A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c35.18.4

v2.c35.18.4

62 The same as Naigameṣa in the Suśrutasaṃhitā. Pitṛgraha is mentioned again at A.h.U.4.41–42. 63 Some editions read Dṛṣṭipūtanā; this reading is accepted by Śivadāsa and the author of the Kairalī. Adṛṣṭipūtanā is the same as Andhapūtanā (see A.h.U.3.23cd–25). 64 Also called Mukhamanditā (see A.h.U.3.26–27ab). 65 Not mentioned in the Suśrutasaṃhitā. 66 Cf. Su.U.27.4–5. 67 Cf. Su.Śā.10.51. 68 Cf. Su.U.27.8. See A. Kumar (1994: 292–293) on the differences between the descriptions of Suśruta and Vāgbhaṭa; A. Kumar interprets the syndrome of the Hṛdaya as the encephalitic form of poliomyelitis. See on the compound baddhamuṣṭiśakṛt: J. Filliozat (1937): 48. 69 Śivadāsa says that Skandāpasmāra is the same as Viśākha. Cf. Su.U.27.9. 70 Cf. Su.U.27.16. 71 I.e., Śvagraha. A. Kumar (1994: 299) regards the symptoms as very close to rabies. 72 See A. Kumar (1994: 298–299), who regards the disorder as a respiratory infection with parenteral diarrhoea. 73 Cf. Su.U.27.10. 74 Cf. Su.U.27.12. 75 Cf. Su.U.27.14. 76 Cf. Su.U.27.13. 77 Cf. Su.U.27.15. 78 Cf. Su.U.27.11. 79 A. Kumar (1994: 301) suggests that the symptoms resemble those of abdominal tuberculosis. 80 Cf. Ca.Ni.7.15; Su.U.60.5. 81 Cf. Ca.Ni.7.15; Ci.9.22–23.