A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c37.2.4

v2.c37.2.4

31 The form Vāhaṭa may be due to the influence of Prakrit; Vāhaṭa may be due to the pronunciation of intervocalic ṭ in Tamil; Bāhaṭa is, however, also the form found in Merutuṅga’s Prabandhacintāmaṇi. The variant Bābhaṭa seems to be restricted to Bengal. A text intermediate between Samgraha and Hṛdaya has, partially, been *published as Bābhaṭa in Calcutta in 1873. 32 Hilgenberg and Kirfel (1941): XLVII. 33 C. Vogel (1965: 45) bases his reasoning on the Tibetan translation of Vāgbhaṭa’s name, Pha-khol (or, inaccurately, Pha-gol), which presupposes a vernacular form equivalent to Vāgbhaṭṭa; the Mongolian form, Ečige-yin boyol, i.e., slave of one’s father, is in support of this view. See on Vāgbhaṭa’s Tibetan name also: Sh. Bira (1980). 34 P.V. Sharma (1968): 303. 35 Atrideva (ABI 215–216) says that it became usual for a son to be given the name of his grandfather in the Gupta period. 36 G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 265) admits never to have set eyes on this Vaidyakanighaṇṭu. 37 See Kane I.2, 718: Aṣārka names a Vāgbhaṭasmṛtisamgraha and quotes a few verses from it. Compare CC II, 132. 38 Vṛddhatrayī 44–45, 263–267, 290–291. G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 465) also mentions another grammarian called Vāgbhaṭācārya, referred to in Jagadīśa’s Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā (see on this work: B.K. Matilal, 1975). This grammarian called Vāgbhaṭa is an altogether different person according to Atrideva (ABI 216–217). See for the quotation from Bhartṛhari: ABI 217; Vṛddhatrayī 290.