A History of Indian Medical Literature v2.c38.71

v2.c38.71

Cakradatta, galagaṇḍa 3–4 also forms part of the Mādhavacikitsā (galagaṇḍa 2) and Vṛnda’s Siddhayoga (41.4–5); galagaṇḍa 31 = Mādhavacikitsā, galagaṇḍa 10; galagaṇḍa 35 = Siddhayoga 41.55 = Yogaratnasamuccaya 272.80; mukharoga 88 = Mādhavacikitsā, mukharoga 2ab = Siddhayoga 58.79; mukharoga 97 = Mādhavacikitsā, mukharoga 24; mukharoga 97–98 = Siddhayoga 58.86–87; mukharoga 111–112 = Siddhayoga 58.99–100; nāsāroga 2–3 = Siddhayoga 60.2–3. 202 Indu cites (ad A.s.Ka.8.17) the Cākṣuṣeṇasaṃhitā. 203 Practically all the quotations are in verse. Proṣe passages are found in Ṭoḍara’s Āyurvedasaukhya (II: 2.206–209: a description of the constitutions; a closely related parallel in verse occurs in Candraṭa’s commentary on Cikitsākalikā 16) and Niścala’s Ratnaprabhā (ad Cakradatta, mukharoga 1 and 9; sneha 1). 204 G. Hāldār does not call him a śalakya specialist, but an ancient āyurvedācārya (Vṛddhatrayī, nāmasūcī 25). 205 Candraṭa ad Cikitsākalikā 283. Indu ad A.s.Ka.8.17. 206 Candraṭa ad Cikitsākalikā 80, 81, 85. Ḍalhaṇa ad Su.Ci.33.7. Niścala ad Cakradatta, sneha 1 and 6; sveda 1, 10, 11. 207 See the recipes in the Yogaratnasamuccaya; Candraṭa ad Cikitsākalikā 303–304; several quotations of Niścala. 208 Candraṭa ad Cikitsākalikā 16. Ṭoḍara II: 2.175–184. 209 Ṭoḍara II: 2.206–209. 210 Candraṭa ad Cikitsākalikā 16. 211 Candraṭa ad Cikitsākalikā 16: Cākṣuṣeṇa distinguished four types of sātmya. 212 Niścala ad Cakradatta, svarabheda 13. 213 Niścala ad Cakradatta, vātavyādhi 81–85; sneha 1. 214 Niścala ad Cakradatta, svarabheda 13. 215 The subject is discussed by Candraṭa (ad Cikitsākalikā 354–355), Ḍalhaṇa (ad Su.U.3.21 and 22), Śivadāsasena (ad Cakradatta, netraroga 45–46 and 229), and Śrīkaṇṭhadatta (ad Mādhavanidāna 59.88). 216 Ad Kālidāsa’s Raghuvamśa 5.50. 217 Sūramcandra I, 233–234. 218 NCC: not recorded. Sūramcandra I, 268. Some MSS have Dāraka instead of Dāruka. See on persons called Dāruka in general: Vettam Mani 203. 219 Ad Ca.Ci.3.197–200ab. 220 See Aruṇadatta ad A.h.Sū.5.55–56: a quotation from Pānaka (Dāraka)’s Āyurvedāvatāra on the properties of sesamum oil; Śā.3.81: a quotation from Caraka (variants Dāraka and Dāruka), not to be found in the Carakasaṃhitā, on the indeterminable quantity of vāyu in the human body. Aruṇa’s first quotation is also found in Śrīdāsa’s comment ad A.h.Sū. 5.55, where it is said to be from Dākara’s Āyurvedāvatāra; a second verse from the same work, absent from Aruṇa’s Sarvāṅgasundarī, and concerned with the relationship between the doṣas and the mahābhūtas, is cited ad Śā.3.7–8ab. 221 Hemarājaśarman (Sanskrit upodghāta to the Kāśyapasaṃhitā, 50) is doubtful. S.V. Sharma (1963) accepts the identity, till evidence is found against it. Sūramcandra (I, 268) regards the two as separate. S.K. Mishra (1992: 313) refers to the Dāruvāha- or Dārukasaṃhitā as a treatise on kāyacikitsā. 222 See Hopkins. 223 H.H. Wilson’s transl. of the Viṣṇupurāṇa, 5.37. Vettam Mani 203. 224 CC and NCC: not recorded. 225 Sū.25.3. 226 Sū.27.3. 227 Ad A.h.Sū.5.20cd–21; Śā.1.5.