasm (the Vîja or the fertilised ovum) is infected with the virus of the disease by reason of the leprosy of the parent (*vide* Charaka's report of Âtreya's theory, *Sârîrasthâna*).

c9.s4.8

एवमयं नानाविधानां एषां गर्भकराणां भावानां समुदायादभिनिर्वर्त्तते गर्भः। यद्ययमेषां नानाविधानां गर्भकराणां भावानां समुदायादभिनिर्वर्त्तते गर्भः कथमयं सन्धीयते। यदि चापि सन्धीयते कस्मात् समुदायप्रभवः सन् गर्भो मनुष्यविग्रहेण जायते मनुष्यश्च मनुष्यप्रभवः। उच्यते। ... तत्र चेत् इहमेतत्स्र्यस्मात् मनुष्योमनुष्य-प्रभवः तस्मादेव मनुष्यविग्रहेण जायते यथा गौर्गोप्रभवः यथा चाश्वः अश्वप्रभवः इत्येवं यदुक्तं अग्रे समुदायात्मक इति तद्युक्तं। यदि च मनुष्यः मनुष्यप्रभवः कस्मात् जडान्धकुञ्जमूकवामनमिन्मथव्यङ्गोन्मत्तकुष्ठकिलासेभ्यो जाताः पितृसदृशा न भवन्ति *et seq.* . . . . . . यच्चोक्तं यदि च मनुष्यो मनुष्यप्रभवः कस्माज्जडादिभ्यो जाताः पितृसदृशरूपा न भवन्तीति तत्रोच्यते यस्य यस्यहि अङ्गावयवस्य बीजे बीजभाग उपतप्तो भवति तस्य तस्य अङ्गावयवस्य विकृतिः उपजायते। नोपजायते च अनुपतापात् तस्मात उभयोपपत्तिरप्यत्र। सर्वस्य च आत्मजानीन्द्रि-

c9.s4.9

यानि तेषां भावाभावहेतुः दैव॑ । तस्माच्चैकान्ततो जडादिभ्यो जाताः पितृसदृशरूपा भवन्ति। (चरक, शारीरस्थान, तृतीयपरिच्छेद) दम्पत्योः कुष्ठबाहुल्याद्दुष्टशोणित-शुक्रयोः । यदपत्यं तयोर्जातं ज्ञेयं तदपि कुष्ठितं ।

c9.s4.10

*N.B.*—The seventh tissue (the *Śukradharâ kalâ*, sperm-bearing or reproductive) contains the parental Vîja, which is a minute organism (समुदायात्मक) deriving its elements from the parental organs, but distinct from the latter, and independent of their peculiarities, and it is the combination and characters of these constituent elements of the parental Vîja in the reproductive tissue that determine the physiological characters and predispositions of the offspring. We may call this Âtreya's *germ-plasm* theory, for it is an advance on the conception of gemmules and of ids, but in Âtreya's version the “germ-plasm” is not only representative of the “somatic” tissues, but also generates and is generated by the latter. This mutual interaction of the “germ-plasm” and “somatic tissues” is a distinctive feature of Âtreya's hypothesis, the value of which will be differently estimated by different schools of biologists.

c9.s4.11

I may also add that the continued identity of the germ-plasm (बीज) from generation to generation, though it follows as a corollary from this doctrine of a distinct reproductive tissue, even when conceived to be affected by somatic processes, as Âtreya and Charaka conceive it to be, is nowhere expressly deduced. On the other hand, Âtreya and Charaka emphasise the influence of abundant or defective nutrition, and of the constituents of the food, etc., on the characters of the Vîja in the reproductive tissue, especially as regards the sexual character, the stature, and the colour-pigment (यक्षे) of the offspring. But though the influence of nutrition on the Vîja is thus freely admitted in a general way, it is expressly stated that the peculiar characters or idiosyncracies of the elements that combine to form the Vîja must be regarded as a matter of chance (दैव), in other words, the truly congenital variations are accidental.

Linked texts (4)