Vedic Sources of the "Vedic Mathematics" – Part II

Summary

Dr. N. M. Kansara’s article examines the controversial claim that the rapid arithmetic techniques described in Swami Bhāratī Kṛṣṇa Tīrtha’s 1965 book “Vedic Mathematics” are of ancient Vedic origin. The author opens by recounting Tīrtha’s life: born Venkata Rama Śāstri in 1884, he studied the Vedas and mathematics in Banaras, became a monk of the Śaṅkarācārya order and served as head of the Govardhan Peeth monastery in Puri. During the 1920s he composed sixteen volumes of sutras designed to teach mental calculation, although only one volume was eventually published. Kansara notes that Tīrtha asserted his sutras were found “either directly or indirectly in the Atharvaveda”file:///home/oai/share/520773%20(23)%201-157_compressed.pdf and that the system could solve all mathematical problems. To test this claim the article compares each sutra’s terminology with known Vedic and post‑Vedic sources. Many of the terms used by Tīrtha—such as ūrdhva (“vertical”), anurūpya (“proportionate”), viloma (“reverse”) and yamajāti (“pairing”)—do appear in ancient ritual manuals like the Śulbasūtras and Śrautasūtrasfile:///home/oai/share/520773%20(23)%201-157_compressed.pdf#:~:text=be%20of%20the%20Vedic%20origin%2C,mathematical%20statements%2C%20which%20can%20make. However, Kansara shows that these words are employed there in very different ritual contexts rather than to describe arithmetic shortcuts. He catalogues instances where Tīrtha’s Sanskrit phrases seem to have been drawn from later mathematical commentaries or even created anew. The article further analyses the structure of the sutras and finds that the “Vedic” methods often rely on algebraic identities discovered in the medieval period. Kansara therefore concludes that the mental arithmetic techniques popularised as “Vedic Mathematics” cannot legitimately be traced to the Vedas. Instead, they represent an ingenious twentieth‑century reworking of diverse mathematical traditions packaged under a Vedic label. He suggests that using the term “Vedic” to describe these methods misleads the public and obscures the genuine mathematical knowledge contained in the ancient Sulba and Śrauta texts. The article urges scholars and educators to acknowledge the modern origin of Tīrtha’s work while continuing to explore authentic mathematical concepts in early Indian scriptures.