A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c33.497

v2.c33.497

22 P. Rāya (1956): 61. 23 Compare: Viśvāmitra. 24 Su.Ci.2.3; U.66.4ab. Suśruta is called Vaiśvāmitra at Su.Ni.7.3, he is referred to as the son of the brahmaṛṣi, i.e., Viśvāmitra; both Gayadāsa and Dalhaṇa remark in their comments on this passage that Viśvāmitra, originally a rājarṣi (royal sage, i.e., a kṣatriya), became a brahmaṛṣi (i.e., a brāhmaṇa) through his austerities (tapas). See also Dalhaṇa ad Su.U.66.3–4ab. 25 Garuḍapurāṇa 145.42. 26 Bhāvaprakāśa I.1.76–80. Jyotir Mitra (1976: 161), who is convinced that Suśruta was a son of Viśvāmitra, remarks that the latter's hermitage was located at the modern Buxer in Bihar, on the banks of the Ganges, 100 kms. away from Vārāṇasī, which made it quite convenient for Suśruta to come down to Vārāṇasī, where Divodāsa Dhanvantari resided. G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 164) accepted the tradition recorded in the Bhāvaprakāśa, but he thought that Viśvāmitra lived in Kānyakubja. 27 Examples are G. Mukhopadhyaya (HIM III, 576–577) and R. Śāstrī (1977: 348). This view was even adopted by F. Hessler (*1852; *1855; see G. Liétard, 1883: 640, and A. Weber, 1983: II, 87–88), who translated the Suśrutasaṃhitā into Latin, and also wrote a number of essays on Indian medicine in German (1883; 1884; 1887a; 1887b; 1888). 28 Examples are G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 164), K.R. Srikanta Murthy (1992a: 198), Sūramcandra (1978: I, 255). The Viśvāmitra of the Rāmāyaṇa is not Suśruta's father according to P.V. Sharma (AVI 53) and V. Śukla (1977: I, 73). 29 Rāmāyaṇa, Bālakāṇḍa 27 (ed. Bombay). 30 Rāmāyaṇa, Bālakāṇḍa 51 (ed. Bombay). Dalhaṇa refers to Viśvāmitra, Suśruta's father, as the king of Gādhi (ad Su.U.66.3–4ab). Bhāvamiśra had the same Viśvāmitra in mind (see Bhāvaprakāśa I.1.76–80). 31 Atrideva (ABI 484–485) expressed as his opinion that the Viśvāmitra, father of Suśruta, found in the Mahābhārata, is the proper candidate, not the one mentioned in the stories about Triśaṅku and Hariścandra (see on these stories: Vettam Mani). 32 See HIM III, 567–577; Vṛddhatrayī 163–164. 33 Su.Ka.8.90–93. Dalhaṇa refrains from identifying this Viśvāmitra, which is remarkable; he is doubtful about the genuineness of the verses and quotes an alternative reading. 34 See A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith (1967) on the Vedic Viśvāmitra and Vasiṣṭha. 35 See Hopkins and Vettam Mani. The enmity between Viśvāmitra and Vasiṣṭha is a well known topic. 36 It should be recalled that Suśruta is the son of a brahmaṛṣi (see Su.Ni.7.3 and the comments of Gayadāsa and Dalhaṇa). 37 Dalhaṇa is acquainted with the Viśvāmitra who, through tapas, acquired the status of a brāhmaṇa; he refers to this development when explaining (ad Su.U.66.3–4ab) that the epithet śrīmant, given to Suśruta, means that he was endowed with both rājaśrī and brāhmī śrī, characteristics of kṣatriyas and brāhmaṇas respectively. Compare the comments of Gayadāsa and Dalhaṇa ad Ni.7.3. 38 This opinion was expressed by Hemarājaśarman in his upodghāta (32) to the Kāśyapasamhitā; he suggested that the reference to Kṛṣṇa and Rāma (Su.Ci.30.27) is in support of his view. 39 AVI 53. Ramachandra Rao (1985): 94. Some Indian authors emphasize that Viśvāmitra is a gotra name, which implies that any descendant of him may be called thus (see HIM III, 576).