A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c30.114

v2.c30.114

15 See on the number sixteen in Indian culture: G. Eichinger Ferro-Luzzi (1974): 146–147; J. Gonda (1965a); D.G. White (1996): 36–44. See on quaternary numeration in general in India: G. Tucci (1963). 16 The organism, imagined as a field. 17 See P.V. Sharma (1989a): 24–25. 18 Caraka’s list agrees partly with the one from the Vaiśeṣikasūtras (3.2.4), partly with another one, found in the Yājñavalkyasmṛti (3.174–175). Cf. Su.Śā.1.17. See on the ātmaliṅgas: A. Comba (1987): 54–57; B. Faddegon (1969): 247–259; A. Roṣu (1978): 130–131. Atrideva claims (ABI 169) that Caraka’s ātmaliṅgas completely agree with those of the Vaiśeṣikasūtras. 19 See on Ca.Śā.1.75–76: A. Roṣu (1978): 150. See on the ātman in Ca.Śā.1.78: E.H. Johnston (1974): 54. See on prāṇāḥ in the sense of sattva in Ca.Śā.1.77: P.V. Sharma (1989a): 7. 20 See on this subject: A. Comba (1987): 50–53, who is convinced that the verses on the kartṛtva of the ātman reflect a Vaiśeṣika orientation. See on the kartṛtva of the ātman: E. Frauwallner (1956; see index s.v. Seele). 21 See on Ca.Śā.1.86–156: E. Woltz-Gottwald and J. Schmitt (1986). 22 Interpreted as tṛṣṇā (thirst, desire) by Cakra. 23 Caraka’s upādha resembles the same concept as found in the Vaiśeṣikasūtras (6.2.3–4); see A. Comba (1987): 57–58. S. Dasgupta (1975: II, 415–416) is in favour of interpreting it as the Buddhist upādāna, ‘grasping’ (see S. Dasgupta, 1975: I, 85, 90, 92; II, 415–416). P.V. Sharma (1992d: 183) appears to accept Dasgupta’s view. 24 See on dhī: J. Gonda (1963b). 25 Cf. Ca.Sū.1.54; 11.37; Ni.1.3. See A. Roṣu (1978): 109. 26 Cf. Ca.Sū.7.51–53; 11.41 and 43; Ni.1.3; Vi.6.6. 27 Cf. Ca.Sū.10.5; Ni.7.10, 19–21; Vi.3; see also Cakra’s comments on these passages. 28 See Cakra’s comments. 29 See the Carakasaṃhitā and Yoga: Jyotir Mitra (1982): 349–359; A. Roṣu (1978): 159 and 192. 30 Compare Dalhaṇa ad Su.Ci.29.13 and U.60.20. See also the powers acquired by the use of soma plants (Su.Ci.29.10–13). The extraordinary powers acquired by Yoga are described in the Pātañjalayogasūtra (3.16–53); they are also found, for instance, in the Upāyahr̥daya, where they are called aiśvarya (see G. Tucci, 1976: retranslation 7), and in the Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa (see G. Tucci, 1976: notes to the Upāyahr̥daya, 16). See on these powers, usually called siddhi: M. Bloomfield (1917); H. Brunner-Lachaux (1975): 432–434; M. Burnouf (1973): 291–292, 820–824; E.W. Hopkins (1901), (1905); S. Lindquist (1935); J. Moussaieff Masson (1980): 125–141; N.M. Penzer (1925c); A. Roṣu (1997b): 428; R. Schmidt (1921); *F.O. Schrader (1937); L. de la Vallée Poussin (1931); D.G. White (1996): 371–372. 31 See on the concept of mokṣa in the Carakasaṃhitā: A. Comba (1987): 58–61; Jyotir Mitra (1982): 353–354; P.V. Sharma (1989a): 24–26. 32 Cf. Bhela Śā.3. See on midwifery in ancient India: G. Mukerji (1929, 1930, 1931); J. Roberton (1846). 33 See on the age of marriage in ancient India: G. Mukerji (1929): 132–140. Cf. A.s.Śā.1.3; A.h.Śā.1.8–9a. 34 Cf. Su.Ci.24.122. The rule is formulated, for example, in the Viṣṇusmṛti (36.7) and Yājñavalkyasmṛti (3.231). See J. Gonda (1951): 60. See on the gotra system and its development: J. Brough (1946), (1947), *(1953); R. Fick (1913), (1931); G.S. Ghurye (1972); *S.V. Karandikar (1929); D.D. Kosambi (1950), (1951), (1953); J.E. Mitchiner (1982; see index); R.K. Mookerji (1947): 83–84, 242–243; M. Müller (1859): 380–388; V.G. Rahurkar (1973); H. Zimmer (1914). Several treatises on the gotras are known (see NCC; H. Zimmer, 1914: 6); the Gotrapravaramanjarī of Purusottama has been edited (by P. Chentsalrao in his Gotrapravaranibandhakadamba, Mysore 1900) and *translated into English (J. Brough, 1953); Kamalākarabhatta's Pravaradarpana also has been edited (by P. Chentsalrao in the mentioned collection of texts). The messenger sent to the physician by the patient or his relatives should preferably be of the same gotra (Su.Sū.29.24).