A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c32.113

v2.c32.113

makes him belong to the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and B. Tripāṭhī (bhūmikā, 21, to ed. II of the Carakasamhitā) to the sixteenth century. He was placed in the eleventh century by R.C. Majumdar (CHSI 226), and in the thirteenth century by Haraprasād Śāstrī (see STMI 208). 547 P.V. Sharma (AVI 207) is of the opinion that Śivasaindhava is mentioned as a commentator by Jejjata (ad Ca.Ci.3.73) and Cakrapāṇidatta. Jejjata, however, refers to the school of the Śivasaindhavas. I could not trace a reference to Śivasaindhava in Cakra’s Āyurvedadīpikā. 548 Gulabkunverba I, (21). 549 B. Tripāṭhī, bhūmikā (21) to ed. II of the Carakasamhitā. 550 He is regarded as such by the editors of the Gulabkunverba edition of the Carakasamhitā: I, (22), G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 46), Haridattaśarman (upodghāta to ed. ee of the Carakasamhitā, page pha), A. Pandey and K. Raghunathan (1977), and B. Tripāṭhī (bhūmikā, 20, to ed. II of the Carakasamhitā). P.V. Sharma is of the opinion that he probably commented on the Carakasamhitā (AVI 268). See on Sudhīra: commentaries on the Suśrutasamhitā. 551 CC and NCC: not recorded as a commentator on the Carakasamhitā. 552 Ad Ca.Ci.3.216–217; he forms part of a series of commentators: Bhāsadatta, Svāmidāsa, Āṣādhavarman, and Brahmadeva. 553 Ad Su.Ni.6.15–19; Gayadāsa explicitly states that he wrote a commentary on the Carakasamhitā and mentions him as the first one of a series of commentators: Svāmidāsācārya, Jaḍa (i.e., Jejjata), and Nandin. 554 Ad Ca.Ci.3.216–217; Jejjata mentions the following early commentators: Himadatta, Svāmīdāsa, Āṣādhavarman. 555 Ad Cakradatta, jvara 5. 556 See G.P. Sharma and P.V. Sharma (1971). 557 AVI 206. B. Rama Rao (1992): 300. Vṛddhatrayī 460. 558 NCC II, 39 and VII, 396–397. Check-list Nr. 541. STMI 218. 559 Cat. Madras Nr. 13091: title Pañcikā, 77 pages. The Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris also possesses a MS (J. Filliozat, Liste Nr. 34: Carakapañjikā, by Ātreyasvāmikumāra; 203 fol.), as well as the Calcutta Sanskrit College (see D.Ch. Bhattacharyya, 1947a: 118; title Pañjikā). 560 The Madras MS covers Ca.Sū.1 and part of 2; the same applies to the Calcutta MS (see C.G. Kashikar, 1977: 163). Some scholars claim that the Madras MS covers Ca.Sū.1–5 (Gulabkunverba I, 115; Haridattaśarman’s upodghāta to ed. ee of the Carakasamhitā, pages pa and ba; A.N. Pandey and V.V.S. Sastry, 1975: 67). 561 According to others he was a Buddhist (P. Cordier, 1903b: 330; S. Dasgupta, 1975: 431). P.V. Sharma (AVI 206; 1970a: 85–86) and B. Rama Rao (1992: 300) agree that he was a Śaiva. 562 See the third introductory verse, where Patañjali is not mentioned by name, but Caraka is credited with works on grammar and yoga (see AVI 99 and 206; P. Cordier, 1903b: 330; P.V. Sharma, 1970a: 24 and 85–86; Vṛddhatrayī 17–18). Compare: Patañjali. 563 P.V. Sharma assumes that Svāmikumāra is the same as Skandasvāmin, a resident of Avanti, mentioned in the Caturbhāṇī (AVI 206; 1970a: 85); Kumāra and Skanda denote the same deity. This hypothesis is implausible, since Skandasvāmin is a fictitious character in the Pādatāḍitaka (see M. Ghosh, 1975: 113). Compare: M. Ghosh (1975) and M. Krishnamachariar (1989: 570) on the date of the works belonging to the Caturbhāṇī. 564 Gulabkunverba I, 115. Haridattaśarman’s upodghāta to ed. ee of the Carakasamhitā, page pa. P.V. Sharma (1970a): 85.