A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c29.95

v2.c29.95

120 Cf. Bhela Sū.6; Su.Ci.24. 121 See on this subject: J.A. Dubois (1947): 329; J.J. Meyer (1952): 231, n.1; Madhu Shukla and S.N. Tripathi (1988); S.N. Tripathi et al. (1981). See on the concept of vega (impetus) in Indian thought: S.N. Sen (1966). 122 In conformity with the distinction of thirteen natural urges, the Suśrutasamhitā (U.55) describes thirteen types of udāvarta, resulting from their suppression. The Carakasamhitā (Sū.19.4), however, enumerates six varieties of udāvarta, caused by the suppression of passing flatus, urination, defecation, ejaculation, vomiting and sneezing. The term udāvarta is absent from Ca.Sū.7.3–5 and Su.U.55.4–6, 7.6 and Su. U.55.9cd–10, 7.7 and Su.U.55.21cd–27, 7.8 and Su.U.55.8cd–9ab, 7.9 and Su.U.55.21ab, 7.10 and Su.U.55.15, 7.11 and Su.U.55.32cd–33, 7.12 and Su.U.55.7–8ab, 7.13 and Su. U.55.20cd, 7.14 and Su.U.55.14cd, 7.15 and Su.U.55.31cd–32ab, 7.16 and Su.U.55.13, 7.17 and Su.U.55.29–30ab, 7.18 and Su.U.55.14ab and 30cd–31ab, 7.19 and Su.U.55.11 and 28ab, 7.20 and Su.U.55.16ab and 34ab, 7.21 and Su.U.55.16cd and 34cd, 7.22 and Su.U.55.12 and 28cd, 7.23 and Su.U.55.17cd and 35cd, 7.24 and Su.U.55.17ab and 35ab. 123 Cf. Bhela Sū.6.7cd–9ab. 124 Cf. Su.Ci.24.38–50ab. 125 Cf. Su.Ci.24.50cd–51ab. 126 Cf. Su.Ci.24.97. See P.V. Sharma (1985e: 84–86) on the interpretation of these verses. 127 Cf. Ca.Vi.6.13–18 and 8.95–100; Bhela Vi.4.7–27. Compare Ca.Sū.7.39–40 and Su.Śā. 4.79. 128 See on some aspects of the Carakasamhitā concerning the preservation of health and the prevention of disease: G.U. Thite (1985). 129 Cf. Bhela Sū.7; Su.Ci.24. See on Ca.Sū.8: S.Ch. Vidyabhusana (1971): 11–12. 130 Five pentads (pañcaka) are described. See on the importance of groups of five in Indian thought: T.N. Chakravarti (1951); D.M. Knipe (1972), (1975): 1–18; N.M. Penzer (1952): 199–202; D.G. White (1996): 32–36, 206–210. The sensory faculties (indriya) are six at Ca.Sū.26.43. 131 Mind is referred to as manas, sattva and cetas (8.4). See on this subject: E.H. Johnston (1974): 50–51; R.F.G. Müller (1959a); A. Roşu (1978). 132 See on these verses: Kaviratna's notes; R.F.G. Müller (1952), (1956a), (1965a), (1965b). See on Cakra's comments ad Sū.8.12: A. Roşu (1978): 199–200. 133 Cf. Su.Ci. 24.89–101. The worship of fire, mentioned in 8.18 and 20, makes P.V. Sharma (1989a: 17 and 32) remark that this is traditionally linked with the Ātharvāṅgirasa school, while it also reminds one of the fire-worship of the Indo-Iranian people (P.V. Sharma supposes Śaka influence to be present in the Carakasamhitā). 134 See on this term, which later also denoted someone killing a brāhmaṇa: G. Bühler (1888b); W. Gampert (1939): 63–64; S.W. Jamison (1991): 216; H. Kern (1888): 52–53; A. Wezler (1994). 135 R.F.G. Müller (1951: 92, n.19) remarks that Sū.8.28 refers to Ṛgveda 10.9. See on the use of mantras in āyurveda: Gulabkunverba I, 437–440; A. Roşu (1986), (1986a), (1988a); G.U. Thite (1982); K.G. Zysk (1989). The literature on mantras in general is extensive; see, for example: H.P. Alper (1989); J. Gonda (1963a); A. Padoux (1975); F. Staal (1996); G. Thompson (1997); E. Thurston (1912): 180–198; A. Wayman (1975). 136 Cakra discusses in this context the tensions between āyurvedic practice and ahiṃsā (non-violence); see on this subject: D. Chattopadhyaya (1979): 381–389. See on ahiṃsā and its