Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c33.570

A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c33.570

Language
English

v2.c33.570

248 The reasons for the pre-eminent position of surgery among medical disciplines are presented at Su.Sū.1.17–18. 249 See Su.Sū.1.7. In contrast with the Carakasaṃhitā (Ca.Sū.30), the Suśrutasaṃhitā describes the scope of each of these divisions. Compare Su.Sū.3.44–45. 250 The other diseases belonging to śālākya are treated in the Uttaratantra. See Su.Sū.3.44–45, where śālākya in general is said to form part of that section. Neither Gayadāsa nor Ḍalhaṇa elucidate why mukharogas are described in the Nidānasthāna. 251 See Gayadāsa and Ḍalhaṇa ad Su.Ni.13.1–2. 252 See Su.Sū.3.45. 253 See Su.Sū.3.45. 254 See Su.Sū.3.44. 255 Yādavaśarman’s edition (cc) gives a number of variants from MSS in its footnotes. 256 See, for instance, Su.Sū.2.5; 10.4; 12.7; 45.5; Ni.8.4; Śā.6.17; 10.4; U.40.7. 257 See Su.Śā.5.18. 258 See, for example, Su.Śā.3.32. 259 See the notes to Su.Sū.7 and 8. 260 Su.Sū.36.8. 261 Sū.Śā.5.41. 262 See G.J. Meulenbeld (1974): Appendix one. 263 Untraceable are, for instance, Yogaratnasamuccaya 8, prose passage between 206 and 207; 15.153–155ab. The quotations from Sauśruta also present a large number of variants; they are not from a Sauśrutatantra, but from some version of the Suśrutasaṃhitā, because many of them form part of the Uttaratantra. 264 See Ṭoḍara III: 3.60, 84–85, 93, 123, 133–134, 217, 219–220, 227–228, 246, 257–258; 4.745 and 1069. 265 Ṭoḍara III: 3.37–38 is related to Su.U.39.97–99ab, 3.209–210 to Su.U.39.110cd–112ab, 4.751 and 796 to Su.U.39.54. 266 Compare Ṭoḍara III: 3.253 and Ca.Ci.3.308cd–309ab. 267 Compare Ṭoḍara III: 4.1226–1227 (= Cikitsākalikā 119) and Su.U.39.218cd–221ab. 268 Ṭoḍara III: 3.9–10 (from Ātreya) = Su.U.39.11cd–13ab. 269 See CC I, 730. 270 Ad Triśatī 213. 271 These fevers are dealt with in Su.U.39. 272 The often expressed view that all the quotations from Vṛddhasuśruta are absent from the Suśrutasaṃhitā is incorrect. This unfounded opinion was, for example, advanced by Ambikādatta (Prākkathan, 13, to ed. hh), Gaṇanāthasena (1924: I, 5), Hemarājaśarman (upodghāta, 37, to the Kāśyapasaṃhitā), K.R. Srikanta Murthy (1992a: 199–200), and Yādavaśarman (upodghāta, 15, to ed. cc). 273 Āyurvedābdhisāra 117–118 (cf. Su.U.39.52–53); 2627c-f (on śūla; cf. Su.U.42.81). 274 Bhāvaprakāśanighaṇṭu, vārivarga 65–67 (also quoted in Bhojanakutūhala, Bṛhadyogataraṅgiṇī, Śāligrāmanighaṇṭu, Ṭoḍara’s Āyurvedasaukhya). 275 Bhāvaprakāśa, cikitsā 1.78. 276 Bhojanakutūhala I, p.186. 277 Bṛhadyogataraṅgiṇī 20.53–55. 278 Ad Su.Ci.31.8; 36.23cd; 37.8–14; 38.9–95; U.24.16cd–17. 279 Jvaranirṇaya 4.102: Vṛddhasuśruta is said to describe the fevers called eṇidāha, etc.; these fevers are absent from the Suśrutasaṃhitā.

Cites (2)