The shortcomings to al-Bīrūnīin's description of Indian thought are more obvious to us now than to earlier generations of Western and Eastern scholars. The tacit value of non-literate elements, expressed in myth, magic and ritual, has been impressed on a global readership through the work of anthropological researchers such as Sir J. Frazer and E. E. Evans-Pritchard. As an elitist, al-Bīrūnī prized literacy, adhering mainly to texts for his information on Indian culture at the same time that he equated illiteracy with ignorance and even heresy. In spite of his textualist orientation, he failed to achieve a thorough grasp of the Sanskrit language and relied almost exclusively on the transmissions and interpretations provided by others. He also introduced Muslim categories into seemingly objective descriptions of Hindu belief, even though it was his preoccupation with verifiably objective, scientific methods, especially counting, which apparently prevented...