A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c30.697

v2.c30.697

80 Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa *2.5.26 (according to R. Śarmā, 1959: 63); Anuṣaṅgapāda (section two) 35.8–27 (they are called caraka and carakādhvaryu) in G.V. Tagare’s translation (1983: 339–341). 81 Sūramcandra (1978): I, 294–295; the medical doctrines of Mahābhārata, Śāntiparvan 16 (ed. Poona) are adduced to prove this point. 82 R. Śarmā (1959): 63–64. 83 R. Śāstrī (1977): 512–514; this author suggests that the Carakasamhitā may be a collective work, because the first member of the compound caraka-pratisamskṛta may be interpreted as a singular or plural. Jyotir Mitra (1974: 65–66) claims that the Agniveśasamhitā was redacted or revised by the school of Caraka, one of the branches of the Yajurveda, long before Patañjali and the Caraka of Kaniṣka. See on the northern pupils of Vaiśampāyana: Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa, Anuṣaṅgapāda 35.10–13 (V.S. Tagare, 1983: 340). 84 Hemarājaśarman’s upodghāta, 43. V. Śukla (1977): I, 46. 85 See the quotation: Gulabkunverba I, 86; Hemarājaśarman’s upodghāta, 43; Yādavaśarman’s upodghāta to ed. z of the Carakasamhitā, 8. 86 See the quotation: Gulabkunverba I, 78. 87 Compare Gulabkunverba I, 85. 88 See the discussion of the term yukti. 88a The edition has vamśāgravartana. 89 See Gulabkunverba I, 87; Hemarājaśarman’s upodghāta, 43–44. 90 See A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith (1967): I, 256 (with references). 91 Vājasaneyisamhitā 30.18. See A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith (1967): I, 256; M. Müller (1859): 350; Mahīdhara’s Vedadīpa ad Vājasaneyisamhitā 30.18 (compare Gulabkunverba I, 86–87). 92 Gulabkunverba I, 87. 93 R. Śāstrī (1977): 511. 94 See Gulabkunverba I, 86. Sāyaṇa gives the same explanation as in his commentary on the Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa (see A. Weber, 1983a: 83). 95 A. Hillebrandt (1897): 159. See A.B. Keith (1976): II, 352–353. A.B. Keith rejects Hillebrandt’s view, as does J. Filliozat (1975: 17). 96 See on the Vedic schools: L. Renou (1947); W. Siegling (1906); R. Simon (1889); M. Witzel (1981), (1982/83), (1984), (1989). See on the meaning of śākhā: M. Müller (1859): 119–127. 97 See the Yajurvedakhaṇḍa of the Caraṇavyūha with *Mahīdāsa’s commentary. See on the Caraṇavyūha: B.R. Modak (1993): 391–399; M. Müller (1859): 369–375; L. Renou (1947); W. Siegling (1906); A. Weber (1850a): 68–69, 80–82, (1855). See on the difference between śākhā and caraṇa, on the meaning of caraṇa and on the caraṇas: M. Müller (1859): 125–127, 367–378. 98 The colophons of the Kāṭhakasamhitā mention the Carakaśākhā (L. Renou, 1947: 151; compare A. Weber, 1850a: 69). See L. von Schroeder’s edition. 99 R. Śāstrī (1977): 510) asserts that the samhitā of the Carakaśākhā has been preserved, but states on another occasion (516) that it is lost. 100 Compare Pāṇini 4.3.107. 101 See L. Renou (1947): 150–151. J. Filliozat (1975: 15) says that the Carakaśākhā comprised the recensions of the Black Yajurveda called Kāṭhaka-, Kapiṣṭhalakaṭha- and Maitrāyaṇīsamhitā. M. Müller (1859: 350) said: "The general name of of the ancient śākhās of the Yajurveda is Caraka, and the Taittirīyas, therefore, together with the Kaṭhas and others, are called by a general name, Carakaśākhās." L. von Schroeder (1887: 188) held, in the same way as J. Filliozat, that the Carakas comprised the Kaṭhas, Kapiṣṭhalas and the Maitrāyaṇīyas, but this view was rejected by A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith (1967: I, 256). Compare J. Eggeling (1978: I, Intr. XXVI. See on the Carakas and the Carakaśākhā also: A. Weber (1850a): 68, 69, 70, 83, (1855b): 454, (1914): 87. The Carakāḥ and Cāraṇayīyaḥ are two schools of the Carakaśākhā according to the Yajurvedakhaṇḍa of the Caraṇavyūha. A Carakabrāhmaṇa is only known from a quotation in Sāyaṇa's commentary on the Ṛgveda (A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith, 1967: I, 256).