Thanks. I guess my problem with the article is that they’re falling into the oriental mysticism trap - everything Indian should have 1x snake charmers and 2x rope tricksters.
There’s always a bit of theological significance to any study in India - at the very least, every single book on whatever subject starts with a dedication to some god or other. But you’d be hard-pressed to find any medieval book from Europe or the Middle East that didn’t also begin with a dedication to god. Also, the people who wrote these books were Brahmins - by definition, priests and philosophers combined, who had to learn the rituals and the philosophy as a base before specializing in some science or other.
To me, the equivalent would be something like taking Occam’s Razor and embellishing it with a whole lot of Catholic theology on the basis that William of Ockham was a Franciscan friar. While that’s true, and his faith and studies in his faith probably had much to do with his work, that should not be the focus of a discussion on the philosophical concept. At most, it can add context. And thus with the mystical significance being attached in this article to the zero.
