Vedic Mathematics or Vedic Nonsense ?

Lets multiply 98 by 76. Under prevalent system, you will do something like this:

First, 98 * 6 = 588.

Second, 98 * 70 = 6860 (Actually, 98 * 7 = 686, then just put 0 at the end)

Finally, 588 + 6860 = 7448

In case of vedic mathematics, you would go something like this:

I have deliberately kept this simple, because, teaching vedic maths is not the scope of this article. It is enough, if you get the idea. If, however, you want to understand it in detail, just google for it.

As you must have figured out by this time, that the so called “vedic mathematics”  does not comprise any separate branch of mathematics or herald some new form of mathematics. It is nothing but some clever tricks to solve elementary arithmetic and algebra and is similar to the speed mathematics, popularised by Trachtenberg and many other such authors.

The whole mumbo-jumbo of vedic mathematics is a result of a book called, ‘Vedic Mathematics’ written by Jagadguru Swami Shri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji Maharaja, and published posthumously in 1965. Swamiji was the Sankaracharya of Govardhan Math of Puri, India, and curiously, it appears that prior to pursuing a life of a sage, he had acquired a masters degree in mathematics.

In the book, Swamiji claims to have “rediscovered” or “reconstructed”, the mathematical laws, which were hidden in cryptic hymns (slokas) of the vedic scriptures, and reveals to us these laws in form of mathematical aphorisms (sutras). Strangely though, he neglects to mention the specific slokas, from where he “rediscovered” the laws. He thought it would be enough if he mentioned that all of these are from vedas, and accordingly mentions in the passing that the appendix (parishishta) of the Atharva Veda contained all these sutras. His book contains a total of 16 sutras and 13 corollaries (The above example is from the third sutra called Ūrdhva Tiryagbhyām, which translates into, “Vertically and Cross-wise”)

The problem is, Atharva Veda just does not have any such parishishta. From where he got hold of that parishishta is anybody’s guess. Nowhere in any book of Vedas, and not even in the appendages, like the Sulbasutras, which were later added to the main texts, can these sutras be found. Dr. Kim Plofker, in the chapter Indian Mathematics, pg 387, from the book The Mathematics of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India, and Islam: A Sourcebook makes this point:

These sutras are often said to represent an ancient mathematical system ‘rediscovered’ or ‘redeveloped’ from the Vedic scriptures, but there is no record of them in traditional study of the Vedas.

A group of intellectuals from India, concerned by the self-destructive attempt to introduce “vedic mathematics” in the Indian primary school, jointly issued a pamphlet, where they made the same point:

As has been pointed out earlier on several occasions, the so-called ‘Vedic Mathematics’ is neither ‘Vedic’ nor can it be dignified by the name of mathematics…The book assembled a set of tricks in elementary arithmetic and algebra to be applied in performing computations with numbers and polynomials. As is pointed out even in the foreword to the book by the General Editor, Dr. A.S. Agarwala, the aphorisms in Sanskrit to be found in the book have nothing to do with the Vedas. Nor are these aphorisms to be found in the genuine Vedic literature.

The term “Vedic Mathematics” is therefore entirely misleading and factually incorrect. Further, it is clear from the notation used in the arithmetical tricks in the book that the methods used in this text have nothing to do with the arithmetical techniques of antiquity.

Many of the sutras, deal with decimals and calculus, which were unknown in India during the time, that is generally attributed to the composition of the Vedas. That the arithmetic, described in that book does not confirm to the vedic era, is noticed by many scholars. The following observations by Jan Hogendijk, in Nieuwe Wiskrant, (Vol 23), is relevant:

The word “Vedic” in the title of the book suggests that these calculations are authentic Vedic Mathematics. The question now arises how the Vedic mathematicians were able to write the recurrent decimal fraction of 1/19, while decimal fractions were unknown in India before the seventeenth century.

Prof. S.G.Dani, in his 1993, article Myths and Reality: On ‘Vedic Mathematics’, published in Frontline, India, also makes a similar observation:

The contents of the swamiji’s book have practically nothing in common with what is known of the mathematics from the Vedic period or even with the subsequent rich tradition of mathematics in India until the advent of the modern era; incidentally, the descriptions of mathematical principles or procedures in ancient mathematical texts are quite explicit and not in terms of cryptic sutras…While certain elements preliminary to calculus have been found in the works of Bhaskara II from the 12th century and later Indian mathematicians in the pre-calculus era in international mathematics, such crystallised notions as the derivative or the integral were not known.

It is also claimed that this vedic mathematics can be applied in all fields of science and will actually be far more effective and easier than conventional methods. Nothing can be further from the truth. The so called mental mathematics, is applicable only in some specific cases and cannot be applied without the same amount of labour, and in some cases much more, than what is required under conventional method. Prof. S.G.Dani, in the same article cited above,wonders aloud:

…why such methods are not commonly adopted for practical purposes. One main point is that they turn out to be quicker only for certain special classes of examples. For a general example the amount of effort involved (for instance, the count of the individual operations needed to be performed with digits, in arriving at the final answer) is about the same as required by the standard methods; in the swamiji’s book, this is often concealed by not writing some of the steps involved, viewing it as “mental arithmetic.” Using such methods of fast arithmetic involves the ability or practice to recognize various patterns which would simplify the calculations. Without that, one would actually spend more time, in first trying to recognize patterns and then working by rote anyway, since in most cases it is not easy to find useful patterns.

The main texts of Vedas are notorious for their ambiguity, partly because of the antiquity of sanskrit, in which it is written and partly because of complete lack of reference to detailed or precise measurements or quantification etc. In fact one can interpret a sloka in any way he/ she desires. There is also no archeological evidence that can be used as a counter reference. Many of the true vedic sutras are simple statements with no proof or method of derivation being given. For example, the famous sutra from Baudhayana Sulbasutra, goes like this (B. Datta, The science of the Sulba):

The rope which is stretched across the diagonal of a square produces an area double the size of the original square

This is now recognised as the earliest result of what we today call Pythagorus’s Theorem. (Budhiyana preceded Pythagorus by about 200 years). But strangely enough, the author of the sutra does not give any hint of  how it was arrived at, nor does he point to any source that he may have referenced. This lays open a wide range of possibilities. Was it simply copied from the Greeks (as some argue) or was is the Indian branch of mathematics that split from a common source and created both the Indian and Greek systems (as other argue) or was it plain indigenous (as yet others argue) ?

This vagueness in the vedas, provides a fertile breeding ground for obscurantism, and its proponents would do just about anything to forward their agenda. Something that is a matter of scholarly debate will be dragged into the dirty arena of politics of communalism and blind nationalism. What is even more disgusting is that, the educated elite would indulge in such nonsense, giving undue credence to the whole filth.

It is unfortunate that in spite of the credible people, coming out in the open and pointing out the fraud perpetrated in the name of the Vedas, this vedic nonsense continues to live on in public fantasy.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Vedic Mathematics
• No Title

Tags: Atharvaveda, India, mumbo-jumbo, Speed Mathematics, Sulbasutras, Vedic Maths, Woo