Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c33: Part 2: Suśrutasaṃhitā

A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c33

Language
English

Contents

Part 2: Suśrutasaṃhitā

v2.c33.2

Sūtrasthāna

v2.c33.3

1 Editions of the Suśrutasaṃhitā:

v2.c33.4

a Āyur-veda-prakāśa [also called Suśruta-saṃhitā] by Suśruta. The Suśruta, or system of medicine, taught by Dhanwantari, and composed by his disciple Suśruta; edited by Sri Madhusudana Gupta. Vol. I: Sūtra, Nidāna and Śārīra, Education Press, Calcutta 1835; vol. II: Chikitsā, Kalpa and Uttara Tantra, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 1836 [IO.9.C.18–19; IO.San.C.109: vol. I; Haas, Cat. BM 139]; ed. in four parts, Jñā-naratnākara Press, Calcutta 1868 [IO.2.E.26–29]; 2nd ed., vol. I: Sūtrasthāna, vol. II: Nidāna and Śārīra, Sangbada Jnanaratnakara Press, Calcutta 1874 [IO.C.6–7]. See on Madhusūdana Gupta: J. Roberton (1846): 311–313.

v2.c33.5

b suśrutaḥ, sūtra-nidāna-śārīra-kalpottara-tantra-kalpitaḥ, śrī-jīvānanda-vidyā-sāgara-bhaṭṭācāryyeṇa saṃskṛtaḥ, Dvaipāyana Press, Calcutta 1873 [IO.10.C.4]; 2nd ed., Sarasvatī Press, Calcutta 1886 [IO.10.C.1]; 3rd ed., vol. I: suśrutaḥ, sūtranidā-naśārīracikitsākalpottarakalpita āyurvedaḥ, bhagavatā dhanvantarīṇopadiṣṭaḥ, śuśru-tanāmadheyena tacchisyeṇa viracitaḥ, śrījīvānandavidyāsāgarabhaṭṭācāryyeṇa saṃ-skṛtya saṃśodhitaḥ, Sarati Press, Kalikātānagara 1889; *4th ed., Calcutta 1899.

v2.c33.6

c Suśrutaḥ... The medical science of the ancient Aryans. Translated and edited by Am-bicachurun Bandyopadhya, *Calcutta 1873/74; 2nd ed., Varāṭa Press, Calcutta 1885 [IO.2.E.34].

v2.c33.7

d Nibandha-samgraha by Dallana. Susruta sanhita. A system of medicine taught by Dhanvantari to his disciples. And composed by Susruta with commentary of Dal-lanacharya. Corrected and translated [into Bengali] by Harimohan Sen. Sūtra-sthāna. Varadeśvarī Press, Comilla 1880.

v2.c33.8

e suśrutācārya praṇītambaina suśrutanāmakāyurvedāṃtargaṭaśārīrasthānamu, Varta-māna-taramgiṇī Press, Madras 1885 [IO.9.C.17].

v2.c33.9

f suśrutasaṃhitā [vaṅgānuvāda-sametā] mahāmati dallanācāryyakṛtanivandhasamgra-hākhya ṭīkā sahitā, kavirāja śrī-avināśacandra kaviratnena anuvāditā saṃśodhitā ca, Sūtra-, Nidāna- and Śārīrasthāna, Calcutta 1885; Sūtrasthāna and Nidānasthāna, Rā-māyaṇa Press, Calcutta 1886 [IO.1039].

v2.c33.10

g suśruta-saṃhitā... dallanācāryya-kṛta-nivandha-saṃgraha, cakrapāṇidatta-kṛta-bhā-numatī-ṭīkā... vaṅgānuvāda... imreji pratiśabda... evam śastra-yantrādira pratīkṛti samanvita... śrī vijayaratna sena... śrī bhagavatīprasanna sena... o śrī niśīkānta sena kavirāja kartṛka sampādita, Maṇirāma Press, Calcutta 1886 [IO.San.C.216]; (*part 14 was published in 1893; see J. Jolly, 1901: 11).

v2.c33.11

h The anatomy by Susruta with the commentary of Dallana, Candrikā Press, Poona 1887 [IO.412].

v2.c33.12

*i Suśrutasaṃhitā with Bhānumatī and Nibandhasaṃgraha, ed. by Gaṅgāprasād Sen, Calcutta 1888– (see J. Jolly, 1901: 10; AVI 210).

v2.c33.13

j The pathology by Susruta with the commentary of Dallana, Dhanvantarī Press, Poona 1889 [IO.San.1037].

v2.c33.14

k Suśrutasaṃhitā with Ḍalhaṇa’s commentary, ed. by Jīvānanda Vidyāsāgara, 3rd ed., Saraswati Press, Calcutta 1891 [BL.14043.d.48] (see the review by R. Roth, ZDMG 49, 1895, 138–140 = R. von Roth, 1994: 682–684).

v2.c33.15

l Nidānasthāna of the Suśruta, translated (into Sinhalese) and edited by H.D. Abhayawardhane Appuhamy, 1st ed., Colombo 1891 [BL.14043.e.25]; ed. by H.D. Abhayawardhane Weda Aracchi, 2nd ed., Colombo 1912 [BL.14044.c.6(1)].

v2.c33.16

*m ed. by Paṇḍit Kṛpa Rām, 1892.

v2.c33.17

n ed., with a Hindī commentary, by Śrī Kṛṣṇa Lāl, Muttra 1895.

v2.c33.18

o suśruta-saṃhitā... suśrutena viracitā... paṇḍita-muralīdhara-śarmaṇā rājavaidyena saṃvaya-saṭippaṇīka-saparīśiṣṭayā [hindī-]bhāṣā-ṭīkayā sambhūṣitā, Śrīvenkaṭeśvar Press, Bombay 1911. ārogyasudhākarasaṃpādakena pharukanagarani-vāsinā paṇḍita muralīdharaśarmaṇā saṭippaṇīka-saparīśiṣṭa-bhāṣīṭīkayā samupetā, Śrīvenkaṭeśvar Press, Bombay 1911.

v2.c33.19

p Suśrutasaṃhitā, Sūtrasthāna, 1st part (Sanskrit text), translated (into Sinhalese) under the instruction of M. Nanissara by S.A. Fernando, Colombo 1896 [BL.14043.e.32].

v2.c33.20

q Suśrutasaṃhitā, with Ḍalhaṇa’s commentary, and a Bengali translation, ed. by Kālīprasanna Kavīśekhara, Calcutta 1898 [BL.14043.d.48].

v2.c33.21

*r Suśrutasaṃhitā, with a Gujarātī translation, ed. by Vaidyarāj Prabhurām Jīvanrām, Dr. Papat Prabhurām and Śāstrī Kālidās Govindjī, Nirṇaya Sāgar Press, Bombay 1901.

v2.c33.22

s suśruta-saṃhitā, maharṣi-suśrutācāryya-viracitā, mahāmuni-nāgārjjuna-pratisamskṛtā... śrī-devendranātha-sena-kavirājena śrī-upendranātha-sena-kavirājena ca sampāditā..., Dhanvantari Steam Machine Press, Calcutta 1902 [IO.10.C.9].

v2.c33.23

t suśrutasaṃhitā, prathamakhaṇḍam, sūtrasthānātmakam, rāmapuraboyālīyā-pravāsī-śrīhāraṇcandracakravartikācāryya-viracita-suśrutārthasandīpanabhāṣya-sametam, bhūtapūrva-rājakīya saṃskṛtavidyālayaḍhyāpaka-pūjyapāda-sarvvatantrasvatantra-tarkālaṅkārapadāṅkita mahāmahopādhyāya-svargīya-candrakāntabhaṭṭācāryya-pramukhaiḥ saṃśodhitam, Satya Press, Kalikātā 1910/11; nidānasthānam, ... śrīlacandrakānta-bhaṭṭācāryya-pramukhaiḥ saṃśodhitam, Girīśa-vidyāratna Press, Kalikātā 1908/09; śārīrasthānam, ... svargīyacandrakāntabhaṭṭācāryya-pramukhaiḥ saṃśodhitam, Satya Press, Kalikātā 1910/11; kalpasthānam uttaratantre śālākyatantrāt kaumārabhṛtyaparyantam ca [U.1-38], ...svargīya candrakāntabhaṭṭācāryya-pramukhaiḥ saṃśodhitam, Satya Press, Kalikātā 1917/18. The India Office possesses a complete edition in three volumes, Vidyodaya Press, Calcutta 1905–06–1926–27 [IO.San.F.144]; the British Library has two volumes: Calcutta 1914–18 [BL.14043.dd.13].

v2.c33.24

u suśruta-saṃhitā arthāt āryya-śastra-cikitsā o kāya-cikitsā... mūla o vaṅgānuvāda... kavirāja yaśodānandana sarakāra karttṛka anuvādita, 2nd ed., Vaṅgavāsī Electro-Machine Press, Calcutta 1911 [BL.14044.b.4; IO.22.G.22].

v2.c33.25

*v Suśrutasaṃhitā with Ḍalhaṇa’s commentary, ed. by Jādavjī Trikamjī Ācāryya, 1st ed., Nirṇaya-sāgar Press, Bombay 1915; 2nd ed., Bombay 1931.

v2.c33.26

w Suśrutamu, śārīrasthānamu, Ādi-Sarasvatī-nilaya Press, Madras 1916 [BL.14044.b.17; IO.12.L.37]; 3rd. rev. ed., Hindū-ratnākara Press, Madras 1925 [IO.San.D.916].

v2.c33.27

x Suśrutasaṃhitā, ed., with Sinhalese interpretation, by Doḍanduvē Dharmasena Paṇḍita, Colombo 1921 [BL.14043.ccc.5].

v2.c33.28

y Suśrutasaṃhitā, śārīrasthāna, ed., with Telugu interpretation and notes, by T.P. Rāmānuja Svāmi, Vizianagram 1922 [BL.14044.b.18].

v2.c33.29

z Suśrutasaṃhitā, Bombay Sanskrit Press, Lahore 1928 [IO.San.D.688].

v2.c33.30

aa śrī suśruta-saṃhitā, sūtra-sthāna, [gujarātī-bhāṣā-januvādaka... prāṇajīvana harihara śāstrī, Śrī-Āyurveda-grantha-mālikā, Gujarātī Printing Press, Bombay 1929 [IO.San.F.153/1].

v2.c33.31

bb suśruta-saṃhitā, maharṣisuśrutācāryyaviracitā mahāmunināgārjjunapratisaṃskṛtā ca, mahāmahopādhyāya-śrīḍalhaṇācāryyakṛtanibandhasamgrahākhya-ṭīkayā samalaṅkṛtā, kavirāja śrīnrīpendranāthasenaguptena kavirāja śrībalāicandrasenaguptena ca sampāditā saṃśodhitā prakāśitā ca, pūrvabhāgaḥ, sūtra-nidāna-śārīra-cikitsitasthānacatuṣṭayasamanvitaḥ, 1st ed., Dhanvantarivaidyutika Press, Kalikātā 1937/38; *part II, Calcutta 1938/39.

v2.c33.32

cc śrīḍalhaṇācāryyaviracitayā nibandhasamgrahākhyavyākhyayā nidānasthānasya śrīgayadāsācāryyaviracitayā nyāyacandrikākhyapañjikāvyākhyayā ca samullasitā maharṣiṇā suśrutena viracitā suśrutasaṃhitā, [tṛtīyāvṛttiḥ], ārambhataś cikitsāsthānasya navamādhyāyaparyantā ācaryyopāhvena trivikramātmajena yādavaśarmaṇā śeṣa ca nārāyaṇa rāma ācārya ‘kāvyatīrtha’ ity anena saṃśodhitā; the Suśrutasaṃhitā of Suśruta with the Nibandhasaṅgraha commentary of Śrī Ḍalhaṇācāryya and the Nyāyacandrikā Pañjikā of Śrī Gayadāsācāryya on Nidānasthāna, revised third edition (1st and 2nd ed. = *ed. v), edited from the beginning to the 9th adhyāya of Cikitsāsthāna by Vaidya Jādavjī Trikamjī Ācāryya and the Rāmāyaṇ Rām Ācāryya “Kāvyatīrtha”, Nirṇaya Sāgar Press, Bombay 1938; this edition contains an upodghāta (in Sanskrit) by Yādavaśarman; 4th ed., with an introduction by P.V. Sharma, Jayakṛṣṇadāsa Āyurveda Granthamālā 34, Caukhambhā Orientalia, Vārāṇasī/Dillī 1980; *repr., Kashī Ayurveda Series 18, Caukhambhā Orientalia, Vārāṇasī/Dillī 1996.

v2.c33.33

dd suśrutasaṃhitāyāḥ sūtrasthānam, śrīcakrapāṇidattaviracitayā bhānumatīvyākhyayā sametam, mahāmahopādhyāyakavirājaraṅganāthasenasarasvatīmahodayair likhitena upodghātena sahitam, ācaryyopāhvena trivikramātmajena yādavaśarmaṇā jayapurarājakīyasaṃskṛtamahāvidyālayāyurvedapradhānādhyāpakena paṃ. nandakiśoraśarmaṇā bhiṣagācāryyena ca saṃśodhitam, Sushrut-saṃhitā (Sūtra Sthān) with Bhānumatī commentary by Chakrapāṇi Datta, with Introduction by Mahāmahopādhyāya Kavirāj Gaṇanāth Sen Saraswatī, edited by Vaidya Jādavjī Trikamjī Ācāryya and Pt. Nandkishor Sharmā Bhishagācāryya, Śrīsvāmilakṣmīrāmanidhigranthamālā, prathamam puṣpam, Swāmī Lakshmī Rām Trust, Jaypur 1939.

v2.c33.34

ee maharṣiṇā suśrutena viracitā suśruta-saṃhitā, āyurveda-rahasya-dīpikākhyayā hindī-vyākhyayā samullasitā, (sūtra-nidānasthānātmakah) prathamo bhāgaḥ, anuvādak Dr. Bhāskar Govind Ghāṇekar; Sushruta Saṃhitā, with Hindī commentary named “Āyurveda Rahasyadīpikā” by Dr. Bhaskar Govind Ghanekar, volume one (Sūtra-Nidān-Sthān), Meharcandra Lakṣmaṇdās, *Lahore 1936; 2nd ed., Meharcandra Lakṣmaṇdās, Delhi 1952; śārīrasthānātmakah dvitīyo bhāgaḥ, āyurvedarahasyadīpikākhyākhyāyār āyurvedācāryya śrī bhāskar govind ghāṇekar, Meharcandra Lakṣmaṇdās, *Lahore 1941; 2nd ed., Caukhambhā Saṃskṛt Sīrīj Āphis, Vidyāvilās Press, Banāras 1950.

v2.c33.35

ff maharṣiṇā suśrutena viracitā suśrutasaṃhitā (mūlamātrā), pāṭhāntara-pariśiṣṭādibhiḥ saṃvalitā, ācaryyopāhvena trivikramātmajena yādavaśarmaṇā nidāstaprāṇālim anuṣṛtya nārāyaṇa rāma ācārya ‘kāvyatīrtha’ ity anena pāṭhāntarapariśiṣṭādibhiḥ samalaṃkṛtya saṃśodhitā, Nirṇaya Sāgar Press, Bombay 1945. gg Suśrutasaṃhitā, with Hindī commentary by Atrideva, *1st ed., 1946/47; 5th ed., Motīlāl Banārsīdās, Dillī/Vārāṇasī 1975; *ed. 1994. hh maharṣiṇā suśrutena viracitā suśrutasaṃhitā, ‘āyurvedatattvasandīpikā’ hindīvyākhyā-vaijñānikavimarśa-ṭippaṇī-sahitā, ṭīkākāraḥ kavirāja Dr. Ambikādattāśāstrī, 2 vols., *1st ed., Benares 1953, 1954; 2nd. ed., vol. I (Sūtrasthāna-Kalpasthāna), vol. II (Uttaratantra), Kāśī Saṃskṛta Granthamālā 156, Vārāṇasī 1966 and 1959; *3rd ed., 1972, 1974; *5th ed., Vārāṇasī 1982. *ii Suśrutasaṃhitā, ed., with Gujarātī translation, by Śāstrī Govinda, Bombay 1963/64. *jj = edition and translation f. *kk Suśrutasaṃhitā, Śārīrasthāna, with Hindī commentary by J.Ḍ. Śarmā, 1975. *ll = edition and translation i. *mm suśrutasaṃhitā, ‘chatra-subodhinī’ hindī ṭīkā sahitā, vyākhyākār: Vaidya Paṇḍit Śambhunāth Śāstrī. *nn suśrutasaṃhitā, śārīrasthāna, jyotiṣmatī hindī vyākhyā, ānglabhāṣānuvād tathā ḍalhaṇa-jejjaṭādi prācīn ṭīkāom kī vicārddhārā evam ādhunik vaijñānik vimarś se paripūrṇa, vyākhyākār: Dr. Jyotirmitra Ācārya. *oo Suśrutasaṃhitā, with Sudhā Sanskrit commentary by Paṇḍit Sudārma Miśra Śāstrī, Haridās Sanskrit Series No. 122. *pp Suśrutasaṃhitā, with Prabhā and Darpaṇa-Hindī commentary by Paṇḍit Nīlkaṇṭh Deśapāṇḍey, Haridās Sanskrit Series No. 164. *qq ed., with Marāṭhī translation, by D.B. Borkar, Poona 1934 (see C.G. Kashikar, 1977: 162). *rr Śārīrasthāna, with English translation by R.V. Patvardhan, Poona (see C.G. Kashikar, 1977: 162). References are to *ed. cc.

v2.c33.36

Translations of the Suśrutasaṃhitā: a Suśrutas. Āyurvēdas. Id est medicinae systema a venerabili D’hanvantare demonstratum a Suśruta discipulo compositum. Nunc primum ex Sanskrīta in Latinum sermonem vertit, introductionem, annotationes et rerum indicem adjecit Dr. Franciscus Hessler, 3 vols., apud Ferdinandum Enke, Erlangae, 1844 [IO.6.F.22 and 12–15], 1847, 1850. b = edition c. b1 Purāṇavaidyakagranthasaṃgraha, a collection of Sanskrit medical works; Charaka edited and Suśruta translated, by Anna Moreshwar Kunte, Jñāna-mitra Press, Bombay 1877 (contains a translation of the first eight chapters of the Suśrutasaṃhitā; see G. Liétard, 1883: 645 and 672) [IO.985]. c The Suśruta-saṃhitā; The Hindu system of medicine according to Suśruta, translated from the original Sanskrit by Udoy Chánd Dutt, Fasciculus I (Sūtrasthāna 1–20), Bibliotheca Indica, New Series, No. 490, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 1883; Fasciculus II (Sūtrasthāna 21–42), Bibliotheca Indica, New Series, No. 500, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 1883; translated from the original Sanskrit by Aughorechunder Chattopadhya, Fasciculus III (Sūtrasthāna 42–46), Bibliotheca Indica, New Series, No. 802, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 1891 [IO.14.C.11 and 12]. See on Udoy Chand Dutt’s translation: G. Liétard (1885).

v2.c33.37

d The Suśruta-Saṃhitā or the Hindu system of medicine according to Suśruta, translated from the original Sanskrit by Dr. A.F.R. Hoernle, Fasciculus I (Sūtrasthāna 1–14), Bibliotheca Indica, New Series, No. 911, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 1897. d1 Japanese translation by Jogen Ojihara, published by Yutaka Ojihara, with a preface by Hiroshi Maruyama, Osaka 1971. This translation is completed by: Index of Suśrutasaṃhitā (Suśruta honshū – Sakuin), based on the Japanese translation by Jogen Ojihara, ed. by Michio Yano and Tsutomu Yamashita, Taniguchi-Shoten Co., Ltd., Tokyo 1994. e An English translation of the Sushruta Samhita, based on original Sanskrit text, with a full and comprehensive introduction, additional texts, different readings, notes, comparative views, index, glossary and plates, (in three volumes) translated and edited by Kaviraj Kunjalal Bhishagratna, Wilkins Press, Calcutta 1907–1916 [IO.21.C.40, 41, 41(a)]; Bharat Mihir Press, Calcutta 1918 [IO.San.C.63]; 2nd ed., The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies Vol. XXX, Varanasi 1963; *repr. 1981. f Diagnostic considerations in ancient Indian surgery (based on Nidānasthāna of Suśruta-saṃhitā) by G.D. Singhal, L.M. Singh, and K.P. Singh, Allahabad 1972; Anatomical and obstetric considerations in ancient Indian surgery, based on Śārīra-sthāna of Suśrutasaṃhitā, by G.D. Singhal and L.V. Guru, Allahabad 1973; Toxicological considerations in ancient Indian surgery, based on Kalpa-sthāna of Suśruta Saṃhitā, by G.D. Singhal and R.N. Dwivedi, Allahabad 1976; Ophthalmic and otorhinolaryngological considerations in ancient Indian surgery, based on Śālākya-Tantra portion of Uttara-Tantra of Suśruta Saṃhitā, by G.D. Singhal and K.R. Sharma, Allahabad 1976; Non-operative considerations in ancient Indian surgery (based on Suśruta Saṃhitā, Cikitsā-sthāna chapters 24 to 40), by G.D. Singhal, R.H. Singh and K.P. Shukla, Varanasi 1979; Paediatric and gynaecological considerations and aphorisms in ancient Indian surgery (based on Suśruta Saṃhitā, Uttara-tantra chapters 27–38 and 63–66), by G.D. Singhal and Jyotir Mitra, Varanasi 1980; Fundamental and plastic surgery considerations in ancient Indian surgery (based on chapters 1–27 of Sūtra-sthāna of Suśruta Saṃhitā, by G.D. Singhal, S.N. Tripathi and G.N. Chaturvedi, Varanasi 1981; Pharmaceutical considerations in ancient Indian surgery (based on chapters 28–46 of Sūtra-sthāna of Suśruta Saṃhitā, by G.D. Singhal and K.C. Chunekar, Varanasi 1982; Operative considerations in ancient Indian surgery (based on Suśruta Saṃhitā, Cikitsā-sthāna, chapters 1–23), by G.D. Singhal and L.M. Singh, Varanasi 1982; Medical and psychiatric considerations in ancient Indian surgery (based on chapters 39–59 and 60–62 of Uttara-tantra of Suśruta Saṃhitā, by G.D. Singhal and K.P. Shukla, Varanasi 1993. Reviewed by F. Zimmermann, Bulletin of the History of Medicine 57, 2, 1983, 291–293. The text reproduced and translated by G.D. Singhal c.s. is that of ed. cc. The series of translations by G.D. Singhal c.s. is completed by G.D. Singhal and J.T.S. Patterson: Synopsis of Ayurveda, based on a translation of the Suśruta Saṃhitā (the treatise of Suśruta), Oxford University Press, Delhi 1993. *g = *ed. ll. *h = *ed. nn. i Suśruta-saṃhitā (section on the human body), text with English translation and commentary etc., vol. III Śārīrasthānam, by Dr. Dinkar Govind Thatte, Kashi Ayurveda Series 16, Chaukhamba Orientalia, Varanasi/Delhi 1994.

v2.c33.38

2 See the comments of Cakrapāṇi and Dalhaṇa on the term utpatti, indicating that the āyurveda already existed and was revealed by Dhanvantari. 3 The sages, not afflicted by diseases, want to preserve their youthful vigour (see Dalhaṇa). 4 See Su.Sū.1.21. 5 The Atharvaveda is mentioned by Dalhaṇa ad Su.Sū.2.1–2 and 24.7, U.61.41cd; the ātharvaṇaḥ are referred to at Su.Sū.34.6cd. The use of the term upāṅga is noteworthy; Dalhaṇa says that an upāṅga is a smaller, constituent part of an aṅga; hands and feet are, for example, upāṅgas of the arms and legs, which are aṅgas; according to another explanation, an upāṅga is some part lying near an aṅga (aṅgasamīpa). The āyurvedasamhitās, however, are much larger than the Atharvaveda (see on this: S. Dasgupta, 1975: II, 273–274). Caraka (Sū.1.43) refers to the āyurveda as the most auspicious (puṇyatama) of the Vedas; see also Ca.Sū.30.20–21. The āyurveda is one of the four upavedas according to Nīlakaṇṭha in his commentary ad Mahābhārata, Sabhāparvan 11.33 (ed. Poona). The Brahmavaivartapurāṇa (Brahmakhaṇḍa 16.8–10) calls āyurveda the fifth Veda (compare Vṛddhatrayī 6). Dārila, Keśava and Sāyaṇa state in their commentaries on the Kauśikasūtra (25.2) that āyurveda is concerned with diseases produced by an unwholesome diet (āhāranimitta), while the Atharvan practices are concerned with those produced by moral transgressions (aśubhanimitta, adharmasamutthita); see: M. Bloomfield (1972): 323; W. Caland (1967): 67; S. Dasgupta (1975): II, 273–275. Cakrapāṇi makes a remark on the nine aṅgas of the Atharvaveda, which consist of vākovākya, itihāsa, five purāṇas, and vaidyaka. The usual series of the six vedāṅgas does not mention āyurveda. 6 Compare Ca.Sū.30.28. The eight divisions are, in contrast with the Carakasaṃhitā, defined in the Suśrutasaṃhitā. 7 Compare the means of acquiring valid knowledge in the Carakasaṃhitā. 8 Compare on Dakṣa: Ca.Ni.2.10 and 8.11; Ci.19.4; Ka.1.14. 9 See the commentaries and the note in Hoernle's translation. 10 See the commentaries on the various classes of deities. Ādideva is also mentioned at Su. Sū.3.46. 11 Compare Su.Sū.1.30; Ca.Śa.3.16. 12 Cf. Su.Sū.1.4, which omits svābhāvika. 13 Cf. Ca.Sū.1.71–72. 14 See Su.Sū.1.22. 15 Cf. Ca.Vi.8. The passage on the admission of śūdras as students (Sū.2.5) may be an interpolation; see the commentaries and Hoernle's note to his translation. See on śūdras and their rights concerning study of the Vedas: J. Gonda (1965): 419–421; R.Sh. Sharma (1980); C. Tiwari (1963). Soma may not be used by śūdras according to the Suśrutasaṃhitā (Sū. 29.13). See the commentaries and Hoernle's note on adyatana (Sū.2.10). 16 An alternative name of the Uttarattantra is Aupadravika (Sū.3.30), which is the title of its first chapter. Chapters 1–26 of the Uttarattantra constitute the Śālākyatantra (Sū.3.31–35ab), chapters 27–38 the Kumāratantra (Sū.3.35cd–37), chapters 39–49 the chapters with kāyacikitsā (Sū.3.38–40), chapters 50–52 with bhūtavidyā (Sū.3.41), and chapters 53–56 serve to embellish the treatise (Sū.3.42). 17 See the commentaries. 18 Some do not reckon eṣya and āhārya among the surgical procedures (see the commentaries). Śastrakarman is of six types in the Carakasaṃhitā (Ci.25.55); see also Jejjata and Cakra ad Ca.Ci.25.40. Compare the elements of śāstrapraṇidhāna enumerated at Ca.Sū. 11.55.

v2.c33.39

19 This fumigation has to be carried out with drugs that are rakṣoghna (driving away all evil influences). White mustard seeds (gaurasarṣapa) are one of the ingredients of the dhūpa; see on the uses of (gaura)sarṣapa for protection and purification: Ca.Śa.8.47 and 50; Manusmṛti 5.120; P.K. Gode (1935b) and (1959). See on fumigation in Indian medicine: L.S.B. Bisht, N.B. Brindavanam and G.P. Kimothi (1988). Dalhaṇa remarks that fumigation also serves to drive away black flies that might be attracted to and lay their eggs in the wound. 20 These mantras give protection against kṛtyā (sorcery) and evil beings (rakṣas), consisting of nāgas, piśācas, gandharvas, ancestral ghosts (pitaraḥ), yakṣas and rākṣasas (5.21; compare Su.Sū.1.8, where they are called grahas). The term kṛtyā occurs several times, for example at Su.Sū.6.19 (see Dalhaṇa's comments). See also A.h.U.5.13; 39.53; A.s.Sū.8.78. See on kṛtyā: W. Caland (1967): 132–136; S.A. Dange (1987): 951; T. Goudriaan (1978) and (1986); V. Henry (1988); S.K. Lal (1979); P.C. Sahoo (1987); A.M. Shastri (1969): 188; N.J. Shende (n.d.): 179–180, (1985): 162–167; K.G. Zysk (1985): 179 and 253. See on the personified Kṛtyā: S.K. Lal (1980): 41–49. Many deities, should protect a particular constituent or function of the human organism, are mentioned in the mantras: Agni should protect the tongue, Vāyu the prāṇas, Soma the vyāna, Parjanya the apāna; the lightning should protect the udāna, the thunder the samāna; Indra Balapati should protect the bala, Manu the manyās and the mati, the gandharvas the desires (kāma), Indra the sattva, Varuṇa the prajñā, the ocean the navel (nābhimanḍala), Sūrya the eyes, the quarters of the sky the ears, Candramas the manas, the nakṣatras rūpa, the nights chāyā, the waters retas, the herbs the hairs, ākāśa the openings of the body, Vasundharā the body, Vaiśvānara the head, Viṣṇu parākrama, Puruṣaśreṣṭha pauruṣa, Brahmā the ātman, Dhruva the eyebrows. 21 Compare Ca.Sū.6 (see the references). Compare Su.Ci.24.102–109. 22 These units of time are absent from the Carakasaṃhitā. 23 See S. Srinivasan (1979): 124. Compare Pālakāpya III.7 (p.401): the time required to pronounce two short syllables. 24 Fifteen nimeṣa make a kāṣṭhā. Compare Āyurvedasūtra 9.13–14: eighteen mātrā (= nimeṣa) make a kāṣṭhā. Pālakāpya and Vāgbhaṭa (A.s.Sū.4.4) agree with Suśruta. See also S. Srinivasan (1979): 124. 25 Thirty kāṣṭhā make a kalā. Vāgbhaṭa (A.s.Sū.4.4) and Pālakāpya agree. See on kalā: J. Gonda (1965a): 119–120; S. Srinivasan (1979): 124–125. 26 Twenty kalā and one-tenth of a kalā make a muhūrta. Cakra mentions that this is the opinion of Aupadhenava and others; he adds that Bhoja's statement that twenty kalā make a muhūrta and Bhāluki's view that thirty kalā make a muhūrta are based on scribal errors (lipidoṣa). Dalhaṇa says that the commentaries (nibandha) reject the opinion that a muhūrta consists of thirty kalā. Pālakāpya, however, records that thirty kalā make a muhūrta. See on muhūrta: H. Jacobi (1920); P.V. Kane V.1, 537–543; S.S. Lishk and S.D. Sharma (1980); A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith (1967); A. von Rospatt (1995): 96, n.214 and 99, n.218; Satya Prakash (1965): 466–468; S.D. Sharma and S.S. Lishk (1979); S. Srinivasan (1979): 126; A. Weber (1983b). A muhūrta is usually regarded as a period of forty-eight minutes. 27 Thirty muhūrta make a day and a night. 28 See on Indian divisions of time: A.L. Basham (1954): 504; M.R. Bhat (1992): I, 8; T. Hayashi (1995): 109–113; P.V. Kane V.1, 475–477; W. Kirfel (1967): 333–335; S. Srinivasan (1979): 118–161. The divisions of time are found in many works; Rājaśekhara's treatise on poetics, the Kāvyamīmāṃsā, for example, deals with them at the beginning of its chapter on the seasons (18.1). See on Indian time-measuring instruments: S.R. Sarma (1994); S. Srinivasan (1979): 125–126.

v2.c33.40

29 The arrangement of the seasons is not yet settled in Vedic literature, where a number of three, five or six is mentioned; the number of three applies to the three main periods, consisting of summer, the rains and winter, marked each by the cāturmāsya sacrifices at their beginning; when the number is five, śiśira and hemanta are taken together as one season (see D. Feller, 1995: 7–9; V. Raghavan, 1972; S. Srinivasan, 1979: 137–138; H. Zimmer, 1879).

v2.c33.41

30 Dalhaṇa gives two interpretations, probably because Śukra precedes Śuci in the usual order.

v2.c33.42

31 This is the civil arrangement of seasons and months according to Hoernle (see the note to his translation); it is the astronomical year according to C. Vogel (1971). The same order of the seasons is found at Ca.Sū.6.4 and 6–7. Some of the same names of months occur at Ca.Sū.6.5. The names given here in the Suśrutasaṃhitā are the old names, known already in Vedic literature (see, e.g., Śatapathabrāhmaṇa 4.3.1.14–19); they are not rare in later Sanskrit literature, and occur, for example, in Rājaśekhara’s Kāvyamīmāṃsā (18.2). See also the commentaries.

v2.c33.43

32 The dakṣiṇāyana is often called visarga, the uttarāyaṇa ādāna in the Carakasaṃhitā.

v2.c33.44

33 This is the medical arrangement according to Hoernle (see the note to his translation); it is the civil year according to C. Vogel (1971). Compare also Ca.Sū.7.46, Vi.8.125 and Si.6.5–6, where the same arrangement is found. Cakrapāṇi says (ad Ca.Sū.6.5–6 and Su.Sū.6.10), basing himself on a quotation from the Kāśyapīya, that the first arrangement is current to the north, the second to the south of the Ganges. Dalhaṇa (ad Su.Sū.6.10) mentions this view, adding that Gayadāsa rejects it. See also AVI 54 and P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to the 4th ed. of ed. cc of the Carakasaṃhitā. Compare on the two systems: Hemarājaśarman (upodghāta 37–38), who holds that the second arrangement is a later addition.

v2.c33.45

34 Dalhaṇa explains the term as deviations from the dharma by the whole people (sarvajanasāmānyadharma). See on adṛṣṭa: S. Dasgupta (1975): I, 282, 283, 292 and II, 306, 360; B. Faddegon (1969): 157; E. Frauwallner (1956): 90–96; W. Halbfass (1980), (1991): 291–345; J.E.M. Houben (1995): 201–207; A. Thakur (1969); H. Ui (1962): 164–170, 188–190; A. Wezler (1983).

v2.c33.46

35 See G.U. Thite (1982): 25–26.

v2.c33.47

36 See, for example, B.R. Modak (1993): 203–233.

v2.c33.48

37 Compare Ca.Vi.3; Pālakāpya, śalya 12.

v2.c33.49

38 These flowery descriptions abound in traditional poetical elements, such as, for example, the kimśuka, mango and aśoka flowers, the kokila bird and the bees in spring (6.27cd–28ab).

v2.c33.50

39 See on the yantras: G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 91–224; R.F.G. Müller (1943–52). Yantras are also described in the Bhāvaprakāśa, Hāritasamhitā, Hastyāyurveda and the works ascribed to Vāgbhaṭa. The commentaries of Cakra and Dalhaṇa make clear that other treatises on the subject were available, probably the works of Bhāluki and Bhoja. Our knowledge concerning the ancient Indian surgical instruments is almost completely dependent on the descriptions in the texts. The excavations at Taxila yielded some instruments of copper and bronze (see O.P. Jaggi IV, photos 34 and 35; P. Rāy, 1956: fig 25a, reproduced from J. Marshall, 1951, vol. III). Some reliefs may show a few instruments and their handling; see on this subject: R.F.G. Müller (1943–52); C. Vogel (1964). The drawings found in many books on the subject are not based on preserved objects (see on the history of

v2.c33.51

these illustrations: R.F.G. Müller, 1943–52: 256–259). See for a photograph of a set of instruments dating from the nineteenth century: D. Wujastyk (1995): 28. See also R.F.G. Müller (1937c), *(1961b), *(1963b). More valuable are the pictures of in Tibetan thaṅkas (see S.P. Banerji, 1894; R.F.G. Müller, 1943–52: 259–260; G.N. Mukherjee, 1933b; G. Mukhopādhyāya, 1913: 356–357). See also some of the illustrations in: Lokesh Chandra (1971); F. Meyer (1981): 193 and 197, and (1995): 139; Rechung (1973): 130–131. See on Tibetan medical thaṅkas: *Byams-pa Hphrin-las, Wang Lei and Cai Jingfeng (1988) (reviewed by R.E. Emmerick, JEĀS 1, 1990: 179–180); F. Meyer (1990), (1995); Y. Parfinovitch, F. Meyer and G. Dorje (1992). See on Tibetan medical instruments: W. Unkrig (1934a).

v2.c33.52

40 A śalākā is a śastra (sharp instrument) in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30). The śalākā is often mentioned in the Suśrutasaṃhitā; it is also known as Caraka.

v2.c33.53

41 See plates XI–XIV in G. Mukhopādhyāya (1914).

v2.c33.54

42 See plates XV–XVI in G. Mukhopādhyāya (1914).

v2.c33.55

43 See plate XVII in G. Mukhopādhyāya (1914).

v2.c33.56

44 See plates XVIII–XXXV in G. Mukhopādhyāya (1914).

v2.c33.57

45 See plates XXXVI–XLI in G. Mukhopādhyāya (1914).

v2.c33.58

46 See plates XLII–LVII in G. Mukhopādhyāya (1914).

v2.c33.59

47 Dalhaṇa mentions ivory (danta), horn (śṛṅga) and wood (dāru) as substitutes.

v2.c33.60

48 See on many of these animals and birds: Ca.Sū.27 and Su.Sū.46. K.N. Dave (1985: 330) identifies the añjalikarṇa as the lesser florican, Sypheotides indica (J.F. Miller) (see: S. Ali and S.D. Ripley 2, 196–198), the avabhañjana as Anastomus oscitans (Boddaert), the openbill stork (see S. Ali and S.D. Ripley 1, 95–98).

v2.c33.61

49 See the explanations in the commentaries.

v2.c33.62

50 See, e.g., Su.Ci.1.104.

v2.c33.63

51 See the explanations of the commentators.

v2.c33.64

52 Compare Hoernle’s translation (raising or smoothing) and his note. See the commentaries.

v2.c33.65

53 See the commentators, in particular Cakra. Singhal c.s. translate the term by blowing.

v2.c33.66

54 Dalhaṇa gives a series of interpretations. Cakra mentions viraṇa a a variant.

v2.c33.67

55 Hoernle’s translation has contusing.

v2.c33.68

56 The kaṅkamukha is mentioned in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30). The kaṅkamukha was re-invented by A. Paré in the sixteenth century, who called it bec de corbin dentelé (see G. Majno, 1975: 273–274).

v2.c33.69

57 See on the Persian version of this chapter in the Ma’din al-Shifā’: M. Azeez Pasha (1971): 127–130.

v2.c33.70

58 The Hāritasamhitā mentions twelve śastras. See on the śastras: G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913). Compare the notes in Yādavaśarman’s edition and in the translations of Bhishagratna and Hoernle. See also: *P.J. Deshpande and V. Prasad (1972); R.N.R. Ranina (1895–1899); L.A. Ravi Varma (1956). An early article on the śastras is that by H.H. Wilson (1823). See on the surgical instruments of Siddha medicine: S. Malayandi (1983): 32–33, 41–44. Compare on the surgical instruments of Greek and Roman medicine: L.J. Bliquez (1985); A. Krug (1993): 73–101; E. Künzl (1996); Th. Meyer-Steineg (1912a); J.S. Milne (1907); J. Scarborough (1969): 82–87.

v2.c33.71

59 G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 225–230; (1914): plates LVIII–LIX. Dalhaṇa mentions two varieties and quotes an anonymous source on the subject. Cakra mentions the same varieties and quotes verses of Bhoja and Bhāluki. The verse attributed to Bhāluki is identical with Dalhaṇa’s quotation. The maṇḍalāgra is mentioned in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30). The Arthaśāstra (2.18.12), Bṛhatsaṃhitā (49.7) and Rājatarangiṇī are acquainted with a type of sword called maṇḍalāgra.

v2.c33.72

60 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 230–232; (1914): plate LX. See Cakra and Dalhaṇa on opinions regarding the dimensions of this instrument.

v2.c33.73

61 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 232–237; (1914): plate LXI. Cakra and Dalhaṇa describe two varieties. The vṛddhipattra was also known to Pālakāpya (Hastyāyurveda, śalya 15, p.478, and śalya 30) and Jayadatta’s Aśvavaidyaka 14.22).

v2.c33.74

62 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 237–238; (1914): plate LXII. Cakra quotes Bhoja’s description. Dalhaṇa gives disagreeing information, but a variant is in conformity with Bhoja. Pālakāpya’s rampaka is a related instrument, used for paring the nails of an elephant.

v2.c33.75

63 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 238–240; (1914): plate LXIII. Cakra quotes Bhāluki’s description.

v2.c33.76

64 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 240–242; (1914): plate LXIV. Bhoja’s description is quoted by name in the Bhānumatī, anonymously by Dalhaṇa. The utpalapattra is mentioned in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30) and Jayadatta’s Aśvavaidyaka (14.21).

v2.c33.77

65 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 243; (1914): plate LXIV. Bhoja’s description is quoted by name in the Bhānumatī; Dalhaṇa’s remarks are based on Bhoja’s verse. The ardhadhāra is also called cakradhāra (the text of Dalhaṇa’s commentary reads vakradhāra). A variant has adhyardhadhāra.

v2.c33.78

66 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 243–247; (1914): plate LXV. The sūcī is one of the śastras in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30); three types of sūcī are mentioned in that treatise (śalya 1.105cd–107). The sūcī was of various lengths according to Dalhaṇa ad Sū.Sū.8.7 (compare Su.Sū.25.23–24).

v2.c33.79

67 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 247–249; (1914): plate LXVI. A note in Yādavaśarman’s edition says that the kuśapattra resembles Paget’s knife of modern surgery. Compare the quotations in the commentaries of Cakra and Dalhaṇa. The kuśapattra is mentioned in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30).

v2.c33.80

68 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 249; (1914): plate LXVI. Compare the quotations from an unknown source in the commentaries of Cakra and Dalhaṇa. The āṭī, also called (jala)vardhanī, is a bird, identified as Acridotheres ginginianus (Latham) (= Turdus ginginianus Latham of MW and PW), the bank myna; it is called āḍi or āḍī and regarded as an aquatic bird in the Hāritasaṃhitā (I.20.11; 22.2). Compare Amarakoṣa 2.5.26. K.N. Dave (1985: 352) identifies the āṭī as the black ibis; see on Pseudibis papillosa papillosa (Temminck), the Indian black ibis: S. Ali and S.D. Ripley 1, 112–113.

v2.c33.81

69 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 249–250; (1914): plate LXVII. See also K.N. Dave (1985): 350–353. Cakra and Dalhaṇa mention kartarī (a pair of scissors) as a synonym. Cakra’s comments are more elaborate than those of Dalhaṇa. Two varieties of śarāri, a bird with a long beak, were known. The śarāri (skimmer bird) is also mentioned in the Carakasaṃhitā (Sū.27.42). Compare Amarakoṣa 2.5.26.

v2.c33.82

70 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 250–251; (1914): plate LXVIII. Cakra and Dalhaṇa quote an anonymous description.

v2.c33.83

71 U.Ch. Dutt, Hoernle and Wise regard it as a kind of trocar; G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913) calls it a scarificator. See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 251–254; (1914): plate LXIX. See the description from an unnamed source in the commentaries of Cakra and Dalhaṇa. Caraka

v2.c33.84

mentions a śastra called kūrca (Ci.7.50). Compare kūrcaka (Su.Ka.1.48) and kūrcana (Ca. Ci.1.47).

v2.c33.85

72 An axe-shaped instrument, resembling a gum lancet (Hoernle); a chisel (Singhal c.s.). See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 254–257; (1914): plate LXX. A sharp instrument, shaped like an axe (kuṭhārākṛti), is mentioned in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30).

v2.c33.86

73 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 257–261; (1914): plate LXXI. Cakra and Dalhaṇa quote Bhoja’s description. The vṛīhimukha is mentioned in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30) and Jayadatta’s Aśvavaidyaka (14.21).

v2.c33.87

74 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 262–264; (1914): plate LXXII. Cakra and Dalhaṇa quote a description from an unnamed source.

v2.c33.88

75 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 264; (1914): plate LXXIII. Cakra and Dalhaṇa quote Bhoja’s description.

v2.c33.89

76 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 264–267; (1914): plate LXXIV. Cakra and Dalhaṇa quote a description from an unnamed source. Compare Dalhaṇa ad Su.Ka.3.29.

v2.c33.90

77 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 267–269; (1914): plate LXXVI. The anonymous quotation in the Bhānumatī derives from Bhoja, as is evident from Dalhaṇa’s commentary.

v2.c33.91

78 See G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 269–273; (1914): plate LXXVI. Cakra and Dalhaṇa quote a description from an unnamed source. Three kinds of eṣaṇī, of various lengths, are described in Pālakāpya’s Hastyāyurveda (śalya 30). See on the probes used in Graeco-Roman medicine: J.S. Milne (1907): 51–89.

v2.c33.92

79 See on uses of the maṇḍalāgra: Su.Ci.15.12 and 16; 22.50; U.15.7, 20 and 21; Dalhaṇa ad Su.Ci.22.46; Siddhayoga 61.230; Kusumāvalī ad Siddhayoga 58.44 (= Su.Ci.22.46); Cakradatta, kaṇṭharoga 9 (= mukharoga 67 in P.V. Sharma’s edition) and netraroga 209, 237, 240; Śivadāsa ad Cakradatta, jihvāroga 3 (compare Niścala ad mukharoga 46 = Su. Ci.22.46) and netraroga 200.

v2.c33.93

80 See on its uses: Su.Sū.16.3; Ci.15.16 and 19.16; Ka.8.129.

v2.c33.94

81 See on three kinds of sūcī and their uses: Su.Sū.25.23–24 (cf. Hastyāyurveda III.1.105cd–107).

v2.c33.95

82 See, e.g.: Cakradatta, galagaṇḍa 12; Siddhayoga 41.12.

v2.c33.96

83 See on its use: Su.Śā.8.9.

v2.c33.97

84 See on its uses: Su.Śā.8.9 and 17; Ci.14.18; Cakradatta, vṛddhi 8 and śirāvyadha 9; Jayadatta’s Aśvavaidyaka 14.23.

v2.c33.98

85 See on its uses: Su.Sū.16.3; Ci.3.23 and 4.9 (pāṇimantha = ārā; see Dalhaṇa).

v2.c33.99

86 See on its uses: Ca.Sū.16.3 and 24.46; Ci.29.36.

v2.c33.100

87 See on its uses: Su.Ci.7.35; 21.13; Ka.3.29; U.15.5, 20, 23; Cakradatta, śūkadoṣa 7. The baḍiśa is both a yantra and a śastra (see the commentaries).

v2.c33.101

88 The eṣaṇī is both a yantra and a śastra. As a yantra, it is gaṇḍūpadamukhī (blunt) and of variable dimensions; as a śastra, it is tīkṣṇakaṇṭakamukhī or yavapattramukhī (sharp) (see the commentaries and Su.Sū.8.11). Cf. Ca.Ci.25.81–82. See on its uses: Su.Sū.26.16–17; Ci.17.30 and 37.119.

v2.c33.102

89 Explained as visrāvaṇa (evacuating) by Cakra and Dalhaṇa, who reject the opinion (accepted by U.Ch. Dutt, Bhishagratna and Singhal) that it is employed for ṛjukaraṇa (i.e., used as a director).

v2.c33.103

90 Dalhaṇa says that blacksmiths (lauhakārāḥ) are well acquainted with tempering; he adds that some regard the mention of caustics and oils as not authoritative. See on iron and steel, their tempering and working in India: B. and R. Allchin (1968): 285–286 and 327;

v2.c33.104

T.R. Anantharaman (1995); E. Balfour (1967): II, 371–376, (1968): III, 734–735; M.N. Banerjee (1927), (1929); N.R. Banerjee (1965); H.C. Bhardwaj (1979): 143–165; A.K. Biswas (1994a), (1996): 209–248, 385–407; J. Campbell (1843); D.K. Chakrabarti (1992); A.K. Coomaraswamy (1964): 137–140; Encyclopaedia Britannica (s.v. Ironwork, history, A.1: India and Southeast Asia); J. Franklin (1835); B.K. Gururaja Rao (1970): 257–260; J.M. Heath (1839); K.T.M. Hegde (1981), (1991): 36–55; O.P. Jaggi VII: 103–113; *M.C. Joshi et al. (1996); *S.D. Joshi (1970); G. Majno (1975): 269 and 512; G. Mukhopādhyāya (1913): 70–73; P. Neogi (1914); B. Prakash (1991); B. Prakash and K. Igaki (1984); K.N.P. Rao (1988): 194–195; P. Rãy (1986a): 146–147; P. Rãy (1956): 98–103 and 211–216; S. Saran and R.N. Singh (1994): 112–142; B.K. Sarkar (1974): I, 99; S.D. Singh (1962); B.V. Subbarayappa (1971): 290 and 299–303; G. Watt IV, 499–520; WIRM V, 256–270. The literature on this subject is very extensive. The tempering of steel (śastrapāna) is described in Varāhamihira’s Bṛhatsaṃhitā (50.23–26). See on the tempering, working and damascening of steel, also in Islamic countries: J. Abbott (1847); A.K. Biswas (1996): 284–285, 387–393; J.S. Milne (1907): 10–11; C. Panseri (1965); Y. Rāgib (1997); E. Wiedemann (1970): I, 731–748.

v2.c33.105

91 Ḍalhaṇa mentions the variant śilikā, i.e., the instrument used by barbers for whetting a razor. See on Graeco-Roman whetstones: J.S. Milne (1907): 166–167.

v2.c33.106

92 Cf. Ca.Sū.25.40: leeches are the foremost among the anuśastras.

v2.c33.107

93 Glass vessels (kācapātra) are referred to at Su.Sū.46.453. Also mentioned in the Caraka-saṃhitā (Śa.8.41: kācamaṇi). See on the history of glass and glass manufacture in India: J. André and J. Filliozat (1986): 368–369; H.C. Bhardwaj (1979): 24–69; M. Chaudhuri (1983), (1986); M.G. Dikshit (1969); R.S.M. Ghosh (1924); P.K. Gode (1946n), (1949c); V. Govind (1970); P. Rãy (1956): 73–76, 78, 80, 89; R.N. Saletore (1975): 154–156, 264–265; S. Saran and R.N. Singh (1994); B.K. Sarkar (1974): I, 124–125; S.N. Sen (1971): 14–15; R.N. Singh (1989); B.V. Subbarayappa (1971): 291–294. See on references to kāca in Sanskrit texts: V. Govind (1970).

v2.c33.108

94 Ḍalhaṇa says that is either a kind of stone (pāṣāṇa) for sharpening tools and instruments made of iron, or a precious stone, red in colour (lohitāśman, ratnapradhāna). Compare his remarks ad U.15.26: niśānopala (whetting stone) or padmarāga (ruby). Cakra is of the opinion that kuruvinda means a red precious stone.

v2.c33.109

95 See Ḍalhaṇa.

v2.c33.110

96 The iron should be pure (śuddha) and śaikya. Cakra interprets śaikya as sharp, Ḍalhaṇa as meaning either sharp or made of purified iron (sāramayalauhaghaṭita). See R.F.G. Müller (1943–52: 234) on the connection between śaikya and śikya. Pālakāpya (śalya 30) says that the instruments should be made from tīkṣṇāyas. The iron mentioned may be steel, because tempering is referred to in this chapter. It cannot be proved that śaikya means wootz in this context (see R.F.G. Müller, 1943–1952: 234–235). Wootz is the steel used for damascening. See on wootz: B. Allchin and R. Allchin (1968); T.R. Anantharaman (1995): 5–6; V. Ball (1884): 230 and 234; H.C. Bhardwaj (1979): 158–160; A.K. Biswas (1994a): 595–602; *B. Bronson (1986); D.K. Chakrabarti (1992): 1–6; J.M. Heath (1839); Hobson-Jobson 972–973; O.P. Jaggi VII, 103–111; I.G. Khan (1986): 72–74; C.D. MacLean (1982): 1025; P. Neogi (1914): 65–76; C. Panseri (1965); P. Rãy (1956): 102 and 216; *M. Sachse (1993); G. Watt IV, 503–504.

v2.c33.111

97 See on the Greek and Roman surgical instruments of steel and iron: J.S. Milne (1907): 10–13.

v2.c33.112

98 Karaṇaprāpta is interpreted as either skillful (svakarmaṇi nipuṇaḥ) or disposing of all the facilities (upakaraṇaprāpta) by Ḍalhaṇa; Cakra says that either a resolute (pragalbha) blacksmith is meant or one who is employed in the service of the king (rājakarmasthā-nanibaddha).

v2.c33.113

99 See on karmāra: T. Burrow (1961); A Mitra (1953): 329–331. The karmāra is aleady mentioned in the Ṛgveda (10.72.2), where he is also called kārmāra (9.112.2).

v2.c33.114

100 See on the Persian version of this chapter in the Ma’din al-Shifā’: M. Azeez Pasha (1971): 130–131. Compare a story about surgical training, told in the Visuddhimagga (see Jyotir Mitra, 1985: 306).

v2.c33.115

102 Viśikhā is a highway; viśikhānupraveśana refers to the physician going on his way to a patient (Cakra and Hārāṇacandra); an alternative explanation found in the commentaries is entry into practice (viśikhā = karmamārga). See on Sanskrit terms for various types of road: O. Stein (1936a).

v2.c33.116

108 Cf. Ca.Vi.4. Suśruta describes direct examination by means of the organs of taste and smell, whereas Caraka says that this type of information should be obtained by inference. Purity of the physician is of less concern to Suśruta. Ḍalhaṇa, however, gives an interpretation in the spirit of Caraka.

v2.c33.117

110 A separate chapter on this subject is absent from the Carakasaṃhitā, because it does not belong to kāyacikitsā (see Ca.Ci.5.64), but the treatment with caustics is repeatedly mentioned (for example, at Ca.Sū.22.33 and 28.26; Ci.14.33 and 36.). See on the preparation and use of kṣāra according to the instructions of Suśruta: S.K. Pandey (1973–74). See on caustics also: N.B. Mulia et al. (1977).

v2.c33.118

111 Kṣar- means to melt away; kṣaṇ- means to destroy.

v2.c33.119

112 Substances called kaṭaśarkarā and bhasmaśarkarā are mentioned; Ḍalhaṇa explains the former as adagdhasudhāpāṣāṇa; kaṭaśarkara is a limestone-paste in Śilpaśāstra texts (see H. Ruelius, 1978: 94). See Hoernle’s elaborate notes on the text of Su.Sū.11.11 and its variants.

v2.c33.120

The preparation of a kṣāra is preceded by rituals, the most important element of which is adhivāsana. See the commentaries and Hoernle’s notes on this ritual and the accompanying mantra. Ḍalhaṇa refers to unnamed authorities, but Cakra quotes Bhoja on the subject. Compare the ritual accompanying the felling of a tree as described in the Śatapathabrāhmaṇa (3.6.4.1–27), Bṛhatsaṃhitā (42: indradhvajasampad; 58: vanasampraveśa), and Hastyāyurveda (III.11; the term used there is upavāsana); see on this subject: J.J. Meyer (1937): III, 18–20, 42–43, 57–59, 87–94; H. Oldenberg (1923): 259–260; J. Schwab (1886): 4–7; O. Viennot (1954): 41–44.

v2.c33.121

The literature on tree cults in India is large; see, for example: W. Crooke (1909): 482; J. Fergusson (1971); E.O. Martin (1972): 232–240; J.J. Meyer (1937); B.C. Sinha (1979); O. Viennot (1954).

v2.c33.122

115 Also known to the *Carakasaṃhitā* (Sū.28.26; agnikarman; Sū.22.33: agnidaha; Ci. 14.33: agnidāha), which has, however, no special chapter on this subject, which belongs to śalya (see the reference to the dāhaviśeṣavid at Ca.Ci.25.103, and the agnikovida at Ca.Ci.25.107). See on agnikarman in contemporary āyurveda: D.N. Shahane (1992). Compare on cautery in Graeco-Roman medicine: A. Krug (1993): 92–93; J.S. Milne (1907): 116–120. See on this subject in Islamic medicine: Albucasis I (M.S. Spink and G.L. Lewis, 1973: 8–165).

v2.c33.123

117 Mentioned in the *Carakasaṃhitā* (Ci.21.133).

v2.c33.124

118 A probe with a head resembling the oval fruit of a jambū tree and made of a black stone (see Cakra and Daḷhaṇa; slate according to Bhiṣagratna). Also mentioned at Su.Sū.5.6, and, as jambvoṣṭha, at Ci.8.32 and 19.50. Known to Pālakāpya (śalya 30: phālajāmbava or jāmbavauṣṭha). Cf. *Bhāvaprakāśa*, cikitsā 50.45.

v2.c33.125

119 Referred to in the *Carakasaṃhitā* (Ci.12.97: tailadāha; Ci.25.103: dāha by means of bees wax, oil, marrow, honey, fat, and ghee).

v2.c33.126

122 Straight lines, curved lines, etc. (Daḷhaṇa).

v2.c33.127

125 Accidental burns and burns caused by the improper use of caustics (see the commentaries). This subject is not separately dealt with in the *Carakasaṃhitā*. Compare Pālakāpya's Hastyāyurveda, śalya 10.46–60 and śalya 25. See on burns and their management in Indian medicine: P.J. Deshpande and S.N. Pathak (1965a), (1966); G.D. Singhal (1986).

v2.c33.128

126 Compare Pālakāpya, śalya 10.55–58ab.

v2.c33.129

128 See on the Persian version of this chapter in the *Ma'din al-Shifā'*: M. Azeez Pasha (1971): 132–134. The subject is not separately dealt with in the *Carakasaṃhitā* (see Cakra ad Ca. Ci.21.68cd–70). Compare Kalyāṇakāraka 21.35–51; Pālakāpya's Hastyāyurveda, Uttarasthāna 34. See on the history of the use of leeches in medical practice: A.E. Shipley's Historical Preface to W.A. Harding and J. Percy Moore (1927). See on the medicinal leech (*Hirudo medicinalis*): K.H. Mann, 1962: 5–21.

v2.c33.130

129 These horns were used for cupping. See on cupping: F.-H. Richter and G. Thoss (1986); E. Thurston (1975): 573. Compare on cupping instruments in Graeco-Roman medicine: A. Krug (1993): 96–97; J.S. Milne (1907): 101–105. See on cupping in Islamic medicine: Albucasis II.96 (M.S. Spink and G.L. Lewis, 1973: 656–673).

v2.c33.131

131 See on the Indian leeches and their application: E. Balfour (1967): II, 696; M. Chandra (1991); W.A. Harding and J. Percy Moore (1927); R.E. Hawkins (1986): 353–354; Nadkarni II, 167–170; W.B. O'Shaughnessy (1841): 679–681; G. Watt IV, 619; WIRM VI,

v2.c33.132

57–59. See on the application of leeches in Islamic medicine: Albucasis II.97 (M.S. Spink and G.L. Lewis, 1973: 674–675).

v2.c33.133

132 Identified as *Hirudinaria* (or *Poecilobdella*) *granulosa* (Savigny) (WIRM VI, 58). See on this leech: M. Chandra (1991): 91–92; W.A. Harding and J. Percy Moore (1927): 226–238. M. Chandra remarks that this species is a medicinal leech; he also states (92–94) that *Poecilobdella javanica* (Wahlberg) may be used for the same purposes and that *P. manillensis* (Lesson) is the medicinal leech of the lowlands of India.

v2.c33.134

133 Identified as *Haemadipsa ornata* Moore (WIRM VI, 58). See on this leech: M. Chandra (1991): 103–104; W.A. Harding and J. Percy Moore (1927): 284–289. Other species of *Haemadipsa* also attack human beings (M. Chandra, 1991: 99–110); the bite of *Haemadipsa moorei* Sanjeva Raj et Gladstone and that of *H. sylvestris* Blanchard is very painful (M. Chandra, 1991: 101–103, 105–106).

v2.c33.135

134 Compare Pālakāpya's *Hastyāyurveda*, śalya 34, where also six poisonous leeches are described; the third type is called *dvimukhī*, the sixth type *govindanā*. See also Hoernle's notes.

v2.c33.136

135 Described in Su.Ka.5.

v2.c33.137

136 Identified as *Dinobdella ferox* (Blanchard) ((WIRM VI, 58). See on this leech: M. Chandra (1991): 81–83; W.A. Harding and J. Percy Moore (1927): 175–185.

v2.c33.138

137 Compare Pālakāpya, śalya 34, where the following six non-poisonous leeches are described: *piṅgalā*, *śaṅkuvaktrā*, *koṭikābhā*, *mūṣikābhā*, *puṇḍarīkamukhī*, and *śāvarikā*.

v2.c33.139

139 A part of Southern India according to Daḷhaṇa.

v2.c33.140

140 A mountainous region about the river Narmadā according to Daḷhaṇa.

v2.c33.141

143 Leeches that have sucked blood can be emptied because they store the blood in a crop (see K.H. Mann, 1962: 10).

v2.c33.142

144 Cakra and Daḷhaṇa mention that some do not read the passage about *indramada*, a disease nowhere described. In spite of this claim of both commentators, *indramada* is well known as the term for fever in fishes (see G.J. Meulenbeld, 1990: 1).

v2.c33.143

148 Menstrual discharge in this context.

v2.c33.144

149 See the elaborate comments of Cakra and Daḷhaṇa. Cf. Ca.Ci.15.16. A disagreeing tradition is found in the *Skandapurāṇa* (1.2.50.49–51; see G.V. Tagare, 1993: 466), which enumerates a chain of twelve transformational products of the *rasa*.

v2.c33.145

150 I.e., five days.

v2.c33.146

¹⁵³ Compare Su.Sū.21.17. Normal blood has the hue of the *indragopaka* (the synonym *surendragopa* is employed at Su.Sū.25.36). The small animal called thus is already known to the *Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad* (2.3.6). See on the meaning of *indragopa*: S. Lienhard (1978); S. Mahdihassan (1953); M. Roy (1978): 92–93. S. Mahdihassan identifies it as a tick or

v2.c33.147

mite, called *Trombidium grandissimum*. Indragopa is often translated by cochineal (see, e.g.: A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith, 1967; MW), but this substance consists of the dried bodies of the females of an insect (*Dactylopius* species, in particular *D. coccus* Costa), which was introduced into India from South America about A.D. 1800. See on cochineal: E. Balfour (1967): I, 756–760; Encyclopaedia Britannica, s.v. cochineal; Nadkarni II, 155–156; G. Watt II, 398–409; WIRM II, 258–260. Compare the lac insect.

v2.c33.148

154 See on bloodletting: D.G. Thatte, S.P. Tiwari and G.P. Tiwari (1981). See on bloodletting in classical antiquity: I. Bloch (1902): 422–423; A. Castiglioni (1954); R. Fuchs (1902): 247–248.

v2.c33.149

156 Bloodletting by other means has been described in Su.Sū.13.

v2.c33.150

157 Called *pracchana* in the *Carakasaṃhitā* (Sū.11.55; Ci.7.40; 23.39; 25.55).

v2.c33.151

158 Cf. Ca.Ni.7.8; Ci.7.40; 13.77; 23.63. See on venepuncture: D.G. Thatte, S.P. Tiwari and G.P. Tiwari (1981). See on phlebotomy in Graeco-Roman medicine: J.S. Milne (1907): 32–36. See on this subject in Islamic medicine: Albucasis II.95 (M.S. Spink and G.L. Lewis, 1973: 624–655).

v2.c33.152

166 The treatment consists of countermeasures which are thought to be svayonivardhana, i.e., which increase the depleted doṣa because they have the same source (yoni). See the commentaries. Cf. Ca.Sū.1.44–45 and Cakra's comments.

v2.c33.153

169 See the commentaries on the actual differences between ojas and bala. Compare on bala: Ca.Sū.11.36; Cakra ad Ca.Ci.15.3; Su.Śā.3.33; Dalhaṇa ad Su.Sū.6.15 and 46.518; A.h.Śā.3.77–78; Candraṭa ad *Cikitsākalikā* 16; Pālakāpya, śalya 6, p.292–293; Toḍara II: 3.359–390.

v2.c33.154

175 The ears should, according to Suśruta, be pierced when the infant is six or seven months of age, which is very young. The commentators are of the opinion that the sixth (Māgha) or seventh (Phālguna) of the new year after the infant's birth is meant, which may be a compromise because the customary age is much later. Cakra refers to the third of fifth year as the usual period, which agrees with the Kātyāyanasūtras, incorporated in the

v2.c33.155

Pāriśiṣṭa (*1.17) of the *Pāraskaragṛhyasūtra* (see A.Kumar, 1994: 89), the only Gṛhyasūtra mentioning the ceremony according to A. Kumar (1994); P.V. Kane (II.1, 196), however, also refers to *Baudhāyanagṛhyaśeṣasūtra* (*1.12.1) and *Vedavyāsasmṛti* (*1.19). Compare on karṇavedha in Indian culture: R.B. Inden and R.W. Nicholas (1977): 59; P.V. Kane II.1, 196, 254–255; J.J. Meyer (1937): II, 64 and III, 222; R.B. Pandey (1969): 102–105; S. Stevenson (1971): 23–24; E. Thurston (1975): 369–376.

First 154 of 800 passages. Read on

Linked texts (54)