A History of Indian Medical Literature v1.c26.s3.31

v1.c26.s3.31

J. Jolly 300 wrote a short article in reply to Hoernle’s earliest claim 301 that I-ching refers to the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha. He brought forward that he was not prepared to question the possibility or even plausibility of the proposed identification and emphasized that he had suggested much the same thing himself. In his view, however, it was still undecided whether the author of the Saṃgraha or Suśruta had the better claim, while the author of the Hṛdaya and the numerous writers of compendia only known from quotations should neither be lost sight of. Jolly went on with some remarks on the list of the eight aṅgas of āyurveda in I-ching’s work. He argued, quite sensibly, that the list is more in conformity with the Suśrutasaṃhitā than with Saṃgraha or Hṛdaya. A strong point mentioned in support is the noteworthy detail that I-ching uses the Sanskrit term agada, as Suśruta does, instead of giving a Chinese equivalent or paraphrase of agadatantra; this means that his source, whatever it may have been, had this term, and not daṃṣṭrā, employed in Saṃgraha and Hṛdaya.