A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c30.937

v2.c30.937

270 See AVI 81; Gulabkunverba I, 76. 271 Gaṇa 71 (gargādayaḥ, belonging to Pāṇini 4.1.105) mentions Agniveśa; gaṇa 71 (kaṇvā-dayaḥ, belonging to Pāṇini 4.2.111) mentions Parāśara and Jatūkarṇa. 272 Aṣṭādhyāyī 4.3.93; Gaṇapāṭha, gaṇa 97 (takṣaśilādayaḥ, belonging to Pāṇini 4.3.93.), 176 (madhvādayaḥ, belonging to Pāṇini 4.2.86) and 206 (varaṇādayaḥ, belonging to Pāṇini 4. 2.82). 273 Authors adducing this argument are: the Gulabkunverba team (I, 76); T. Śarmā (1981/82: 89); P.V. Sharma (1970a): 5–6, (1975c): 81, (1992d): 180; V. Śukla (1977): I, 45; B. Tripāṭhī in his Bhūmikā (8) to ed. ll of the Carakasamhitā; Yādavaśarman in the upodghāta (6–7) to ed. z of the Carakasamhitā (see his additional evidence from the grammatical literature). 274 See, for example: P.V. Sharma (1975c): 81. 275 See, for example: V. Śukla (1977): I, 45; B. Tripāṭhī, Bhūmikā (7–8) to ed. ll of the Carakasamhitā. These authors refer to *Śrīśankar Bālkṛṣṇa Dīkṣit’s Bhāratīya Jyotiḥśāstretihās 139. See on the same subject: M.R. Bhat (1992): I, Intr. VIII–IX. 276 See A.L. Basham (1954): 493; J.F. Fleet (1912); S. Srinivasan (1979): 131–132. 277 See on Agniveśa and his date: ABI 469–472; Atrideva (1978): 65–66; AVI 81–89; J. Filliozat (1975): 12–13; Gaṇanātha Sena (1924): I, 4–5, 17–18; Gulabkunverba I, 68–77; Haridattaśāstrin, upodghāta cha-ṭha to ed. ee of the Carakasamhitā; Hemarājaśarman, upodghāta 42; HIM III, 519–527; Ramachandra Rao (1985): 16; R. Śarmā (1959): 18–24; T. Śarmā (1981/82): 87–89; P.V. Sharma (1970a): 4–14, (1992d): 179–180; P.V. Sharma’s Introduction (VII–VIII) to his ed. and transl. of the Carakasamhitā; R.K. Sharma and Bhagwan Dash, Preface (XXXV–XXXVI) to their ed. and transl. of the Carakasamhitā; V.Śukla (1977): I, 44–45; Sūramcandra (1978): 202–209; B. Tripāṭhī, Bhūmikā (7–11) to ed. ll of the Carakasamhitā; Y.K. Tripāṭhī (23); Vṛddhatrayī 145–146; Yādavaśarman’s upodghāta (6–7) to ed. z of the Carakasamhitā. 278 P. Cordier (1899a): 3; (1901a): 80. 279 NCC IX, 97. 280 See on this problem: P. Cordier (1903b): 328–329; Gulabkunverba I, 101–105; HIM III, 624–629; A.F.R. Hoernle (1908). 281 See A.F.R. Hoernle (1908): 1001. 282 Some MSS supporting this order are: Cat. IO Nrs. 2637 and 2643; Cat. München Nrs. 371a and b. See for other MSS: A.F.R. Hoernle (1908): 1001. 283 See A.F.R. Hoernle (1908): 1000. G. Mukhopadhyaya (HIM III, 614 and 625) asserts that Dātār (ed. t) adopted Jīvānanda’s arrangement, which proves to be incorrect. 284 The argument, employed by the Gulabkunverba team (I, 104), that chapters fourteen (arśas), nineteen (atīsāra) and twenty-one (visarpa) are from Caraka’s pen because they are quoted in the Nāvanītaka is inconclusive (see Bower MS). 285 See the arguments of P. Cordier (1912) for attributing chapter eight (rājayakṣman) chiefly to Caraka. 286 See the list of quotations. 287 The chapters are numbered according to the most current serial order. 288 R. Śāstrī (1977: 419) is convinced that part of this chapter is by Caraka. 289 Vijayarakṣita (ad Mādhavanidāna 11.1–2) quotes Caraka (Ci.18) on the subject. 290 Paribhāṣā 25 at the end of A.S.Ka.8. 291 The chapter seems also to be attributed to Caraka by Jejjaṭa (ad Ca.Ci.24.117–135); compare Gulabkunverba I, 104; Jejjaṭa states that the chapter was written by the ācārya, i.e., Caraka.