Studies in the Medicine of Ancient India, Part I: Osteology, or the Bones of the Human Body c6.s3.t1.18

c6.s3.t1.18

6. There is another incongruity in Vāgbhaṭa’s No. 27, he counts two *hanu-bandhana*, or jaw-attachments. Suśruta counts two *hanu*, or jaws, and Charaka counts two *hanumūla-bandhana*, or attachments at the base of the (lower) jaw. Both are consistent views; for, as will be explained in § 65, in the system of Suśruta the two *hanu* signify the two maxillary bones (superior and inferior), while in the system of Charaka the two *bandhana* signify the two rami of the inferior maxillary. Vāgbhaṭa I, noticing the terminological difference, but not understanding its reason, sought to compromise it by adopting the contracted term *hanu-bandhana*, or jaw-attachment, and treating it as a synonym of the simple term *hanu*, jaw; the two jaws being, in his view, as it were two attachments to the face.