The Suśruta Project

The textual and cultural history of medicine in South Asia based on newly-discovered manuscript evidence

Menu
  • Home
  • Project Overview
    • The Project
  • Project Team
    • Principal Investigator
    • Project collaborators*
    • Research fellows
    • Research Assistants
    • Project associates
  • The Toolbox
    • Prosopography, Manuscripts, e-Texts
    • Transcription, collating, editing
    • Palaeography
    • Tools and Methods
    • Plant databases
    • Bibliographies
      • Selected editions of the Suśrutasaṃhitā
      • Suśruta-related publications by project participants
      • Further selected Suśruta research
  • The Laboratory
    • The evolving new edition (updated weekly)
    • The evolving new translation (updated weekly)
    • Github
    • Working Methods
    • Project management (team members only)
  • Project Publications
  • Training
    • Training in Digital Humanities
    • Training in Indology and philology
Menu

An anusvāra and the goals of editing

Posted on December 16, 2020October 21, 2021 by Dominik Wujastyk

We have a reading (SS.sū.1.10 … upaśamakaraṇārtham) where the final -m is an anusvāra in the earliest witnesses, K and H (in “Orthographic variants”, switch off “filter final anusvāra variants”). We want our edition to represent the earliest known transmission of the work. Scribal usage of daṇḍas is variable and not a determining editorial factor. And the next akṣara is a ka, so there’s really no grammatical reason to change -ṃ to -m, unless we assume the speaker is pausing between these sections of text (so there’s saṃhitā, P.6.1.72). On the other hand, this is clearly a series of separate statements about the contents of the eight divisions of medicine; today we might represent it as a bulleted list. So perhaps we can assume a pause, and -m is not wrong. In short, the grammatical case doesn’t help us make a decision.

Reading this morning about HyperStack, I noticed the section-heading “2.1 The real Patrick”. In our case, this would be “The Real Suśruta.” The idea of recovering an original authorial voice is a commonplace in textual criticism. Paraphrasing the HyperStack statement, “The Suśruta Project aims to give society as direct access as possible to the historical Suśruta.” We can’t do that, of course, since the Suśrutasaṃhitā has many authorial layers . What we can do, more modestly, is provide direct access to the early version of the Suśrutasaṃhitā preserved by the Nepalese manuscripts.

But the question remains, not just what the earliest manuscripts say, but what do we think their archetype read?

Recent Blog Posts

  • Scribal uncertainty about Dhanvantari
  • Book publication
  • Candraṭa’s editing of the Suśrutasaṃhitā
  • Progress report for June 2023
  • The problem of “the original text” according to AI

Categories

Archives

  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • October 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • October 2020
  • April 2020

The Suśruta Project is funded as a four-year Insight Grant by the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanites Research Council. Grant no. 435-2020-1077.  Dates: 1 April 2020 - 31 March 2024. Applicaton DOI.

Supplementary funding is provided for the project from the Singhmar Chair Endowment Grant administered by the University of Alberta.

This website and all files created by this project are copyrighted by Dominik Wujastyk and the Suśruta Project and distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

University of Alberta

University of Alberta
©2023 The Suśruta Project | Theme by SuperbThemes