Indian Medicine (Medicin), translated by C. G. Kashikar c8.27

c8.27

§ 6. Vagbhata.— Besides some apocryphal productions (cf. § 3) two big and kindred works are attributed to this author¹; of these the bigger and evidently older is referred to in citations as Vrddha Vagbhata and the other simply as Vagbhata. The latter work which is particularly respected and is frequently commented is properly called the Astangahrdayasamhita² i. e. the quintessence of medicine and contains, with arrangement similar to Susruta, in six sthanas and 120 adhyayas a lucid and versified presentation of the whole medicine with special reference to surgery as in Susruta. AHr conforms more closely with Caraka than with Susruta. It also quotes both these authors. Thus in 6.40.84 and 88 both Caraka and Susruta are quoted together; in 1.9.13 Caraka alone is quoted and in 6.30. 31 Susruta alone is quoted. AHr besides quotes Bhela, Nimi, Kasyapa, Dhanvantaryah and in the introduction (1.1) the son of Atri, Agnivesa and other Rsis whose particulars are not given. At the end it also mentions the AS (Vrddha Vagbhata) which the author clearly characterises as his chief source. On the evidence of Tibetan sources, Huth (whose results are indeed not undisputed) places the composition of AHr in the 8th century as the latest limit. A similar result would be obtained if the AHr can be identified with the book Astankar (?) of the Arabic sources³. The citation in Vrnda also appears to take back Vagbhata at least in the 9th century. The opium, pulse-feeling (Nadipariksa) and the metallurgical process do not yet come in here. Of the commentaries, Arunadatta's commentary named Sarvāṅgasundarī is very valuable and is much used by his successors. It is composed in the 15th century⁴ at the latest. Hemādri's Āyurvedarasāyana is written at the end of the 13th century.