An English Translation of the Sushruta Samhita, Vol. I: Sutrasthanam — trans. Kaviraj Kunja Lal Bhishagratna (1907)

obligatory on Government, ;is well as on private individuals, it was almost impossible to secure a full-grown anatomical subject in I'auranic India, the more so when we consider that the Hindus look upon the non-cremation and mutilation oi a corpse vvilii a peculiar horror as it prevents the spirit from purging off its uncleanness in the funeral fire, and bars ilf access to a higher spiritual life. Naturally in later and more ceremoniil times the interred corpses of infants, less than 2 \ears old, had to be unearthed and dissected for anatomical purposes ; and these portions of the Sushruta SamliitS might have been modified by the subsequent commentators in order to conform them to occular proofs.— T. R.

(i) See Tiray's Anatomy {1897) p. 2S8 and 301 Figs. 248 and 262.

(2) "'?f^T*fgtw; vi?i': ^^rfij^: ^T^?nf" 1"

\ishnu Smriti. Ch, 96. 55. (,'haraka. Shfiriraslli^nani.

INTRODUCMON. , XXV

must have described their courszs and locations, a,L? otherwise it would have been quite impossible for practical suigeons, for whom it was intended, to conform to the directions of the Samhita in surgically operating on their patients' limbs^, and to avoid those vulnerable unions or anastomoses as"'enjo'ned therein. These Marmas have been 'divided into three classes such as, the Sadya-prana-hara : Kala-pnina-hara, and Vaikalya-kara, according as an injur}' to any of them proves instantaneously fatal, or fatal in course of time, or is followed b}-^ a maimed condition of the limb concerned. The fact is that the study of practical Anatomy was in a manner forbidden in the reig>n of Ashoka Pij-adarshi inasmuch as ail religious sacrifices were prohibited by a royal edict (i), and the subsequent commentators (who were also redactors on a small scale) of the Sushruta ■jSamhita, in the absence of any positive knowledge on the subject, had to grope their way out in darkness as best they could ; hence, this wanton mutilation of texts and hopeless confusion of verses in the Sharira Sthanam of the present day Sushruta Samhita, which should be re-arranged and restored to their proper chapters before any definite opinion can be pronounced on the anatomical knowledge of the holy Sushruta.

Sushruta as a Biologist •. — h^ the tirst chapter of his Sh.irira Sthanani, Sushruta discusses the question. what is man, wherein lies his individualit v, why does he come into being, why does he die at all ? Like all Indian philosophers, Sushruta argues the question down from the universe to man. The factors or laws, that govern the evolution of the universe in its physical aspect, are extended to cover the evolution of the physical aspect of man (organic evolution). There is but one law and one force which run through -the three plains of mind, matter and spirit. Physiology, that fails to loc^k

(l) fournal of ihe .\siiiUc Society i.f CulciUla \'n\. \'U. P. 26f.

XXvi INTRODUCTION.

<•