Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Medical Literature v1.c26.s18: Various ancient authorities

A History of Indian Medical Literature v1.c26.s18

Language
English

Various ancient authorities

v1.c26.s18.1

BANDHAKA¹ is mentioned as the author of a treatise on children’s diseases in Ḍalhaṇa’s *Nibandhasaṃgraha* (ad Su.U.1.4cd–8ab). He therefore figures on the traditional list of authors of a tantra on kaumārabhṛtya.²

v1.c26.s18.2

BHĀLUKI³ was the author of a *Bhālukitantra*,⁴ also quoted as *Bhālukīya*.

v1.c26.s18.3

Authors and treatises quoting from or referring to this work or its author are Āḍhamalla,⁵ Anantakumāra,⁶ the *Āyurvedādhisāra* and its commentary,⁷ the *Bheṣajakalpa*,⁸ the *Bheṣajjamañjūsāsannaya*, Bindu,⁹ Cakrapāṇidatta,¹⁰ Candraṭa,¹¹ Caturbhuja,¹² Cūḍāmaṇi,¹³ Ḍalhaṇa,¹⁴ Dāmodara,¹⁵ Dattarāma,¹⁶ Gaṅgādhara,¹⁷ Gayadāsa,¹⁸ Hārāṇacandra,¹⁹ Jejjata,²⁰ Mādhavācārya,²¹ Bhudeb Mookerjee,²² Nārāyaṇa,²³ Niścalakara,²⁴ Nṛsiṃhakavi,²⁵ Parameśvara,²⁶ Rāmaprasāda,²⁷ Śivadāsasena,²⁸ Somadeva,²⁹ Śrīdāsapaṇḍita,³⁰ Śrīkaṇṭhadatta,³¹ Toḍara,³² Vācaspati,³³ Vāgbhaṭa,³⁴ Vallabhabhaṭṭa,³⁵ Veṅkaṭeśa, Vijayarakṣita,³⁶ and Viśvanātha Dvivedī.³⁷ Bhāluki is also quoted by the unknown author of the interpolated portions of Niścalakara’s *Ratnaprabhā*.³⁸

v1.c26.s18.4

Hariprapanna quotes some rasayogas, ascribed to Bhāluki, from Dattarāma’s *Rasarājasundara*,³⁹ Dattātreya’s *Rasacaṇḍāṃśu*,⁴⁰ Deveśvara Upādhyāya’s *Rasendraratnakoṣa*,⁴¹ Kāśīnātha’s *Cikitsākramakalpavalī*,⁴² Magnirāma’s *Rasakalpalatā*,⁴³ and the anonymous *Rasaratnakaumudī*.⁴⁴

v1.c26.s18.5

Verses from the *Bhālukitantra* were incorporated in the *Mādhavacikitsā*,⁴⁵ *Siddhayoga*,⁴⁶ *Cakradatta*,⁴⁷ and various later works.

v1.c26.s18.6

The Indian tradition regards Bhāluki as the author of a śalyatantra,⁴⁸ but the quotations from the treatise called after him show that it dealt with more aspects of medicine.

v1.c26.s18.7

The *Bhālukitantra* was composed in the form of a dialogue between an unknown teacher and Bhāluki as his pupil.⁴⁹ It may have consisted of a number of sections (sthāna), since a *Siddhisthāna* of the work is referred to.⁵⁰ It was probably written in verse, interspersed with prose.⁵¹

v1.c26.s18.8

Subjects covered by the quotations are: units of time,⁵² the preparation of medicines,⁵³ emetics and clysters,⁵⁴ surgical instruments,⁵⁵ bloodletting,⁵⁶ the application of leeches,⁵⁷ the extraction of foreign bodies,⁵⁸ the surgical treatment of aśmarī (vesical calculus),⁵⁹ the diagnosis and treatment of various diseases,⁶⁰ and in particular the description and treatment of fevers. Bhāluki’s description of a series of saṃnipāta fevers, his characterization of the disorder called koṭha,⁶¹ and his way of distinguishing between kilāsa and śvitra,⁶² were famous, being quoted in a number of later works. The number of śūkadoṣas and their subdivision, as found in his tantra, were, however, not accepted by later authors.⁶³

v1.c26.s18.9

The comments of Cakrapāṇidatta and Ḍalhaṇa on Suśruta’s chapters about surgical instruments show that Bhāluki’s treatise was probably one of the sources of the Suśrutasaṃhitā.⁶⁴

v1.c26.s18.10

One verse is said to be common to the works of Bhāluki and Bhoja.⁶⁵ Another quotation, ascribed to Bhāluki, consists of verses found in the Bhelasaṃhitā.⁶⁶

v1.c26.s18.11

Most interesting are the verses on saṃnipāta fevers. A long series is quoted in the Madhukośa⁶⁷ and Nārāyaṇa’s Jvaranirṇaya;⁶⁸ closely related descriptions are found in the Kāśyapasaṃhitā,⁶⁹ Vaṅgasena,⁷⁰ and Jvaratimirabhāskara.⁷¹ Niścala cites eight stanzas on saṃnipāta fever in general⁷² and twenty-four verses on irregular (viṣama) fevers.⁷³ The last series is the longest description known of the viṣama fevers; pralepaka fever is included in the group.

v1.c26.s18.12

Bhāluki was opposed to the admission of śūdras as pupils of āyurvedic teachers.⁷⁴

v1.c26.s18.13

The Bhālukitantra is probably a rather early work, anterior to Jejjaṭa, Mādhavacikitsā and Siddhayoga.

v1.c26.s18.14

The iatrochemical tradition regards Bhāluki as one of its originators and authorities.⁷⁵

v1.c26.s18.15

BHOJA⁷⁶ is an ancient authority who composed a work of his own that may have resembled the Suśrutasaṃhitā⁷⁷ in being of a comprehensive nature, although laying emphasis on śalya and śālākya. Bhoja’s treatise, referred to as a saṃhitā⁷⁸ or tantra, was, as appears from quotations, written in verse, mixed with some prose,⁷⁹ and must have been in the form of a dialogue between a teacher and some king.⁸⁰ Bhoja was undoubtedly a specialist in śalya and śālākya,⁸¹ but the quotations from his work prove that he was well versed in basic concepts,⁸² anatomy,⁸³ kaumārabhṛtya,⁸⁴ kāyacikitsā,⁸⁵ materia medica,⁸⁶ technical rules,⁸⁷ etc.

v1.c26.s18.16

The Indian tradition regards him as the author of a śalyatantra.⁸⁸ This work may have been one of Suśruta’s sources.⁸⁹

v1.c26.s18.17

The ancient Bhoja is quite different from his later namesake to whom numerous works on various subjects, including medicine, are attributed.⁹⁰

v1.c26.s18.18

Bhoja is already known as an ancient medical authority in Buddhist literature,⁹¹ where he is referred to as a specialist in toxicology and the treatment of snake-bites.⁹²

v1.c26.s18.19

Special features of Bhoja’s treatise, as shown by quotations, are: the digestive fire forms part of pitta;⁹³ a divergent description of the stages of embryonic development;⁹⁴ the same views on irregular fevers as expressed by other specialists in śalya;⁹⁵ pravāhikā is called visraṃsī;⁹⁶ numerous detailed descriptions of diseases;⁹⁷ the description of nine types of pramehapiḍakā;⁹⁸ masūrikā, one of the pramehapiḍakās, is called kulatthikā;⁹⁹ the absence of raktavidradhi as a separate type of vidradhi;¹⁰⁰ an aberrant view on sidhma;¹⁰¹ the acceptance of a larger number of kṣudrarogas;¹⁰² the recognition of sixty-five mukharogas;¹⁰³ the description of ten types of kaṣāya;¹⁰⁴ the names of some uncommon plants: alakṣmī,¹⁰⁵ lakṣmī and mahālakṣmī,¹⁰⁶ hrasvavallī, mahāvallī, kṣudravallī, and śvetavallī.¹⁰⁷

v1.c26.s18.20

Several versions of Bhoja’s work may have been current, since quotations are found from authorities and works called Bhojarāja, Bhojarājīya, Bhojottara, Bṛhadbhoja, Kṣudrabhoja, Mahābhoja, and Vṛddhabhoja.¹⁰⁸

v1.c26.s18.21

Bhoja is almost always quoted with respect, but on one occasion Dalhaṇa rejects his view. 109

v1.c26.s18.22

Authors and works quoting from or referring to Bhoja 110 are: Āḍhamalla, 111 Anantakumāra, 112 Āśubodha and Nityabodha Senagupta in their commentary on the Rasaratnasamuccaya, 113 the Āyurvedābdhisāra and its commentary, 114 Bhāvamiśra, 115 Bharadvāja’s Bheṣajakalpa, 116 the Bheṣajakalpasārasaṃgraha, the Bṛhannighaṇṭuratnākara, 117 Binod Lal Sen in his Āyurvedavijñāna, 118 Cakrapāṇidatta in his Āyurvedadīpikā 119 and Bhānumatī, 120 Candraṭa, 121 Dalhaṇa, 122 Dāmodara, 123 Dattarāma Caube, 124 the Gandhavāda, 125 Gaṅgādhara in his Bheṣajakalpa, Gayadāsa, 126 Gopāladāsa in his Cikitsāmṛta, 127 Indu, 128 Jejjaṭa, 129 the Jvarasamuccaya, the Kairalī commentary on the Uttarasthāna of the Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā, 130 Karaṇdīkar in his Nidānadīpikā, 131 Kāśīrāma, 132 Lakṣmīrāma, 133 Nāganātha in his Nidānapradīpa, Narasimha in his commentary on the Mādhavanidāna, Niścalakara, 134 Nṛsiṃhakavi, 135 Parameśvara, 136 Raghunātha, 137 Rūpanayana in his commentary on the Yogaśataka, Śivadāsasena, 138 Śrīdasapaṇḍita, 139 Śrīkaṇṭhadatta, 140 Tiṣaṭa, 141 Toḍara, 142 Trimalla, 143 Vācaspati, 144 Vāgbhaṭa, 145 the Vaidyacintāmaṇi, 146 Vijayarakṣita, 147 Virasiṃha, 148 and the Yogaratnākara. 149 Bhoja is also quoted by the unknown author of the interpolated portions of Niścalakara’s Ratnaprabhā. 150

v1.c26.s18.23

Bhoja is mentioned in the Ma’din al-Shifā’ 151 and Amānallāh Khān’s Gaṅj-i Badāward, written during the reign of Shāh Jahān. 152

v1.c26.s18.24

Bhojarāja 153 is quoted by Anantakumāra, 154 in the Kāmaratna, 155 and by Śivadāsasena. 156 The Bhojarājīya 157 is cited in the Bheṣajamañjūsāsannaya and by Śrīdasapaṇḍita. 158 Bhojottara, 159 Bṛhadbhoja, 160 and Kṣudrabhoja 161 are cited by Anantakumāra. Mahābhoja is cited by Śrīdasapaṇḍita. 162 Bṛhadbhoja was one of the sources of the Bheṣajakalpasārasaṃgraha 163 and Gaṅgādhara’s Bheṣajakalpa. Vṛddhabhoja is quoted by Āḍhamalla, 164 the commentator on the Āyurvedābdhisāra, 165 Candraṭa, 166 Dalhaṇa, 167 Nāganātha in his Nidānapradīpa, Rūpanayana in his commentary on the Yogaśataka, Toḍara, 168 Vācaspati, 169 Vijayarakṣita, 170 and the unknown author of the interpolated portions of Niścalakara’s Ratnaprabhā. 171

v1.c26.s18.25

The verses from Vṛddhabhoja are interesting, since they stress the importance of disorders of the digestive fire and describe the differences among three closely related disorders of this group, namely arocaka, bhaktadveṣa and abhaktacchanda.

v1.c26.s18.26

Bhoja’s treatise may belong to the period in which the saṃhitā of Suśruta was revised; it may even be earlier and belong to Suśruta’s sources, 172 since Śrīkaṇṭhadatta remarks that Suśruta follows Bhoja. 173 Dalhaṇa refers unfavourably to predecessors who incorporated a statement by Bhoja in the text of the Suśrutasaṃhitā. 174 Bhoja is mentioned in the company of Bhāluki 175 and Viśvāmitra, 176 also together with Jejjaṭa and Kārttika. 177 He is certainly earlier than Jejjaṭa, Indu, Tiṣaṭa, etc., who quote him. Bhoja himself refers to earlier authorities 178 and to Dhanvantari. 179

v1.c26.s18.27

CAKṢUṢYA or CAKṢUṢYENA 180 is an ancient medical authority and the reputed author of a lost tantra on śālākya. 181

v1.c26.s18.28

He is quoted 182 or referred to by Āḍhamalla, 183 Anantakumāra, 184 Āśubodha and Nityabodha in their commentary on the *Rasaratnasamuccaya*, 185 the author of the *Bheṣajakapaśārasaṃgraha*, 186 the author of the *Bheṣajamañjūṣāsannaya*, 187 Cakrapāṇidatta, 188 Candraṭa, 189 Ḍalhaṇa, 190 Gayadāsa, 191 Indu, 192 Mādhava, 193 Niścalakara, 194 Śivadāsasena, 195 Śrīkaṇṭhadatta, 196 Toḍara, 197 Vācaspati, 198 Vāgbhaṭa, 199 and Vaṅgasena. 200

v1.c26.s18.29

Cakṣuṣyeṇa’s treatise was one of the sources of Cakrapāṇidatta’s *Cikitsāsaṃgraha*. 201

v1.c26.s18.30

Cakṣuṣyeṇa’s work was probably a *saṃhitā*, 202 mainly written in verse, 203 with an emphasis on śālākya, but also covering many other subjects. 204 The citations show that Cakṣuṣyeṇa’s treatise dealt with general subjects, technical rules, 205 pañcakarman, 206 and the treatment of diseases belonging to the divisions of kāyacikitsā and kaumārabhṛtya. 207 Among the general subjects were the three types of country (deśa), 208 the constitutions (prakṛti), 209 sattva, 210 sātmya, 211 the various types of kaṣāya, 212 and the four types of sneha. 213

v1.c26.s18.31

Cakṣuṣyeṇa distinguished two varieties of kvātha. 214 He held a divergent view on the meaning of pilla, regarding it as a term designating one eye disease or a small group of disorders, two of which are known under the names aklinna- and praklinnavartman. 215

v1.c26.s18.32

A Cākṣuṣa quoted by Mallinātha 216 appears to be a different author, who wrote on nīti or gajaśāstra. 217

v1.c26.s18.33

DĀRUKA 218 is an ancient medical authority, quoted by Cakrapāṇidatta 219 on the rules for the preparation and administration of decoctions. Two citations, found in the commentaries of Aruṇadatta and Śrīdāsa on the *Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā*, may be from Dāruka, if certain variants in the MSS are preferable to the printed text. 220

v1.c26.s18.34

Opinions are divided on the question whether or not Dāruka is identical with Dāruvāha. 221 A decision cannot be reached on this point.

v1.c26.s18.35

A Dāruka is the friend and charioteer of Kṛṣṇa in the *Mahābhārata* 222 and a number of Purāṇas. 223

v1.c26.s18.36

DĀRUVĀHA, 224 sometimes called Dāruvāhi(n), is an ancient medical authority, referred to and quoted in a number of texts and commentaries.

v1.c26.s18.37

Dāruvāha’s name occurs in the *Kāśyapasaṃhitā*, where he induces Vṛddhajīvaka to put questions to his teacher, Kaśyapa. 225 Another chapter of the same treatise 226 presents him as a member of an assembly of sages who declare how many types of diseases should be distinguished; the royal sage (rājarṣi) Dāruvāha is credited with the thesis that diseases are of five kinds: of exogenous origin (āgantuja), caused by one of the three doṣas, or all three together.

v1.c26.s18.38

Dāruvāha is quoted by Aruṇadatta, 227 Cakrapāṇidatta, 228 Jejjaṭa, 229 and Niścalakara. 230 Dāruvāhi(n) is cited by Śrīdāsapaṇḍita 231 and the author of the *Vyākhyāsāra* on the *Aṣṭāṅgahṛdaya*. 232 Indu refers to Dāruvāhi(n) in his commentary on the *Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha*. 233

v1.c26.s18.39

Niścala gives Daruvāha’s opinion on the quantities of a kvātha and sneha to be prescribed to different types of patients. Cakrapāṇidatta and Jejjata quote verses about the pathophysiology of fever. Aruṇadatta and Śrīdāsapaṇḍita quote two stanzas on the circumstances during sexual intercourse which determine the conception of a boy or a girl. Aruṇadatta cites Dāruvāhi on the physiology of lactation. 234 Indu ascribes some statements in prose on the qualities required of a wet-nurse to Dāruvāhi, 235 cites him twice as interpreting in a different way some verses on the deities to be inscribed in a maṇḍala serving to ward off grahas, 236 and regards Nagnajit as identical with Dāruvāhin. 237 The view that Dāruvāha or Dāruvāhi(n) and Nagnajit are one and the same authority is shared by a number of contemporary Indian scholars. 238 Some consider him to be the same as Dāruka. 239

v1.c26.s18.40

JĪVAKA 240 is mentioned as the author of a treatise on children’s diseases in Ḍalhaṇa’s commentary on the Suśrutasaṃhitā. 241 Recipes attributed to him are found in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya, 242 the Bower MS, 243 the Cakradatta, 244 Toḍara’s Āyurvedasaukhya, 245 and Vaṅgasena’s Cikitsāsārasaṃgraha. 246 These prescriptions, apart from those in the Bower MS, do not deal with children’s diseases; 247 those found in Anantakumāra’s work are concerned with disorders in pregnant women. Some verses, occurring in Vaṅgasena’s treatise, enumerate seven disorders of the breastmilk, as described by Jīvaka. 248 The collection of prescriptions, known as the Jīvakapustaka, mentions Jivaka as one who gets instruction in medical matters from the Buddha. 249

v1.c26.s18.41

A (Vṛddha)jīvaka is the reputed author of the Kāśyapasaṃhitā, a treatise specializing in the branch of āyurveda called kaumārabhṛtya. 250 The Kāśyaparṣiproktastrī-cikitsāsūtra, a Buddhist treatise on embryology and prenatal care, is said to have been taught by Kāśyapa to Jīvaka. 251 Thai traditional medicine credits Jīvaka with treatises on children’s diseases. 252

v1.c26.s18.42

Although his name is often mentioned in connection with paediatrics, the earliest references to him, found in Buddhist literature, depict him as a skillful surgeon, 253 who practised laparotomy and even trephination of the skull. 254 This Jīvaka, surnamed Komārabhacca, 255 is described as providing free medical care to the Buddha and other monks, and donating his mango grove, named Jīvakārāma, at Rājagṛha, to the Buddhist monastic community. His free medical service to monks is said to have attracted large numbers of people to join the order. Legends about his life and medical feats can be found in many versions of a number of Buddhist scriptures. 256

v1.c26.s18.43

Jīvaka is reported to have obtained his medical education at Taxila by studying for seven years as apprentice to a physician, who is called Ātreya in part of the sources. After completing his studies, he travelled widely and acquired great fame. The legends concerning Jīvaka recount treatments performed on various people in different places.

v1.c26.s18.44

A Jīvakacarita, devoted to the life and deeds of the Jīvaka known from Buddhist literature, was written by Śubhacandra, an author assigned to the sixteenth century. 257

v1.c26.s18.45

Jīvaka is known as Kumārajīva (Hécho-byed gźon-nu) in the Tibetan medical tradition, where he is associated with G-yu-thog yon-tan mgon-po. 258

v1.c26.s18.46

The secondary literature on Jīvaka is rather extensive. 259

v1.c26.s18.47

KAPILA²⁶⁰ is quoted in Niścala's *Ratnaprabhā* on the composition of the groups of drugs called tryūṣaṇa, caturūṣaṇa, pañcoṣaṇa, and ṣaḍūṣaṇa.²⁶¹

v1.c26.s18.48

Kapila is also quoted in Toḍara's *Āyurvedasaukhya*.²⁶² Toḍara's quotations, dealing with the symptoms and treatment of fevers and vesical calculi, do not convey the impression of being from an early treatise, since the saṃnipāta fevers called raktaṣṭhīvin and pralāpaka are mentioned.

v1.c26.s18.49

Hemādri cites a verse by a Kapila who is obviously identical with Kapilabala, for this stanza about the relationships between the doṣas and the tastes forms part of the text of the *Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha*.²⁶³ The Kapila quoted by Nṛsiṃhakavi is the same as the Kapilabala quoted by Cakra.²⁶⁴

v1.c26.s18.50

D.Ch. Bhattacharyya claims that Kapila, whom he regards as identical with the Kapilabala who was Dṛḍhabala's father, is twice cited or referred to by Niścala.²⁶⁵ A medical authority called Kapila figures in the *Milindapañha* (4. 7.20)²⁶⁶ and *Visuddhimagga*.²⁶⁷ His name is also found in the *Mahāvyutpatti*.²⁶⁸ A medical treatise, devoted to rasāyana, called *Kapilasiddhānta* is also recorded.²⁶⁹ G. Mukhopadhyaya claims that the name of Kapila occurs in the list of sages of the *Carakasaṃhitā*²⁷⁰ and in a list of persons described as proficient in the healing art in the *Devīpurāṇa*.²⁷¹

v1.c26.s18.51

The Kapilamuni quoted in the *Kalyāṇakāraka*,²⁷² and the Kapila referred to in Cakrapāṇidatta's *Āyurvedadīpikā*²⁷³ and in the introductory verses of Vācaspati's commentary on the *Mādhavanidāna*, may be different from the physician Kapila.

v1.c26.s18.52

Kapila is by some regarded as the author of a *śalyatantra*.²⁷⁴

v1.c26.s18.53

Kapila is a Rasasiddha in the *Pāradasaṃhitā*,²⁷⁵ *Rasaratnākara*²⁷⁶ and *Rasaratnasamuccaya*.²⁷⁷ The *Raseśvarasiddhānta*, quoted in the *Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha*, ²⁷⁸ refers to Kapila as one of the Siddhas who obtained jīvanmukti.

v1.c26.s18.54

As is evident from the quotations, Kapila may in some cases be regarded as an abbreviation of Kapilabala; the appellation muni, applied to Kapila and not to Kapilabala, tells against an overall identity of Kapila and Kapilabala.²⁷⁹

v1.c26.s18.55

KARĀLA²⁸⁰ is an ancient medical authority, regarded as a specialist in śālākya and the author of a lost tantra on that branch of āyurveda.²⁸¹ Vāgbhaṭa (A.s.Sū.1.11) mentions him as one of a series of sages who composed a medical treatise (tantra).

v1.c26.s18.56

Karāla is moreover quoted or referred to in the Bower MS,²⁸² by Cakrapāṇidatta,²⁸³ Daḷhaṇa,²⁸⁴ Śivadāsasena,²⁸⁵ Soḍhala,²⁸⁶ Śrīkaṇṭhadatta,²⁸⁷ and Vācaspati.²⁸⁸ Vāgasena²⁸⁹ and Vṛnda²⁹⁰ are sometimes said to quote him.

v1.c26.s18.57

The quotations from and references to Karāla, the reference in the Soḍhalanighaṇṭu excepted, deal with diseases of the eyes, ears and nose, thus showing that he was indeed a specialist in śālākya.

v1.c26.s18.58

Karāla distinguished ninety-six, Sātyaki eighty, and Videha seventy-six eye diseases.²⁹¹ Caraka followed Karāla,²⁹² but Suśruta was an adherent of Videha's system.²⁹³ Karāla's views differed in some other respects too from those of other śālākya specialists, both with respect to the aetiology of particular diseases²⁹⁴ and their treatment.²⁹⁵

v1.c26.s18.59

Karāla is by some regarded as a pupil of Nimi (Videha).²⁹⁶ Others, who identify him with Karāla Janaka, consider him to be the son of Nimi.297 Karāla Janaka is mentioned in the Majjhimanikāya, Mahābhārata and Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita.298 This Karāla Janaka taught āyurveda to Vasiṣṭha according to the Mahābhārata, where also references to the former’s knowledge about foetal development and the component parts of the human body are found.299

v1.c26.s18.60

KHARANĀDA 300 was the author of a Kharanādasamhitā, which must have been an authoritative work,301 since it is profusely302 and extensively303 quoted by later writers. Alternative forms of Kharanāda’s name are Kharanāda, 304 Khāraṇāda, 305 and Khāraṇādi.306

v1.c26.s18.61

Kharanāda’s medical treatise itself is known from quotations only, but a torn leaf from a birch bark MS of a commentary on this work was discovered during excavations at Navapura near Gilgit in the summer of 1938.307 This commentary is called Khāraṇāda and the fragment found relates to a chapter on pregnancy entitled khuṇḍikā garbhāvakrāntiḥ.308

v1.c26.s18.62

Kharanāda’s work was called a saṃhitā, as shown by a reference to the Kharanādasamhitā in Indu’s commentary on the Aṣṭāngasaṃgraha,309 and was revised by Bhaṭṭarahariścandra.310

v1.c26.s18.63

Authors and works quoting from or referring to Kharanāda 311 are: Āḍhamalla, 312 Anantakumāra, 313 Aruṇadatta, 314 Āśubodha Vidyābhūṣaṇa, 315 the Āyurvedābdhisāra, 316 Bharadvāja’s Bheṣajakalpa, 317 the glosses on Bhāvamiśra’s Bhāvaprakāśa, 318 the Bhesajjamañjūsāsannaya, Cakrapāṇidatta’s commentary on the Carakasamhitā, 319 Candranandana’s commentary on the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, 320 Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya and commentary on the Cikitsākalikā, 321 Dāmodara’s Ārogyacintāmaṇi, 322 Gaṇanāthasena’s commentary on his Siddhāntanidāna, 323 Gulrājśarmamiśra’s Viśikhānupraveśavijñāna, Hemādri’s commentary on the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, 324 Indu’s commentaries on the works ascribed to Vāgbhaṭa, 325 Jejjaṭa, 326 Keśava, 327 Kṛṣṇadatta’s commentary on Trimalla’s Śataślokī, Mānakavi’s Kavipramoda, Meghadeva’s commentary on the Mādhavadravyaguṇa, Nāganātha’s Nidānapradīpa, Nārāyaṇa’s Jvaranirṇaya, 328 Niścalakara, 329 Nṛsiṃhakavi, 330 the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā, 331 Śivadāsasena’s commentary on the Cakradatta, 332 Soḍhala’s Gadanigraha, 333 Śrīdāsapaṇḍita’s commentary on the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, 334 Śrīkaṇṭhadatta, 335 Ṭoḍara, 336 Tripāṭhīśaṃkara’s commentary on the Añjananidāna, Vācaspati, 337 Vijayarakṣita, 338 and Vopadeva.339 Non-medical authors citing him are Dakṣiṇāvartanātha and Pūrṇasarasvatī in their commentaries on Kālidāsa’s Meghadūta.340 A Vṛddhakharanāda is quoted once in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya.341

v1.c26.s18.64

A medical treatise called Khāraṇādi is mentioned in the introductory verses of the MS of an Ātreyasaṃhitā.342

v1.c26.s18.65

Kharanāda is known as a medical authority in the Tibetan tradition.343

v1.c26.s18.66

The quotations show that the work was composed in verse and dealt with the whole range of medicine.344 Some regard it as a treatise on kāyacikitsā, 345 but it may have been more like the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, 346 although it had features in common with the Carakasamhitā.347 The absence of quotations from Kharanāda in Dalhaṇa’s commentary on the Suśrutasaṃhitā suggests that it was definitely not a specialized work on śalya. The contents of the *Kharanādasamhitā* were in some respects related, even closely so, to those of the *Carakasamhitā* and *Suśrutasamhitā*,³⁴⁸ but one of its noteworthy features was that it frequently disagreed with the works of Caraka and Suśruta, which made the commentators meet with numerous problems, and which induced Keśava to write his *Siddhamantra* with a view to solve these controversies.³⁴⁹ This particularity of the *Kharanādasamhitā* may explain that Haricandra produced a new version of the work, more in line with the *Carakasamhitā*,³⁵⁰ on which he wrote a commentary.³⁵¹ Kharanāda himself probably tried to surmount some of the difficulties posed by discrepancies between the pharmacological descriptions of the *Caraka*- and *Suśrutasamhitā*, which made him appreciated by Keśava and Hemādri.³⁵² The overall impression gained from the quotations is in favour of the view that Kharanāda can be regarded as a predecessor of Vāgbhata.

v1.c26.s18.67

Noteworthy features of the *Kharanādasamhitā*, as shown by quotations from it, are: agreements and disagreements compared with the views of Caraka³⁵³ and Suśruta;³⁵⁴ more details than in the *Caraka*- and *Suśrutasamhitā*;³⁵⁵ elaborate descriptions of the properties and actions of articles of food and drugs;³⁵⁶ the distinction of four types of śāka;³⁵⁷ the use of particular technical terms;³⁵⁸ the description of kapha as being yogavāhin;³⁵⁹ a definition of a particular action of drugs called pramāthin;³⁶⁰ a list of the twenty gunas that differs from those found in Caraka and Suśruta;³⁶¹ the acceptance of eight gunas as vīrya;³⁶² the recognition of six types of sātmya;³⁶³ a particular classification of the constitutions (prakrti);³⁶⁴ the acceptance of only four types of viṣamajvara;³⁶⁵ a particular view on lethal fevers;³⁶⁶ a description of specific therapies for various types of prameha;³⁶⁷ the distinction of thirty-six types of vātarakta;³⁶⁸ particular rules for the ratios of ingredients of pharmaceutical preparations.³⁶⁹

v1.c26.s18.68

Kharanāda’s chronological position depends on the date of Haricandra, who revised the *Kharanādasamhitā*. Haricandra is earlier than Vāgbhata, which therefore applies to Kharanāda too.³⁷⁰ As in Haricandra’s case, it cannot be determined with certainty whether Kharanāda preceded Drdhabala, but the possibility that the former belongs to an earlier period deserves to be taken into consideration.³⁷¹

v1.c26.s18.69

The fragment of the *Kharanādanyāsa* is dated between the seventh century and the ninth.³⁷²

v1.c26.s18.70

NĀGABHARTAR was the author of a *Nāgabhartrtantra*,³⁷³ quoted or referred to by Gananāthasena,³⁷⁴ Gangādhara,³⁷⁵ Nāganātha in his *Nidānapradīpa*, Nārāyana,³⁷⁶ Niścalakara,³⁷⁷ Vijayarakṣita,³⁷⁸ and the unknown author of the interpolated portions of Niścalakara’s *Ratnaprabhā*.³⁷⁹

v1.c26.s18.71

Part of the citations refer to one and the same subject, namely the chief seats of the doṣaja varieties of quartan fever (caturthaka). The verses on this subject quoted by Vijayarakṣita and Gangādhara are identical.³⁸⁰ Vācaspati’s commentary on the *Mādhavanidāna* (ad 2.37–38) contains the same stanza, but ascribes it to Vāgbhata, in whose works it is not found.³⁸¹ Cakrapāṇidatta remarks (ad Ca.Ci.3.72) that the pitaja type of caturthaka fever (described in pādas c and d) has been added by Hārīta, but Vijayarakṣita claims (ad *Mādhavanidāna* 2.37–38) that Hārīta does not mention the seats of the three doṣaja varieties of caturthakajvara.

v1.c26.s18.72

The quotations in Niścala’s *Ratnaprabhā* indicate that the *Nāgabharṭṭantra* was a complete medical treatise, dealing with pharmacology, ³⁸² materia medica, ³⁸³ and the treatment of diseases. ³⁸⁴

v1.c26.s18.73

NAGNAJIT ³⁸⁵ is referred to in the *Bhelasaṃhitā* as a royal sage (rājarṣi, pārthivarṣi) to whom Ātreya Punarvasu, questioned by him, expounds the science of toxicology (Sū. 18). ³⁸⁶ His association with this branch of medicine is confirmed by the *Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha*, where he is said to have distinguished seven stages (vega) of poisoning, which differ from the eight stages recognized by Ātreya Punarvasu (U.40.32–33). Vāgbhaṭa describes him in this way as an authority with views of his own which do not agree with Ātreya’s teachings. Nagnajit’s seven stages of poisoning are mentioned in the *Kairalī* commentary on the *Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā*. ³⁸⁷

v1.c26.s18.74

Nagnajit is known in Buddhist ³⁸⁸ and Jaina ³⁸⁹ literature.

v1.c26.s18.75

Aruṇadatta ³⁹⁰ quotes some verses of Nagnajit which have no connection with toxicology and deal with the seven elements (dhātu) of the human body. Śrīdāsapaṇḍita ³⁹¹ refers to Nagnajit as a member of a group of great sages (maharṣi).

v1.c26.s18.76

A Vinagnajit is one of the originators of āyurveda in Hemādri’s *Lakṣaṇaprakāśa*. ³⁹²

v1.c26.s18.77

Nagnajit is associated with the country of Gandhāra. The *Bhelasaṃhitā* relates that the royal sage Nagnajit put his questions to Ātreya when the latter stayed in Gandhāra. The *Aitareya-* ³⁹³ and *Śatapathabrāhmaṇa* ³⁹⁴ are acquainted with a king of Gandhāra of this name. ³⁹⁵ A resident of Gandhāra called Nagnajit occurs in the *Mahābhārata*. ³⁹⁶

v1.c26.s18.78

Nagnajit is not only known as a medical authority, but also as an expert in the science of architecture (vāstuśāstra). He is one of the eighteen teachers of this science in the *Matsyapurāṇa*. ³⁹⁷ Varāhamihira’s *Bṛhatsaṃhitā* refers to Nagnajit’s views in the same context, especially with regard to the construction of images and their proportions. ³⁹⁸ Bhaṭṭotpala, the commentator on the *Bṛhatsaṃhitā*, quotes from and refers to works by Nagnajit. ³⁹⁹

v1.c26.s18.79

Indu equates Nagnajit and Dāruvāhin; ⁴⁰⁰ some contemporary Indian scholars share his opinion. ⁴⁰¹

v1.c26.s18.80

PĀRVATAKA ⁴⁰² is mentioned as the author of a treatise on children’s diseases in Dalhaṇa’s *Nibandhasaṃgraha* (ad Su.U.1.4cd–8ab). ⁴⁰³ The name of Parvataka or Pārvataka is therefore found on the list of authors of a tantra on kaumārabhṛtya. ⁴⁰⁴

v1.c26.s18.81

Someone called Parvata figures among the originators of āyurveda in Hemādri’s *Lakṣaṇaprakāśa*. ⁴⁰⁵

v1.c26.s18.82

SĀTYAKI ⁴⁰⁶ is an ancient medical authority regarded as a specialist in śālākya and the author of a lost tantra on that division of āyurveda. ⁴⁰⁷

v1.c26.s18.83

Sātyaki is quoted or referred to by Cakrapāṇidatta, ⁴⁰⁸ Dalhaṇa, ⁴⁰⁹ Narasimha in his commentary on the *Mādhavanidāna*, Śrīkaṇṭhadatta, ⁴¹⁰ and Vācaspati. ⁴¹¹

v1.c26.s18.84

The quotations deal with diseases of the eye and the head, thus pointing to a treatise on śālākya. ⁴¹² These citations, all of them in verse, show that Sātyaki recognized a number of eighty eye diseases. ⁴¹³ His views on some of these disorders were regarded as authoritative. ⁴¹⁴ He distinguished śiraḥkampa (tremor of the head) as a separate entity, whereas Suśruta regards it as a form of anantavāta; 415 Vāgbhaṭa 416 and Śārṅgadhara 417 follow Sātyaki in describing it as a distinct disorder. One quotation mentions that Sātyaki and Videha agree on a particular point of therapy. 418

v1.c26.s18.85

The Mahābhārata mentions a Sātyaki as a friend and pupil of Arjuna and a brother of Kṛṣṇa. 419

v1.c26.s18.86

SUDĀNTASENA, 420 alsocalled Sudānta, is a medical authority quoted by Ādhamalla, 421 Gaṇanāthasena, 422 Niścalakara, 423 Śivadāsasena, 424 Vaidyacintāmaṇi, 425 Śrīkaṇṭhadatta, 426 and Vijayarakṣita. 427

v1.c26.s18.87

The quotations are concerned with the actions of the excited doṣas, the definitions of upaśaya and rasāyana, oleation treatment (sneha), and some recipes.

v1.c26.s18.88

Sudāntasena's treatise, obviously in verse, may have covered many aspects of medicine. His lists of the actions of the doṣas, in long metres, agree with Caraka's teachings on the subject, as noticed by Vijayarakṣita. 428

v1.c26.s18.89

As is evident from the quotations, Sudāntasena preceded Vijayarakṣita. 429

v1.c26.s18.90

VYĀḌI is known as an authority on medicine, alchemy, and many other subjects, in particular grammar and lexicography. 430 It is a matter of no doubt that several different authors are concerned. 431

v1.c26.s18.91

Vyāḍi is quoted as a medical authority in Niścalakara's Ratnaprabhā 432 and Ṭoḍara's Āyurvedasaukhya. 433

v1.c26.s18.92

Medical treatises referring to Vyāḍi or one of his works are Kāsīrāma's commentary on the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā, 434 Kṛṣṇadatta's commentary on Trimalla's Śataślokī, Māṇikyasūri's Rasaratnasamuccaya, Śivadattamiśra's auto-commentary on the Śivakoṣa, 435 and Vāsudeva's Vāsudevānubhava. 436 The quotations are, at least partly, from Vyāḍi as a lexicographer 437 and grammarian. 438 A verse by Vyāḍi, probably from his lexicon, quoted from an unnamed source, is reproduced by G. Mukhopadhyaya. 439

v1.c26.s18.93

The Indian tradition ascribes a lost tantra on rasāyana to him. 440 Vyāḍi is mentioned as an adept of rasāyana (alchemy) in the Navanāthacarita. 441

v1.c26.s18.94

Works on rasaśāstra referring to or quoting Vyāḍi are the Lohasarvasva of Sureśvara, the Rasakakṣapuṭa, Rasarājalakṣmī, Rasaratnapradīpa of Rāmarāja, Rasasindhu of Viṭṭhala, and Rasendrasambhava.

v1.c26.s18.95

Vyāḍi is mentioned as a Rasasiddha in the Pāradasaṃhitā, 442 Nityanātha's Rasaratnākara, 443 the Rasaratnasamuccaya, 444 the Rasataraṅgiṇī, 445 and the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha. 446

v1.c26.s18.96

The Garuḍapurāṇa is acquainted with Vyāḍi as an expert on pearls and their purification. 447

v1.c26.s18.97

A verse, calling Vyāḍi a rasācārya, kavi and mīmāṃsaka, is quoted by Paṇḍit Yudhiṣṭhira. 448

v1.c26.s18.98

Some Indian sources claim that Vyāḍi lived in the Vindhyas and was a son of Nandinī. 449

v1.c26.s18.99

Tales about the alchemist Vyāḍi 450 are told in Al-Bīrūnī's India, where he is depicted as a resident of Ujjain and a contemporary of king Vikramāditya. 451 He is regarded as the teacher of Nāgārjuna and Carpaṭi. 452 In the sixteenth century the Tibetan historian Tāranātha wrote about a Vyāḷi from Eastern India who failed, after twelve years of striving, to gain magical powers and to make gold, and thence set off on a series of extraordinary adventures.453

v1.c26.s18.100

The Tibetan tradition regards Vyāḷi as one of the eighty-four Siddhas.454 Some alchemical treatises attributed to him (Bha-li-pa) are preserved in Tibetan versions,455 namely the Rasāyanaśāstroddhṛti (Gser-hgyur-gyi bstan-bcos bsdus-pa), translated by Ratnaśrī (O-rgyan-pa),456 Rasasiddhiśāstra (Dṅul-chu grub-paḥi bstan-bcos), translated by Śrīnarendrabhadra and Oddyana-pa rin-chen dpal,457 and Sarveśvara-rasāyana.458 A Dhātuvādaśāstra is sometimes added to this list.459

Cites (54)