A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c33.571

v2.c33.571

280 *Jvaratimirabhāskara* 9.36cd–37ab (cf. Su.U.39.55). 281 Ad *Cakradatta*, vātavyādhi 3–5 (see Su.Ci.31.7; compare Daḷhaṇa ad Su.Ci.4.3–4); śūla 1 and 59–60 (compare Su.U.42.112–115 and Daḷhaṇa’s comments); gulma 17; sneha 13–14. 282 *Śālīgrāmanighanṭu* 979. 283 Ad *Siddhāntanidāna* 4.31. 284 Ad Ca.Sū.13.29–40 (compare Niścala’s quotation ad *Cakradatta*, sneha 13–14). 285 Ad *Cakradatta*, arśas 107–110; vātavyādhi 88–92 (compare Niścala ad *vātavyādhi* 81–85). 286 Ad A.h.Sū.5.3–4ab. 287 Ad *Siddhayoga* 1.55; 5.64–67 (compare Śivadāsa ad *Cakradatta*, arśas 107–110). 288 Ṭoḍara I: 14.58–60; III: 3.39–40 (40cd = Su.U.39.100ab), 266 (cf. Su.U.39.295cd–296ab); 4.519–520, 739–740, 748–749 (= Su.U.39.53, 52cd, 52ab), 754, 755 (= Su.U.39.55), 756, 757–758ab, 758cd–759 (= Su.U.39.71–72ab), 760–761 (cf. Su.U.39.74cd–75ab); V: 11. 283 and 821; IX: 1.200 (= Su.Sū.46.344cd–345ab), 245, 293–294, 319, 341, 397–398. 289 Ad *Mādhavanidāna* 2.34–36ab (= Su.U.39.53, 54, 51, 52cd, 52ab) and 42–47; 26.1. 290 Ad *Triśatī* 172–173. 291 Ad *Mādhavanidāna* 2.4–7, 26–30ab (see Daḷhaṇa ad Su.U.39.42), 37–38 (= Su.U.39.53, 52cd, 52ab), 39 (see Su.U.39.55), 42–47; 26.1 (= Su.U.42.81). 292 Ad Su.U.66.7cd–9a: Daḷhaṇa enumerates, in a long series of verses, the diseases dealt with in the six sections of the *Suśrutasaṃhitā*. 293 These sūtras can, according to Cakra and Daḷhaṇa (ad Su.Sū.1.1–2), be recognized by the use of the perfect tense (litprayoga). Examples are Su.Sū.1.1–2, 2.1–2, etc. Hariprapanna (Intr., 70, to the *Rasayogasāgara*) remarks that these sūtras, newly added, are absent from many old MSS, and are not found in Kṛpā Rām’s ed. (*m* of the *Suśrutasaṃhitā*. G. Häldār (*Vṛddhatrayī* 181–182) is critical of Daḷhaṇa and makes many more statements belong to the group of *pratisamskartṛsūtras*. 294 See Su.Sū.1.6. Cf. Ca.Sū.30.21. 295 See Su.Sū.19.27. 296 See: Dhanvantari. 297 See Su.Sū.1.20. 298 The same line of transmission is found in the *Carakasamhitā* (Sū.1.4–5), where Bharadvāja occupies a position similar to that of Kāśirāja Divodāsa in the *Suśrutasaṃhitā*. 299 See, for example, the story on the enmity between Vasiṣṭha and Viśvāmitra (Su.Ka.8.90–93). Compare Hoernle’s notes to his translation of Su.Sū.1.17. 300 See N.H. Keswani (1974): 12. 301 Su.Sū.34.8cd–9ab. See D. Chattopadhyaya (1979): 35–38. 302 See Su.Sū.34.17cd–18ab. 303 See Su.U.1.4cd–8ab. 304 It is remarkable that in sections of the *Suśrutasaṃhitā* preceding the Uttaratantra (Ni.16 and Ci.22) Bhoja’s number of sixty-five diseases of the oral cavity (mukharoga) is preferred to Videha’s number of sixty-four. 305 One of these scholars is P.V. Sharma (AVI 99–100; 1970a: 72–73; Intr., IX, to the 4th ed. of ed. cc of the *Suśrutasaṃhitā*). 306 Nimi is identical with the king of Videha, whose treatise is mentioned as one of the sources of the Uttaratantra (Su.U.1.5ab). He may belong to the ophthalmologists (nayanacintaka) of Su.U.7.4. 307 The opposite view may even be defended, for Cakrapāṇi declares (ad Ca.Ci.30.289–290) that Dṛḍhabala had recourse to the *Suśrutasaṃhitā* in completing Caraka’s work. This