A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c30.713

v2.c30.713

¹²² The Carakasaṃhitā describes this doctrine as adhered to by some authorities (Śā.1. 46–48). Cakra remarks in his comments on these verses that the nirātmavādimata (the doctrine denying the existence of the ātman) of the Buddhists (bauddhāḥ) is referred to; the samudaya of the bhāvas (aggregates of the entities) of the text is explained as the kṣaṇabhaṅgināṃ melakaḥ of the Buddhists; such an aggregate, called sattva, is nirīśa, i.e., devoid of a permanent ātman (sthāyyātmarahita) in Buddhist doctrine according to Cakra. The Carakasaṃhitā disagrees with the doctrine described and defends the existence of the ātman (ātmasadbhāva; see Ca.Śā.1.49–51 and Cakra's comments). The verses of Ca.Śā.1.46–48 have been discussed by J.A.B. van Buitenen (1957b: 96), E.H. Johnston (1974: 51), and A. Roṣu (1978: 190–191); van Buitenen and Johnston regarded them as close to Buddhacarita 12.17, a view criticized by Roṣu. Compare Johnston's comments ad Buddhacarita 12.17. Cakra refers to the kṣaṇabhaṅgivāda ad Ca.Sū.16.27, to kṣaṇabhaṅgitvasabhāva ad Ca.Śā.1.93. See on the kṣaṇikavāda, for example: A. von Rospatt (1995); L. Silburn (1955); Th. Stcherbatsky (1961): 31–40, (1962): I, 79–114.