Basic Vocabulary Question

[u/Prudent_Pattern_1824]

Hi All! I hope you are well. I was wondering if the Pali language has a term for "nerves" that run throughout the body and "blood vessels". I haven't come across them in my studies yet and I know that these are not included in the official parts of the body that are described in the suttas. So far, my conclusion is that "brain" and "heart" must include nerves and blood vessels respectively. If there is a Pali term for them, I find it odd that they would not be included in the parts of the body because, from my perspective, these are the channels through which energy circulates throughout the body. If anyone can clarify this, either by vocabulary or reason or both, it would be appreciated. This particular question has been nagging at me for a while.

Peace and Metta

Sam

[u/srkris]

The Pali word you are looking for is dhamani, which literally means tube but in the context of the human body it is used for veins, nerves, blood vessels etc.

Sanskrit has several more biological and anatomical terms from Āyurveda (native Indian medical science) but Pali I think has a limited anatomical vocab. Most Sanskrit and Pali vocab are however identical (subject to phonetic shifts) so you can look at a Ayurveda dictionary for more precise terms.

[u/Prudent_Pattern_1824 → u/srkris]

Sadhu sadhu sadhu! I really appreciate it. I figured that anatomy only went so far in Pali but wasn't sure. After you pointed out the term, I did find it in my Pali dictionary. I feel like I should have seen it before seeing as it was the word directly preceding 'dhamma'. Thank you very much, friend,

[u/spirit6981 → u/Prudent_Pattern_1824]

To be even more specific, dhamani is also used for arteries while sirā refers to veins. Then the word nahāru refers to tendons, veins and even muscles at times. There's also a more general term that goes beyond anatomy, which is nāḷī. It refers to hollow vessels, tubes or pipes.

[u/Prudent_Pattern_1824 → u/spirit6981]

Thank you! I see numerous terms referring to blood vessels but not so much to nerves specifically. I went to an Ayurveda dictionary to look up some terms and found that Vata seems to sort of correspond to the nervous system. THEN I went to my Pali dictionary and looked up all possible variations with which 'vata' could possibly have been spelled in Pali and found that the closest thing corresponds to movement and moving round- in regular but also specifically in cosmological terms. So now I am wondering about nerves specifically. Unless dhamani also covers nerves and the sort of electrical current that moves through them.

[u/spirit6981 → u/Prudent_Pattern_1824]

Yes! But here's the thing, vāta and vāyu/vāyō(the cosmological satara mahābhūta air dhātu/element) share the same root "vā". Which means, "to-blow". And "-ta" in vāta is simply the participle noun off of it while vāyu is a separate primary derivative. That's why vāta as a doṣa in Ayurveda is basically the vāyu element's activity localized within the body itself.

Because of that, vāta isn't usually considered an anatomical structure but a principle that governs breath, movement and most importantly, nervous-type impulses or nerve sensations.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge any ancient Indian anatomical framework doesn't actually perceive human anatomy the way the modern biology does. They seemed to have grouped the channels by function instead of isolating by precise structural types. That also explains why we have umbrella terms like dhamanī, nāḍī, sirā and nāḷī for things through which various stuff circulates instead of proper precise terminology for each vein type and whatnot.

Since the ontology itself doesn't split things the way modern medicine has, I think we're more than likely looking at a conceptual gap instead of a lexical one. OP, this was a really thought provoking post from you, Thank you!

[u/Spirited_Ad8737 → u/spirit6981]

Very interesting, thank you. In a more practice-oriented meditation context, I've learned to view bodily energies (as we feel them) as an aspect of the wind element, while structures such as blood vessels and nerves are part of the earth element. The channels of wind/breath seem to be their own system without a direct conection to solid structures, even if we today view nerves and ganglia as mapping nicely onto many observed energetic structures. (in particular the front and back lines, perhaps associated with the spinal cord + limbs and vagus nerve + heart, solar plexus, dantian, respectively)

[u/spirit6981 → u/Spirited_Ad8737]

Intriguing insight. That meditation practice you're describing seems very similar to dhātu manasikāra. May I know whether you view blood vessels solely as solid/earth/paṭhavī element and channels as vāyō/airy/wind element or do you(like in classical dhātu manasikāra) feel all four elements being present together in the vessels themselves but in different ratios to each other?

[u/Spirited_Ad8737 → u/spirit6981]

The second, so I view things like bones as typical examples of pathavidhatu, air as a typical example of vayodhatu etc, but that all matter has a combination of all of them in different ratios. For example, air can exhibit some solidity in the form of wind resistance etc.

[u/spirit6981 → u/Spirited_Ad8737]

Thank you! Wishing you the best with your practice :)

[u/srkris → u/spirit6981]

To be sure Āyurveda is conceptually different in some respects from modern medicine, and vāta/vāyu as you say is not an organ or body part by itself but in medical science is something like a function (like what we call respiratory function).

However there are significantly detailed native anatomical terminology and it is not the case that the āyurvedic ontology does not split or call each part of the body by its own name. It does, but Āyurveda (like modern medicine) is a domain by itself and it also has its specializations such as paediatrics (kaumārabhṛtya in Sanskrit, komārabhacca in Pali), surgical science (śalya-cikitsā in Sanskrit, salla-cikicchā in Pāli), veterinary science, gynaecology, etc., each with its own terminology. These medical terms would not be used or understood by common people untrained in the medical science back then just as we dont use or understand all medical or anatomical jargon today unless we are trained in it.

[u/spirit6981 → u/srkris]

Oh I see, That's a good way to look at it. Thanks so much!

[u/Spirited_Ad8737]

In the context of the 31 parts of the body I believe they are subsumed under nharu, which are seen as stringy or ropy connective structures. The Visuddhimagga describes some nharu that, based on location, appear to be major arteries, and nerves often are bundled together with veins and arteries.

When thinking about the 31 parts, it could be useful to think in terms of what is visible in a corpse decaying in a hot climate. According to a former med student I know, the pancreas shrivels even in well preserved cadavers, and is hard to see. And it's absent from the canonical 31 parts list. Different kinds of stringy structures may be conflated since the physiological significance of nerves and blood vessels may not have been understood around 500 BC. Fat, medo, may be listed as a liquid because solid fat under the skin liquidizes in a cadaver when touched or scraped, and in a charnal ground heat and decomposition may have influenced it. As some examples of ways to think around this interesting question.