English
The development of the foetus is thus described by Sridhara in his Nyaya-kandali: ‘‘ After the union of the father’s semen and the mother’s blood there is set up in the atoms consti- tuting them a change through the heat of the womb, such that their old colour, form, etc. become destroyed and new similar qualities are produced ; and in this way, through the successive formation of dyads and triads, the body of the foetus develops; and, when such a body is formed, there enters into it the mind (antahkarana), which could not have entered in the semen-blood stage, since the mind requires a body to support it (ma tu Sukra-sonitavasthayam sari- rasrayatvan manasah). Small quantities of food-juice of the mother go to nourish it. Then, through the unseen power (adrsta), the foetus is disintegrated by the heat in the womb into the state of atoms, and atoms of new qualities, together with those of the food-juice, conglomerate together to form a new body.” According to this view the subtle body and the mind have nothing to do with the formation and development of the foetus. Heat is the main agent responsible for all disintegration and re-combination involved in the process of the formation of the foetus. The Nyaya does not seem to have considered this as an im- portant question, and it also denies the existence of a subtle body. The soul, according to the Nyaya, is all-pervading, and the Maha- bharata passage quoted above, in which Yama draws out the purusa 1 Vacaspati’s Tativa-vaisaradi, 1v. 10. Reference is made to Maha-bharata, Ill. 296. 17, angustha-matram purusam niscakarsa yamo balat. Vacaspati says that purusa is not a physical thing and hence it cannot be drawn out of the body. It must therefore be interpreted in a remote sense as referring to the cessation of manifestation of citta in the dying body (na casya niskarsah sambhavati, ity aupacariko vyakhyeyas tatha ca cites cittasya ca tatra tatra vrtty-abhadva eva ~ niskarsarthah). The Samkhya-pravacana-bhasya, v. 103, says that the thumb-like purusa referred to in Mahda-bharata, 111. 296. 17, which Yama drew from the body of Satyavan, has the size of the subtle body (linga-deha). * Nydya-kandalt, Vizianagram Sanskrit series, 1895, p. 33- XIII] The Foetus and the Subtle Body 3°7 of the size of a thumb, has, according to Nyaya, to be explained away’. In rebirth it is only the all-pervading soul which becomes connected with a particular body (ya eva dehantara-samgamo ’sya, tam eva taj-jnah-para-lokam ahuh)?. Candrakirti gives us an account of the Buddhist view from the Sali-stamba-sitra®, The foetus is produced by the combination of the six constituents (sannam dhatiinam samavayat). That which consolidates (samslesa) the body is called earth (prthivi-dhatu) ; that which digests the food and drink of the body is called fire (tejo-dhatu) ; that which produces inhalation and exhalation is called air (vayu-dhatu); that which produces the pores of the body (antah-sausiryam) is called ether (akasa-dhatu); that by which knowledge is produced is called the wijfana-dhatu. It is by the combination of them all that a body is produced (sarvesam sama- vayat kayasyotpattir bhavati). The seed of vijfana produces the germ of name and form (nama-ripankura) by combination with many other diverse causes. The foetus is thus produced of itself, not by another, nor by both itself and another, nor by god, nor by time, nor by nature, nor by one cause, nor by no cause, but by the combination of the mother’s and the father’s parts at the proper season*. The combination of father’s and mother’s parts gives us the five dhatus, which operate together when they are in combination with the sixth dhatu, the vijfiana. The view that the foetus is the result of the joint effect of the six dhatus reminds us of a similar expression in Caraka, 1v. 3. Caraka gives there a summary of the discussions amongst various sages on the subject of the causes of the formation and development of the foetus: where there is a union between a man with effective semen and a woman with no defect of organ, ovary and blood, if at the time of the union of the semen and blood the soul comes in touch with it through the mind, then the foetus begins to develop®. When it is taken care of by proper nourishment, etc., then at the right time 1 tasman na, hrt-pundarike ydvad-avasthanam Gtmanah ata eva angustha- matram purusam niscakarsa balad yama iti Vydsa-vacanam evam-param avagantavyam (Jayanta’s Nydya-mafjari, p. 469). 2 Ibid. p. 473. 3 Madhyamika-vrtti (Bibliotheca Buddhica), pp. 560-61. 4 Ibid. p. 567. 5 In the Vaisesika also the all-pervading Giman comes into touch with the foetus through the manas; but the difference is this, that here the manas is an operative factor causing the development of the foetus, whereas there the manas goes to the foetus when through the influence of body-heat it has already de- veloped into a body. 20-2 308 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. the child is born, and the whole development is due to the com- bined effect of all the elements mentioned above (samudayad esam bhavanam). The foetus is born of elements from the mother and the father, the self, the proper hygienic care of the parents’ bodies (satmya) and the food-juice; and there is also operant with these the sattva or manas, which is an intermediate vehicle serving to connect the soul with a former body when it leaves one (aupapaduka)'. Bharadvaja said that none of these causes can be considered as valid; for, in spite of the union of the parents, it often happens that they remain childless; the self cannot pro- duce the self; for, if it did, did it produce itself after being born or without being born? In both cases it is impossible for it to produce itself. Moreover, if the self had the power of producing itself, it would not have cared to take birth in undesirable places and with defective powers, as sometimes happens. Again, proper hygienic habits cannot be regarded as the cause; for there are many who have these, but have no children, and there are many who have not these, but have children. If it was due to food-juice, then all people would have got children. Again, it is not true that the sativa issuing forth from one body connects itself with another; for, if it were so, we should all have remembered the events of our past life. So none of the above causes can be regarded as valid. To this Atreya replied that it is by the combined effect of all the above elements that a child is produced, and not by any one of them separately*. This idea is again repeated in Iv. 3. 20, where it is said that just as a medical room (kiitdgaram vartulakaram grham jaintaka-sveda-pratipaditam —Cakrapani) is made up of various kinds of things, or just as a chariot is made up of a collection of its various parts, so is the foetus made up of the combination of various entities which con- tribute to the formation of the embryo and its development (nana- vidhanam garbha-karanim bhavanam samudayad abhinirvartate)?. The idea of such a combined effect of causes as leading to the production of a perfect whole seems to have a peculiar Buddhistic ring about it. Bharadvaja, in opposing the above statement of Atreya, asks what, if the foetus is the product of a number of combined causes, * Caraka-samhitd, Iv. 3. 3. * neti bhagavan Atreyah sarvebhya ebhyo bhavebhyah samuditebhyo garbho *bhinirvartate. Ibid. tv. 3. 11. 3 Ibid. Iv. 3. 20. XIII] The Foetus and the Subtle Body 309 is the definite order in which they co-operate together to produce the various parts (katham ayam sandhiyate)? Again, how is it that a child born of a woman is a human child and not that of any other animal? If, again, man is born out of man, why is not the son of a stupid person stupid, of a blind man blind, and of a madman mad? Moreover, if it is argued that the self perceives by the eye colours, by the ear sounds, by the smell odours, by the organ of taste the different tastes, and feels by the skin the different sensations of touch, and for that reason the child does not inherit the qualities of the father, then it has to be admitted that the soul can have knowledge only when there are senses and is devoid of it when there are no senses; in that case the soul is not un- changeable,but is liable to change (yatra caitad ubhayam sambhavati jnatvam ajfatvam ca sa-vikaras catma). If the soul perceives the objects of sense through the activity of the senses, such as per- ceiving and the like, then it cannot know anything when it has no senses, and, when it is unconscious, it cannot be the cause of the body-movements or of any of its other activities and consequently cannot be called the soul, d@tman. It is therefore simple nonsense to say that the soul perceives colours, etc. by its senses. To this Atreya replies that there are four kinds of beings, viz. those born from ovaries, eggs, sweat and vegetables. Beings in each class exist in an innumerable diversity of forms?. The forms that the foetus-producing elements (garbha-kara bhavah) assume depend upon the form of the body where they assemble. Just as gold, silver, copper, lead, etc. assume the form of any mould in which they are poured, so, when the foetus-producing elements assemble in a particular body, the foetus takes that par- ticular form. But a man is not infected with the defect or disease of his father, unless it be so bad or chronic as to have affected his semen.