A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c42.s5: Contents

A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c42.s5

Language: English

v3.c42.s5.1

The contents of the Bhelasaṃhitā are summarily listed in the middle of the Sūtrasthāna (17.7cd–9ab), and said to consist of a Sūtrasthāna in thirty chapters, a Nidāna-, Vimāna- and Śārīrasthāna in eight chapters, ⁷ an Indriyasthāna in twelve chapters, a Cikitsāsthāna in thirty, a Kalpasthāna in twelve, and, finally, a Siddhisthāna in twelve chapters. This table shows that the arrangement in sections (sthāna) and the number of chapters in each section are exactly the same as in the Carakasaṃhitā.

v3.c42.s5.2

The order of the chapters, however, seems rather arbitrary at places, due to the disorderly condition of the MS. ⁸

v3.c42.s5.3

Preserved, completely or partly, are the following chapters: Sūtrasthāna 4–23 and 25–28; Nidānasthāna 2–8; Vimānasthāna 1 and 3–6; Śārīrasthāna 2–8; Indriyasthāna 1–12; Cikitsāsthāna 1–28; Kalpasthāna 1 and 3–9; Siddhisthāna 1–2 and 4–8. Completely or almost completely extant are Sūtrasthāna 5–19, 22–23 and 25–27; Nidānasthāna 3–5 and 8; Vimānasthāna 4–7; Indriyasthāna 4–12; Cikitsāsthāna 1–2, 8, 17, 25–26 and 28; Kalpasthāna 3–6 and 8; Siddhisthāna 4–7.

v3.c42.s5.4

The Bhelasaṃhitā is more concise than the Carakasaṃhitā and uses simpler language. The verses are in śloka and anuṣṭubh metre and rather monotonous by presenting many repetitions of the same pattern. ⁹ Prose passages are found only in Śārīrasthāna 4–8. ¹⁰ The Sanskrit text is rather often grammatically incorrect. ¹¹

v3.c42.s5.5

The chapters of the Bhelasaṃhitā usually begin in the same way as in the *Carakasaṃhitā*, but they end differently, with the words ity āha bhagavān Ātreyaḥ. Unlike the *Caraka-* and *Suśrutasaṃhitā*, the work has not been revised by some later author. The preserved version, however, differs from an earlier text that once must have been current.

v3.c42.s5.6

The treatise is called after Bhela or Bheḍa,¹² one of the six pupils of Ātreya Punarvasu.¹³ Each of these pupils composed, according to the story related in the *Carakasaṃhitā*,¹⁴ a medical treatise, based on the words of their teacher.¹⁵

v3.c42.s5.7

The *Bhelasaṃhitā* is basically in the form of a dialogue between Ātreya as a teacher and Bhela as a student. The former is also designated as Punarvasu (Sū.25.5), Punarvasu Ātreya (Śā.4.2),¹⁶ Cāndrabhāga (Sū.25.1), Cāndrabhāga Punarvasu (Sū.18.1),¹⁷ and Kṛṣṇātreya (Sū.16.1; Śā.3.9; I.1.14).¹⁸ However, Bhela is not the only person receiving instruction from Ātreya. In the chapter on the detection of poison in food (Sū. 18) it is the royal sage (rājarṣi) Nagnajit¹⁹ who asks Ātreya questions during the latter’s stay in the country of Gāndhāra. Gurdālu Bhekin²⁰ is desirous of information on medical topography (Sū.13), while Suśrotar Medhāvin,²¹ who puts forward his own opinions on the treatment of disorders of the doṣas, is instructed by Ātreya in this subject (Sū.25).

v3.c42.s5.8

In a way similar to what is found in the *Caraka-* and *Suśrutasaṃhitā*, the *Bhelasaṃhitā* presents accounts of discussions among sages on important topics. Subjects of these discussions, which are less elaborate and smaller in number than in the *Carakasaṃhitā*, are the number of the tastes (Sū.12) and embryology (Śā.4). The persons taking part in the deliberations on the tastes are Ātreya, Khaṇḍakāpya, Maitreya, and a number of other sages.²² In both *Bhela-* and *Carakasaṃhitā* the meeting takes place in the Caitraratha forest. In contrast with the *Carakasaṃhitā*, the *Bhelasaṃhitā* does not attribute the views expounded to particular individuals. Nevertheless, as in the *Carakasaṃhitā*, seven different opinions are referred to, which are finally rejected by Ātreya, who proclaims the correct doctrine on the tastes.

v3.c42.s5.9

The theories refuted by Ātreya claim that the tastes are one, two, three, four, five, six, or seven in number. The report in the *Bhelasaṃhitā* differs in some details from the one found in the *Carakasaṃhitā*.²³

v3.c42.s5.10

The discussion on the question which part of the embryo develops first is also found in the *Caraka-* and *Suśrutasaṃhitā*.²⁴ The account of the *Suśrutasaṃhitā* disagrees with the versions of *Bhela-* and *Carakasaṃhitā*, which are rather similar in the composition of the assembly²⁵ and the views expressed.²⁶

v3.c42.s5.11

Authorities mentioned on other occasions in the *Bhelasaṃhitā* are Bhadraśaunaka (Sū.9.7),²⁷ Bharadvāja (Śā.4.32; 6.1–2),²⁸ and Śaunaka (Sū.9.9; Śā.4.32;²⁹ 8.3³⁰).

v3.c42.s5.12

The Sūtrasthāna of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* is in its general outlines of the same character as the corresponding section of the *Carakasaṃhitā*, though distinctive features are present and the order of the chapters does not fully agree. Some chapters bear the same names as in the *Carakasaṃhitā*: Sū.6 (navegāndhāraṇīya; = Ca.Sū.7),³¹ 7 (indriyopakramaṇīya; = 8), 8 (cikitsāprābhṛtiya; = 16), 15 (tisraisaṇīya; = 11) 16 (vātakalākaliya; = 12), 17 (daśaprāṇāyataniya; = 29), 19 (vidhiśoṇīya; = 24), 20 (arthedaśamūlīya; = 30: arthedaśamahāmūlīya), 22 (sveda; = 14), 26 (aṣṭodariya; = 19), 27 (annapānavidhīya; = 27: annapānavidhi).³² Other chapters

v3.c42.s5.13

correspond more or less to chapters of the *Carakasaṃhitā* with different names: Sū.5 (atyāśitīya) and Ca.Sū.5 (catuṣpādabhisagjītīya), Sū.9 (catuṣpādabhisagjītīya) and Ca.Sū.9 (khuḍḍākacatuspāda), 11 (samaśayanaparidhanīya) and Ca.Sū.28 (vividhāśitapītīya), 12 (ātreyakhaṇḍakāpyīya) and Ca.Sū.26 (ātreyabhadrakāpyīya), 25 (ṛtuvibhāgīya) and Ca.Sū.6 (tasyāśitīya). Chapters resembling Sū.10 (āmapradoṣīya), 13 (janapadavibhaktiya), 18 (annarakṣiya), and 23 (gāḍhapurīṣīya) are absent from the Sūtrasthāna of the *Carakasaṃhitā*.³³

v3.c42.s5.14

The Nidānasthāna describes nearly the same eight major diseases as the Nidāna section of the *Carakasaṃhitā*, in a slightly different order. However, one exception should be noticed: kāsa has taken the place of raktapitta, though the latter disorder belongs to the eight diseases dealt with in the Cikitsāsthāna, while chapter twenty of that section is concerned with the treatment of kāsa. In this regard it is very remarkable that the Tuyoq fragment of Bhela, already referred to, reads raktapitta instead of kāsa in the last lines of chapter eight of the Nidānasthāna, where the diseases described in that section are listed. This made Lüders³⁴ infer that the Tuyoq fragment represents a more original state of the text than the Tanjore MS.

v3.c42.s5.15

The Vimānasthāna of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* differs considerably from the same section of the *Carakasaṃhitā*. Two of its chapters bear titles which are identical: Vi.1 (rasavimāna; = Ca.Vi.1) and 5 (vyādhitarūpīya; = Ca.Vi.7). The subject matter of chapter three, the title of which has not been preserved, and of chapter four (rogaprakṛtiviniścaya) is related to that of chapter six (rogānika) of Caraka’s Vimānasthāna. Chapter six (ṛtuvimāna) is concerned with seasonal regimen (ṛtucaryā), described in chapter six (tasyāśitīya) of the Sūtrasthāna of the *Carakasaṃhitā*.³⁵

v3.c42.s5.16

Six of the eight chapters of the Śārīrasthāna bear names which are identical with or closely similar to those of corresponding chapters of the *Carakasaṃhitā*: 3 (asamānagotrīya; = Ca.Śā.2: atulyagotrīya), 4 (puruṣanicaya: = 5: puruṣavicaya), 5 (śarīranicaya; = 6: śarīravicaya), 6 (khuḍḍikā garbhāvakrāntiḥ; = 3), 7 (śarīrasaṃkhyā; = 7), and 8 (jātisūtrīya; = 8).

v3.c42.s5.17

Some chapters of the Indriyasthāna find their counterparts in Caraka’s Indriyasthāna: 4 (sadyomaraṇīya; = Ca.I.10), 5 (yasyaśyāvivīya; = 9: yasyaśyāvanimittīya), 6 (pūrarūpīya; = 5), 7 (indriyānīka; = 4),³⁶ 9 (gomayacūrṇa; = 12: gomayacūrṇīya), 11 (puṣpīya; = 2: puspitaka), and 12 (avākcitīya; = 8: avākśirasīya).

v3.c42.s5.18

The Kalpasthāna is comparable to the same section of the *Carakasaṃhitā*, the order of the chapters excepted.

v3.c42.s5.19

The Siddhisthāna has only one chapter with a title that is also found in the *Carakasaṃhitā*: 7 (phalamātrāsiddhi; = Ca.Si.11).

v3.c42.s5.20

The section that differs from the *Carakasaṃhitā* is the Cikitsāsthāna. Caraka’s chapters on rasāyana and vājīkaraṇa (Ci.1–2) are absent. Chapters one to nine correspond to chapters three to ten of Caraka’s Cikitsāsthāna, although their order is not completely identical; moreover, the *Bhelasaṃhitā* devotes two chapters to the treatment of fevers.

v3.c42.s5.21

Chapters of the Cikitsāsthāna of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* that are similar to chapters of the *Carakasaṃhitā*: 10 (atisāra; Ca.Ci.19), 11 (grahaṇī; Ca.Ci.15), 13 (udara; Ca. Ci.13), 14 (ūrustambha; Ca.Ci.27), 16 (arśas; Ca.Ci.14), 17 (śvayathu; Ca.Ci.12), 20 (kāsa; Ca.Ci.18), 24 (vātavyādhi; Ca.Ci.28), 27 (vraṇa; Ca.Ci.25), and 28 (pānātyaya; Ca.Ci.24).

v3.c42.s5.22

A separate chapter on kṣatakṣīṇa (Ca.Ci.11) does not form part of the *Bhelasaṃhitā*, where this disorder is merely mentioned in passing (Ci.4.73; 24.29; Sū.7.50; 8.23). A separate chapter on mūtraḳcchra (Ci.12) is absent from the *Carakasaṃhitā*, which deals with this disorder in the trimarmīya chapter (Ci.26). The treatment of visarpa and vātaśoṇita is described in one chapter in the *Bhelasaṃhitā* Ci.15), in two chapters (Ci.21 and 29) in the *Carakasaṃhitā*. The *Bhelasaṃhitā* does not present a separate chapter on udāvarta, as the *Bhelasaṃhitā* does (Ci.18); Caraka describes it in the trimarmīya chapter (Ci.26). The same applies to hṛdroga (Bhela Ci.19; Ca.Ci.26). The chapter of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* on śīroroga, karṇaroga, kaṇṭharoga and arocaka (Ci.21) has no parallel in the *Carakasaṃhitā*, which deals with these diseases in a number of chapters (Sū.17 and Sū.9: śīroroga; Ci.26: karṇaroga, kaṇṭharoga and arocaka (Ci.21) ṇṭharoga mentioned; Ci.26: The *Bhelasaṃhitā* has a separate chapter on ajīrṇa (Ci.22), described in the chapter on grahaṇī (Ci.15) of the *Carakasaṃhitā*. Nidrā (sleep) and mūrcḥā (fainting) are the subjects of one chapter (Ci.23); the *Carakasaṃhitā* deals with sleep and its disorders, as well as with mūrcḥā, in the Sūtrasthāna (Sū.21 and 24). The subjects of the chapter on plīhan and halimaka (Ci.25) are distributed over two chapters of the *Carakasaṃhitā* (Ci.13, the chapter on udara, and 16, the chapter on pāṇḍuroga). 38 Apatantraka, the subject of a separate chapter in the *Bhelasaṃhitā* (Ci.26), 38 is discussed in the Siddhisthāna (9.14) of the *Carakasaṃhitā*.

v3.c42.s5.23

Diseases discussed in the Cikitsāsthāna of the *Carakasaṃhitā* which are not dealt with in the corresponding section of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* are pāṇḍuroga (Ca.Ci.16), 39 hikkā and śvāsa (Ca.Ci.17), 40 chardi (Ca.Ci.20), 41 tṛṣṇā (Ca.Ci.22), 42 viṣa (Ca.Ci.23), 43 and yonivyāpad (Ci.30). 44

v3.c42.s5.24

One of the chapters of the Sūtrasthāna (Sū.26: aṣṭodarīya) gives an idea of the contents of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* in its original, form. It enumerates, exactly like the corresponding chapter of the *Carakasaṃhitā* (Sū.19: aṣṭodarīya), the number of varieties of a long series of diseases. 45 Some diseases occurring in this list and not described in the preserved parts of the *Bhelasaṃhitā* are arbuda, bhagandara, ślīpada, upadaṃśa, and vidradhi.

v3.c42.s5.25

The *Bhelasaṃhitā* is, as already mentioned, much more concise than the *Carakasaṃhitā*. The digressions on philosophical and religious subjects, which are characteristic of the *Carakasaṃhitā*, are absent from it. In spite of the large number of differences between the two works, the agreements between the treatises of Bhela and Caraka are close enough to warrant the conclusion that both belong to the Ātreya school of medicine.

v3.c42.s5.26

Authors and works quoting from or referring to Bhela 46 are: Anantakumāra, 47 the *Ārogyāmṛtabindu*, Aruṇadatta, 48 the *Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayaratnākara*, 49 the *Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha*, 50 Bhāvamiśra, 51 the *Bhesajjamañjūsāsannaya*, the Bower MS, 52 the *Bṛhadraśarājasundara*, 53 the *Bṛhaṇṇighaṇṭuratnākara*, Cakrapāṇidatta, 54 Candranandana, 55 Candraṭa, 56 the *Carakasaṃhitā*, Caube Kyākhūbādāsa's *Ajīrṇatimirabhāskara*, Dalhaṇa, 58 Dīpacandra's *Laṅghanapathyaniṛṇaya*, Gaṅgādhara, 59 Gayadāsa, 60 Gopāladāsa's *Cikitsāmṛta*, Gulrājśarmamiśra, 61 Harṣakīrti, Hemādri, 62 Jayaratna's *Jvara-

v3.c42.s5.27

parājaya, Jejjata, 63 the *Jvaracikitsā*, the *Jvarasamuccaya*, 64 the Kairalī commentary on the *Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā*, 65 Kalyāṇa's *Bālatantra*, 66 Karaṇdīkar's *Nidānadīpikā*, 67 Kāśirāma, 68 the *Kāśyapasaṃhitā*, the *Lakṣmaṇotsava*, Lolimbarāja, 69 the *Mādhavacikitsā*, 70 Mānakavi, 71 the *Nāḍīcakra*, 72 Nīlamegha, 73 Niścalakara, 74 Nṛsiṃhakavi, 75 the *Rasayogasāgara*, the *Rasendrasambhava*, *Rūpanayana*, 76 the *Sahasrayoga*, 77 Śivadāsasena, 78 Sodhala, 79 the *Tantrasāra*, 80 Tisaṭa, 81 Ṭoḍara, 82 Trimalla, 83 Vācaspati, 84 Vāgbhaṭa, 85 Vijayarakṣita, 86 the *Virasimhāvaloka*, 87 the *Yogaratnākara*, 88 Yogendranātha, 89 and Yogīndranāthasena. 90 Bhela is also quoted by the unknown author of the interpolated portions of Niścalakara's *Ratnaprabhā*. 91

v3.c42.s5.28

The *Bhelasaṃhitā* was one of the sources of the *Ma'din al-Shifā'*. 92 Some scholars claim that Bhela's treatise was known to Ibn Sīnā. 93

v3.c42.s5.29

The Tibetan tradition is acquainted with Bhela as a medical authority under the name of Gziṅs-can. 94