A History of Indian Medical Literature v1.c20.s3.63

v1.c20.s3.63

Hoernle also claimed that Drdhabala made use of the Mādhavanidāna, unaware as he was of Mādhava’s innovations in the field of nosography. An example is his allegation that the verses on the nidāna of gulma in Ca.Ci.5 derive from Mādhava, who versified the prose on this subject in Ca.Ni.3 and incorporated his verses in his Mādhavanidāna (28.6–14 = Ca.Ci.5.9–17), from which work Drdhabala borrowed them.600 Hoernle’s contention that Drdhabala is posterior to Mādhava, because the latter was unacquainted with the Kāśmīrapātha, is invalidated by the fact that Drdhabala is not, as supposed by Hoernle, the author of the Kaśmīr recension.601