Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c43: Part 7

A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c43

Language
English

Contents

Part 7

v3.c43.1

The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu

v3.c43.2

Contents

v3.c43.3

The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu,¹ a treatise in 408 verses, is, as its name implies, related to Vāgbhaṭa's works. It belongs to Vāhaṭācārya's Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā according to the colophon of one of its MSS,² though its introductory verse states that it is concerned with the drugs mentioned in the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha. Actually, the first part of the work (verses 2–201) describes groups of drugs found in both treatises by Vāgbhaṭa, as is also indicated in one verse of the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu,³ for it is based on the twenty-five groups of chapter fifteen of the Sūtrasthāna of the Aṣṭāṅgahṛdaya and chapter sixteen of the same section of the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha,⁴ to which one group has been added, making a total of twenty-six. This extra group, the pippalyādigana,⁵ inserted as number three of the series, is also found in the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha, but at the end, in prose, and worded quite differently.⁶ The viratarādigana (103–112), on the other hand, has been taken from the Aṣṭāṅgahṛdaya, not from the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha, where the names of the drugs composing it are different.

v3.c43.4

The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu, after quoting one of Vāgbhaṭa's gaṇas, proceeds with a string of synonyms of each of the drugs composing the group. A significant feature is that the author coined new synonyms for each of these drugs, in order to arrive at a clear characterization.⁷ In a few cases a member of a gaṇa has been suppressed.⁸

v3.c43.5

This first section of the work is followed by a second, heterogeneous one, called viprakīrṇa, about various medicinal plants, vegetables and fruits (203–286), inorganic substances (287–311ab), poisons (311cd–312), aquatic plants (313–317ab), flowers (317cd–322), liquids, dairy produce, products of the sugarcane, and oils (323–328ab), fermented drinks (328cd–332ab), cow's urine and cow dung (332cd), cereals, pulse and sesamum (333–340), technical terms denoting groups of drugs, such as triphalā, etc. (341–342), names for 'drug' (343ab), animals (343cd–372), the dhātus and doṣas (373–378ab), various terms (378cd–379), the earth, sun, planets and some related terms (380–391ab), deities (391cd–400), terms relating to plants (401–404), and terms relating to medicine in general (405–406). The treatise ends with two verses dedicated to Dhanvantari and the Aśvins.

v3.c43.6

The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu is quoted in Priyavrat Śarmā's auto-commentary on the Dravyaguṇasūtra.

v3.c43.7

The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu may be compared for its structure and contents with the Abhidhānamañjarī and Paryāyaratnamālā.

v3.c43.8

*Special feature* The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu is the first work to mention the medicinal plant called kumārī (278).⁹

v3.c43.9

*The author* The Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu is an anonymous work.¹⁰

v3.c43.10

*Date* As the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu is based on Vāgbhaṭa’s works, it cannot be earlier than the seventh century, which is corroborated by the presence of verses taken from the Amarakoṣa.¹¹ The earliest author to quote from the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu, without naming his source, is, according to P.V. Sharma, Indu in his commentary on the Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā,¹² which would, if correct, establish that the work was in existence in the latter half of the twelfth century.¹³ Aruṇadatta once quotes an ardhaśloka from the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu¹⁴ and often gives synonyms to be found in it,¹⁵ which indicates that it was composed before the middle or latter half of the twelfth century.¹⁶ In P.V. Sharma’s opinion, Vopadeva (second half thirteenth century) was certainly acquainted with several quotations from it which were current in āyurvedic circles in his time, as appears from his Hṛdayadīpakanighaṇṭu, while it was also used by Madanapāla for the composition of his nighaṇṭu, and by Hemacandra for his Nighaṇṭuśeṣa (twelfth century). Finally, P.V. Sharma brings forward that Jejjata appears to have been acquainted with the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu;¹⁷ the corroboration of this assertion would considerably push back the date of the work.

v3.c43.11

As the material adduced by P.V. Sharma in support of his assertions consists merely of series of synonyms which resemble those found in the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu without being identical with them, it is impossible to regard his claims as proved.

v3.c43.12

Specific developments in the field of materia medica concerning the identity of medicinal plants and their synonyms were put to use by P.V. Sharma as a second type of evidence with a view to determine the date of the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu. Though a fruitful approach in itself, the conclusions derived from it remain highly controversial.¹⁸

v3.c43.13

The third type of evidence adduced by P.V. Sharma consists of some words in the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu which may be indicative of its date. These words are harayonī (290) as a synonym of rasendra, i.e., mercury, pārvatībīja (290) as a synonym of abhraka, i.e., mica, both pointing at a rather developed state of rasaśāstra, and pūti (299), i.e., civet, which is also found in the Paryāyaratnamālā (794) and the Siddhayoga (22.79). For the above reasons and in view of the fact that certain drugs introduced in the tenth century or later, such as akarakarā, ahiphena, mastagī and rūmī, as well as pārasīyavavānī, which occurs for the first time in the Siddhayoga, are absent from the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu,¹⁹ P.V. Sharma concludes that the work was written before the ninth century.²⁰ In support of this date he finally tries to demonstrate that Mādhava’s Paryāyaratnamālā, assigned by him to the ninth century, represents a more developed state of knowledge than the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu.²¹ All this evidence, taken together, establishes, in P.V. Sharma’s view, that the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu was probably composed in the eighth century.²²

v3.c43.14

This conclusion is too specific to be endorsed. The facts are in favour of placing

v3.c43.15

the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu in about the same period as Vṛnda’s Siddhayoga and the Paryāyaratnamālā (about A.D. 800–1000).

v3.c43.16

*The Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā*

v3.c43.17

The Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā or Aśvinīsaṃhitā,²³ also called Āśvineyasaṃhitā,²⁴ has partly been preserved.²⁵

v3.c43.18

The Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā is quoted in Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya, Gopāladāsa’s Cikitsāmṛta, Trimalla’s Yogatarangiṇī,²⁶ and in the Yogaratnākara.²⁷ Cakrapāṇidatta borrowed from it according to Niścala.²⁸ The Aśvinikumāramata is referred to by Kāśīrāma in his commentary on the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā;²⁹ the Aśvinīmata is one of the sources of Basava’s Śivatattvaratnākara and the Bheṣajakalpasārasaṃgraha. The Aśvinīsaṃhitā is quoted in the Bheṣajamañjūsāsannaya, by Niścala³⁰ and by Bhāvamiśra.³¹ The Āśvineya is quoted in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya,³² Datta-rāma’s Bṛdhrasarājasundara,³³ Trimalla’s Bṛhadyogatarangiṇī,³⁴ and the Vaidyacintāmaṇi;³⁵ it is referred to in the Ratnākarauṣadhagrantha and Revaṇasiddha’s Virabhāṭṭīya. An Aśvinasaṃhitā is quoted in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya,³⁶ by Bhāvamiśra,³⁷ Candraṭa,³⁸ Soḍhala, and Śrīdāsapaṇḍita.³⁹ Recipes from the Aśvinasaṃhitā occur in Gaṇeśaśarman’s Pākapradīpa,⁴⁰ Soḍhala’s Gadanigraha,⁴¹ the Vaidyacintāmaṇi,⁴² Vaṅgasena’s Cikitsāsaṃgraha,⁴³ and the Yogaratnākara.⁴⁴ An Aśvinā was one of the sources of the Basavarājīya, Jvaracikitsā,⁴⁵ and Jvarasamuccaya,⁴⁶ an Aśvinīya of the Basavarājīya, an Aśvinīya of Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya,⁴⁷ an Aśvinā- and Aśvinīyasaṃhitā of Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya. Formulae from an Aśvinikalpa occur in the Basavarājīya and Vallabhendra’s Vaidyacintāmaṇi. The Kumārasaṃhitā, quoted in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya, appears to be the same as the Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā.⁴⁸ A Kumārasaṃhitā, probably also identical with the Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā, is quoted in the Bheṣajamañjūsāsannaya. A work by the Aśvins is mentioned as a source by Harṣakīrti.

v3.c43.19

A Saṃnipātakalikā,⁴⁹ Saṃnipātalakṣaṇa,⁵⁰ Saṃnipātaprakaraṇa,⁵¹ or Saṃnipāṭārṇava,⁵² a Trayodaśasaṃnipātanādanacikitsā,⁵³ and a Dhāturatnamālā,⁵⁴ as well as a Harītakikalpa,⁵⁵ are said to form part of the Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā.

v3.c43.20

The Saṃnipātakalikā was one of the sources of Kalyāṇa’s Bālatantra⁵⁶ and is quoted by Meghamuni in his Meghavinoda.⁵⁷ An unspecified Saṃnipātakalikā is quoted in Karandīkar’s Nidānadīpikā.⁵⁸ The Harītakikalpa from the Aśvinasaṃhitā is quoted in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya.⁵⁹

v3.c43.21

A commentary on the Saṃnipāṭārṇava, entitled Saṃnipātapadacandrikā, may have been written by Māṇikya, son of Padmanābha.⁶⁰ Hemanidhana or Hemanidhāna,⁶¹ a Jain monk of the Kharataragaccha, who probably lived in Bikaner, wrote a commentary on the Saṃnipātakalikā in A.D. 1676/77.⁶² A Hindī commentary (stabaka) by Rāmavijaya Upādhyāya, also a Jain monk of the Kharataragaccha, dates from 1774/75.⁶³

v3.c43.22

An Aśvinīganhaṭu is quoted in the Basavarājīya.⁶⁴ A Nāḍinidāna, -nirṇaya or -parīkṣā,⁶⁵ as well as a Yogasāra,⁶⁶ are ascribed to the Aśvins. Several formulae are attributed to them.⁶⁷

v3.c43.23

The Brahmavaivartapurāṇa credits the Aśvins with a Cikitsāsāratantra.⁶⁸ The Tibetan tradition credits them with two treatises, called Gces-bsdus⁶⁹ and Byan-khog khrims-kyi lun-hod hphro-ba.⁷⁰

v3.c43.24

Candranandana

v3.c43.25

Candranandana was the author of (1) the Madanādinighaṇṭu, (2) a commentary, called Padārthacandrikā, on the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā,⁷¹ and (3) a collection of glosses (vṛtti) on the latter work.⁷²

v3.c43.26

The Madanādinighaṇṭu The Madanādinighaṇṭu,⁷³ also called Gaṇanighaṇṭu,⁷⁴ and sometimes Oṣadhinighaṇṭu,⁷⁵ enumerates both names and properties of medicinal substances.⁷⁶ The treatise can be divided into two main parts. The first one, consisting of 592 verses, is arranged in thirty-two sections (gaṇa), in agreement with the number of groups of drugs (gaṇa) in Vāgbhaṭa’s Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā (Sū.15).⁷⁷ The second part (viprakīrṇadravyaprakaraṇa; about 440 verses) deals with miscellaneous drugs, not mentioned in the preceding sections, and some other subjects.⁷⁸ It is mainly devoted to medicinal plants, but also deals with inorganic substances, fermented fluids, grain and pulse, prepared dishes, animals, terms designating parts of plants, groups of drugs, and anatomical terms. The plan of the work therefore resembles that of other nighaṇṭus, also based on the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, such as the Aṣṭānganighaṇṭu and the Abhidhānamañjarī. Candranandana follows Vāgbhaṭa in the number of drugs, but adds strings of synonyms, properties, and actions.⁷⁹

v3.c43.27

The Madanādinighaṇṭu was translated into Tibetan under the title Sman-dpyad yan-lag brgyad-paḥi sñin-poḥi hgrel-pa-las sman-gyi min-gi rnam-graṅs, i.e., Vaidyakāṣṭāngahṛdayavytter bheṣajanāmasūci,⁸⁰ and forms part of the Tanjur.

v3.c43.28

The Madanādinighaṇṭu is quoted by Bhānuji Dīkṣita⁸¹ and Kṣīrasvāmin⁸² in their commentaries on the Amarkoṣa, Śivadatta in his auto-commentary on the Śivakoṣa,⁸³ and Śrīvallabhagaṇi in his commentary on the Nighaṇṭuśeṣa.⁸⁴ Some quotations from a nighaṇṭu in Indu’s Śasilekhā agree with verses from the Madanādinighaṇṭu.⁸⁵

v3.c43.29

A Gaṇanighaṇṭu is quoted in the Śālīgrāmanighaṇṭubhūṣaṇa of the Bṛhannighaṇṭuratnākara.⁸⁶

v3.c43.30

Special features Candranandana distinguishes rather frequently more than one type of a drug mentioned as a single entity by Vāgbhaṭa; sometimes he adds items to a group. Examples are: the sthalaja and jalaja varieties of madhuka (1.3); nimba and mahānimba (1.7–8); a second type of viśālā (1.12–13); two varieties of vidula (1.26–27);⁸⁷ dantī is added to dahana (1.31); two types of elā (1.63–64); hareṇu is added to elā (1.66–67); sarṣapa and raktasarṣapa (1.68–69); two types of kumbha (= trivṛt; 2.1–2); two types of lodhra (2.19–20); three types of śīgru (4.19–21); madhūla is added to madhūka (4.23–24); three types of dūrvā (6.1–3); dhanvayāsa is added to anantā (6.5–6); śvetakāmboji⁸⁸ is added to śvetapākī (6.16–17); two types of vidārī (8.1–2), of pañcāngula (8.4–5), of vṛścīva = varṣābhū (8.11–12), and of gopasutā (= śārivā; 8.18–19); lāmajjaka is added to uśīra

v3.c43.31

(9.1–4); three types of śīśira (= candana; 9.5–7); two types of bāṇa (15.14), darbha (17.7), and tuttha (18.3); kuṭheraka is added to kālamāla (22.7–8).⁸⁹ A few items, added by Candranandana, are absent from the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, for example lāmajjaka (9.3). Some names differ slightly from those employed by Vāgbhaṭa.⁹⁰

v3.c43.32

The section on miscellaneous drugs contains some items which are not found in the Aṣṭāngahṛdayasaṃhitā, such as ādārikā (p.22), damanaka (p.26),⁹¹ dadhipuṣpī (p.23),⁹² graiṣmī (p.28), kaṇṭakarañja (p.22), śīrīṣikā (p.21), vanakārpāsī (p.21), vārṣikī (p.28), and vāsantī (p.27).

v3.c43.33

The author One of the problems connected with Candranandana is whether one or two authors of this name should be distinguished, one who wrote the Padārthacandrikā, and another one who composed the Madanādinighaṇṭu.⁹³

v3.c43.34

P.V. Sharma adduced two arguments in favour of this distinction.⁹⁴ First, the maṅgala of the Padārthacandrikā is addressed to Viṣṇu, that of the Madanādinighaṇṭu to Sarvajña, who is probably the Buddha. This may indeed point to two different authors, but can also be explained by assuming a syncretistic attitude to religion on the part of Candranandana. The second argument is based on a discrepancy in Candranandana’s genealogy. The edited Sanskrit text of the Padārthacandrikā mentions Kalyāṇa and Vidyā as his parents, whereas Ravinandana is the name of Candranandana’s father in the Tibetan version of this commentary. This argument does not carry conviction, since it appears improbable that Kalyāṇa and Vidyā are the actual names of Candranandana’s parents.

v3.c43.35

The issue whether one or two Candranandanas contributed to the medical literature can be elucidated by comparing the synonyms of medicinal plants, found in the Madanādinighaṇṭu, with those mentioned in the Padārthacandrikā. It so happens that the synonyms occurring in the latter work are for the greater part one of the first of the strings of names of the former, which suggests that both works are by one and the same author. The Tibetan tradition also regards the commentator and the author of the nighaṇṭu as identical.⁹⁵

v3.c43.36

Candranandana mentions his name at the beginning of the Padārthacandrikā and Madanādinighaṇṭu.⁹⁶ His father was Ravinandana, as indicated at the beginning of the Madanādinighaṇṭu and in the Tibetan version of the Padārthacandrikā.⁹⁷ His grandfather was called Mahānandana.⁹⁸ The Padārthacandrikā was written at the instance of Śakunadeva.⁹⁹ Candranandana was, according to the Tibetan tradition, a native of Kaśmīr.¹⁰⁰

v3.c43.37

Date An important clue to Candranandana’s chronological position is the Tibetan translation of the Padārthacandrikā, made by Rin-chen bzaṅ-po between A.D. 1013 and 1055.¹⁰¹ A more precise dating would be reached if Candranandana were identical with Candradeva, mentioned in the biography of the Elder G-yu thog-pa,¹⁰² the chief physician of the Tibetan king Khri-sroṅ lde-bćan, who lived in the eighth century. This G-yu thog-pa visited Candradeva on his way to India and received instruction from him. The same biography relates that G-yu thog-pa met Vairocana, who claimed to have received the Rgyud-bźi from Candradeva. 103 The identity of this Candradeva with Candranandana, considered as not impossible by R.E. Emmerick, 104 would place our author in the middle of the eighth century. The same date was suggested by G. Huth. 105 The quotations from Candranandana’s works are not helpful in establishing his date, since they are found in authors who are later than Rin-chen bzań-po.

Candraṭa

v3.c43.s1.1

Candraṭa, 106 the son of Tiṣaṭa, who wrote the Cikitsākalikā, composed the following works: (1) a commentary on the Cikitsākalikā, (2) Suśrutapāṭhaśuddhi, (3) Yogaratnasamuccaya, (4) Yogamuṣṭi, (5) Dravyāvalī, and (6) Vaidyatriṃśattikā.

v3.c43.s1.2

(1) Candraṭa’s authorship of the commentary on the Cikitsākalikā 107 is evident from the opening sentences of the work. It is written in a lucid style and is important for the constitution of the text of the Cikitsākalikā and its interpretation. At some places Candraṭa informs us of sources not referred to by Tiṣaṭa himself. 108

v3.c43.s1.3

Many basic āyurvedic concepts are discussed at length in the comments on verse sixteen of the Cikitsākalikā. 109 Some new ideas are put forward in this part of the commentary. Candraṭa distinguishes three types of bala (strength): bala (in its restricted sense as physical strength), ojas, and tejas. Sattva is said to be of two types: bhīrutva and sahiṣṇutva. The concept of sātmya is elaborately dealt with according to the views of various authorities. Candraṭa himself is of the opinion that sātmya is of eight types. Regarding the concept of vipāka, he agrees with Suśruta in distinguishing two types. Drugs (auṣadha) are classified according to the predominance of one or more of the mahābhūtas in them.

v3.c43.s1.4

The concept of diseases caused by one’s karman is elucidated by a long quotation from a work not mentioned by name. 110 Differences of opinion between the followers of Caraka (kāyacikitsakāḥ) and Suśruta (śalyatantrakartāraḥ) are noticed. 111 Details on the preparation of various medicines are frequently given, 112 as well as the names of compound formulae. 113 The interpretations of the names of drugs are mostly correct, 114 but sometimes doubtful or wrong, 115 probably because the identity of a number of medicinal substances had become controversial, or because of insufficient knowledge. Occasionally, a medicinal plant is described and its vernacular name mentioned. 116 The term piccaṭa(roga) is employed as a synonym for the eye disease or group of eye diseases usually called pilla. 117 Añjanas, to be employed in eye diseases, are divided into three types: guṭikā, rasa and cūrṇa; guṭikā is subdivided into piṇḍa, varti and guṭikā in a restricted sense. 118

v3.c43.s1.5

Authorities quoted or referred to by Candraṭa are: Agniveśa (1; 2), Āstīka (mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 387), the Aśvins (1, 227, 306: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Ātreya (1; 5), Aupadhenava (1; 145), Aurabhra (1; 2; 145), Bhaṭṭa 119 (introductory part of the commentary), Bhela (2: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 20; 80; 82; 248: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Bhoja (2: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 85; 115), Bhṛgu (2: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Bhṛguja 120 (375: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Cakṣuṣyeṇa (2; 16; 80; 81; 85; 283; 303–304;

v3.c43.s1.6

354–355), Caraka (passim), Dhanvantari (1: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), dhānvantarīyāḥ (2), Haricandra 121 (maṅgala), Hārīta (2: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 82; 115; 116; 140–142; 173–174; 212–215), Janakātmaja 122 (347: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Jejjata (maṅgala; 161–162; 191–192; 221–222), Kāṅkāyana (147 and 151: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Kapilabala (283), Kharaṇāda (16; 82; 283), Kṛṣṇātreya (85), Kṣārapāṇi (2; 16; 190; 208–211; 270), Nimī (2), nyāyavidaḥ (16), Parāśara (2: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 82; 298–302: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa), Pauṣkalāvata (1), Puṣkalāvata (2; 145), Rasavaiśeṣika (16), 123 Siddhasāra (81), 124 Sudhīra (maṅgala), Śukra 125 (383), Suśruta (passim), vaiśeṣikāḥ (16), Tiṣaṭa (19; 82; 83–84; 110; 111; 193; 208–211; 212–215; 354–355), Vaitaraṇa (2), vaiyākaraṇāḥ (16), Varuṇa (383), 126 Videha 127 (2; 102; 104; 229–231: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 304: mentioned by Tiṣaṭa; 327; 328; 343; 346–347: Janakātmaja in Tiṣaṭa’s text), Viśvāmitra (361–364), Vṛddhabhoja (325), and Vṛddhavideha (85).

v3.c43.s1.7

Noteworthy is the absence of Vāgbhaṭa, 128 although he is quoted in Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya.

v3.c43.s1.8

Candraṭa’s commentary on the Cikitsākalikā is quoted in Priyavrat Śarmā’s autocommentary on the Āyurvedadarśana and Ṭoḍara’s Āyurvedasaukhya.

v3.c43.s1.9

(2) The Suśrutapāṭhaśuddhi, 129 a MS of which was described by J. Taylor, 130 consists of a revision of the Suśrutasaṃhitā, made by Candraṭa after the commentary of Jejjata, as he indicates himself. 131 The text frequently differs from the printed edition of the Suśrutasaṃhitā according to Taylor, whereas A.F.R. Hoernle 132 notes that it does occasionally, though not very materially, differ from its traditional recension; 133 however, the latter remarks that Candraṭa’s revised text deserves a searching examination because it contains additional and spurious verses recorded as such by Dalhaṇa. Hoernle’s suggestion 134 of a connection between Candraṭa and Kārttikakuṇḍa rests on very slender evidence and needs corroboration. P.V. Sharma, being of the opinion that the text of the Suśrutasaṃhitā as we have it contains changes and additions by the hand of Candraṭa, 135 tried to identify some of the alterations. 136 However, the description of the India Office MS of the Suśrutapāṭhaśuddhi is in contradiction with such a view.

v3.c43.s1.10

Candraṭa refers to his Suśrutapāṭhaśuddhi and Yogaratnasamuccaya at the end of his commentary on the Cikitsākalikā, which proves that the commentary is the latest of the three.

v3.c43.s1.11

A Pāṭhaśuddhi and Mahāpāṭhaśuddhi, quoted extensively by Anantakumāra, 137 cannot but designate Candraṭa’s work. A Pāṭhaśuddhi is cited in the Bhesajjamañjūsāsannaya.

v3.c43.s1.12

The quotations from the Pāṭhaśuddhi in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya sometimes agree, sometimes disagree with the current text of the Suśrutasaṃhitā. 138

v3.c43.s1.13

Candraṭa is referred to and extolled in Bālāditya’s Suśrutasāra, which may mean that the author of this work was acquainted with the Pāṭhaśuddhi.

v3.c43.s1.14

(3) The Yogaratnasamuccaya, 139 written by Candraṭa, son of Tiṣaṭa, according to its first two verses, 140 is a collection of prescriptions, 141 arranged in eight sections (adhikāra): 142 ghṛta, 143 taila, cūrṇa, guṭikā, avaleha, gadaśānti, 144 (pañca)karman, and kalpa. 145

v3.c43.s1.15

The kalpa section describes nineteen kalpas: amlavetasa-, suvarṇa-, citraka-, kākamācī-, śatāvarī-, bhallātaka-, haritakī-, triphalā-, laśuna-, guḍūcī-, śilājatu-, guggulu-, vārāhī-, kukkuṭī-, eraṇḍataila-, kuṅkuma-, gokṣura-, and alambuṣākalpa. 146

v3.c43.s1.16

The work is of great value because it gives the source of its recipes. These sources are, according to P.K. Gode, 147 who first listed them: Agastya, Agniveśa, Amitaprabha, 148 Amṛtamālā, Āryasamuccaya, Aśvinasaṃhitā, 149 Aśvinīkumārasamhitā, Aśvinīyasaṃhitā, Bhadrasenaka, 150 Bhadravartman, 151 Bhāradvāja, Bheḍa, 152 Bhiṣaṇmuṣṭi, Bindusāra, 153 Cakusyena, 153 Cikitsākalikā, Dravyāvalī, Hārīta, 154 Jatūkarṇa, Kāṅkāyana, Kharanāda, Kṛṣṇātreya, Kṣārāpāṇi, Nāvanītaka, 155 Parāśara, 156 Śaivasiddhānta, Śaunaka, Siddhasāra, 157 Śivasiddhānta, Suśruta, Tisata, Vāgbhaṭa, Vāhaḍa, Vaitaraṇa, Videha, 158 Vṛddhavāhaḍa, Vṛddhavideha, Yogaratnasamuccaya, and Yogayukti.

v3.c43.s1.17

D.Ch. Bhattacharyya 159 added the following names: Ātreya, Carakottaratantra, Cikitsāsamuccaya, 160 Gopura, Ravigupta, and Vṛddhasuśruta; 161 absent from his list are: Agastya, Bhāradvāja, Bhadrasenaka, Kāṅkāyana, Śaivasiddhānta, Vāhaḍa, Vaitaraṇa, and Yogaratnasamuccaya.

v3.c43.s1.18

R.P. Bhatnagar and P.V. Sharma 162 added some more names: Acyuta, 163 Amṛtakumbha, 164 Amṛtaprabha or -prabhā, 165 Aupadhenava, Bhāluki, Cikitsāsāra, Cikitsātiśaya, 166 Dhānvantara, Dhanvantari, Kālāpāda, 167 Mahendrakalpa, Nāgārjuna, 168 Rudrasenaka, 169 Śālihotra, and Vaṅgadatta; absent from this list are: 170 Agastya, Bhadrasenaka, Śaivasiddhānta, Śivasiddhānta, Tiṣaṭa, Vaitaraṇa, and Yogaratnasamuccaya.

v3.c43.s1.19

Niścala mentions the Svalpavāgbhaṭa as one of Candraṭa's sources; 171 he also reproduces recipes which Candraṭa took from some unspecified treatise (tarāntara), 172 Anantakumāra's quotations show that Candraṭa borrowed from the Īśānayoga, 173 Mahodadhi, 174 and Śacīmata. 175 Anantakumāra also quotes a recipe derived from Candraṭa that was written on a stone pillar (śīlāstambha) by the Yavanas. 176

v3.c43.s1.20

The Yogaratnasamuccaya is the same as the Candraṭasamgraha, quoted by Niścala; it may also be identical with the Candraṭasāroddhāra, 177 usually separately listed. 178

v3.c43.s1.21

Candraṭa's collection of formulae was well known in former ages, for it is repeatedly quoted by Niścala. 179 Soḍhala was inspired by it when he composed his Gadanigraha. 180 The work was one of the sources of Cakrapāṇidatta's Cikitsāsamgraha. 181 It is also one of the sources of Dattarāma's Bṛhradasarājasundara, 182 the Bhāratabhaiṣajyaratnākara, and the Rasayogasāgara. 183

v3.c43.s1.22

The work is probably quoted as Yogaratnasamuccaya 184 in the Bhesajjamañjūsāsannaya (which refers to Candraṭa too) and the Yogaratnākara. Hemādri's citations from a Yogaratna are in all probability from Candraṭa's work. 185

v3.c43.s1.23

Anantakumāra's quotations from Candraṭa 186 are undoubtedly from the Yogaratnasamuccaya. Niścalakara, Śivadāsena, 187 Śrīdāsapaṇḍita and Śrīkaṇṭhadatta refer to Candraṭa or quote from him as the author of a therapeutic work which contains a large number of formulae, i.e., the Yogaratnasamuccaya. Ṭoḍara quotes a verse on the proper doses of various type of kaṣāya, which may be from the Yogaratnasamuccaya. 188

v3.c43.s1.24

Candraṭa did not recognize samgrahagrahaṇī as a distinct type of grahaṇī. 189 His readings of Caraka and Suśruta differed occasionally from those accepted by other authors. 190

v3.c43.s1.25

The works by Candraṭa called (4) Yogamuṣṭi 191 and (5) Dravyāvalī 192 are recorded by P.V. Sharma; 193 the (6) Vaidyatriṃśattikā is only mentioned by Th. Aufrecht 194 and in the NCC. 195

v3.c43.s1.26

Śivadāsena quotes from a Vṛṇḍatīkā by Candraṭa, 196 which probably means that Candraṭa wrote a commentary on Vṛṇḍa's Siddhayoga.

v3.c43.s1.27

The author The only fact known is that Candraṭa was the son of Tiṣaṭa. The first verse of the Yogaratnasamuccaya shows that he followed his father's footsteps in being a sun-worshipper. 197

v3.c43.s1.28

Date As discussed in the section on the date of Tiṣaṭa, the terminus ad quem for the composition of the Cikitsākalikā is provided by Niścalakara's statement that Cakrapāṇidatta (about A.D. 1050) utilized Tiṣaṭa's work in writing his own therapeutic compendium. 198 The earliest author after Cakrapāṇidatta to quote from Candraṭa is Śrīkaṇṭhadatta in his Vyākhyākusumāvalī. 199 The terminus post quem of Tiṣaṭa and Candraṭa has been deduced from a remark at the beginning of the latter's commentary on the Cikitsākalikā, proving that he was acquainted with Haricandra's and Jejjaṭa's commentaries. 200 As Jejjaṭa's date is disputed, 201 it is preferable to depart from another fact in establishing the upper chronological limit. This fact consists of Candraṭa's quoting the Siddhasāra 202 and its author, Ravigupta, 203 who lived about A.D. 650. This fixes the period of Tiṣaṭa and Candraṭa between 650 and 1050. If Candraṭa wrote a commentary on Vṛṇḍa's Siddhayoga, as seems to follow from a remark of Śivadāsena, 204 the dates of Tiṣaṭa and Candraṭa fall within the period 900–1050. 205

Govardhana

v3.c43.s2.1

Govardhana 206 was the author of several medical works: (1) a commentary (ṭīkā) on the Bṛhattantrapradīpa; 207 (2) Karmamālā, a commentary on the Yogaśataka; 208 (3) Kaumudī; 209 (4) Nyāyasārāvalī; 210 (5) Paribhāṣāvalī. 211 All these works are quoted in Niścalakara's Ratnaprabhā. 212

v3.c43.s2.2

The Ratnamālā, quoted by Niścala, 213 is also a work of Govardhana according to D.Ch. Bhattacharyya 214 and P.V. Sharma. 215

v3.c43.s2.3

Some add to Govardhana's works the Cikitsāleśa and Rogapradīpa. 216

v3.c43.s2.4

An unspecified work of a Govardhana is quoted in Gopālādāsa's Cikitsāmṛta.

v3.c43.s2.5

Govardhana is later than Amitaprabha 217 and the Mādhava who wrote the Yogavyākhyā. 218 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya 219 supposed Govardhana to be later than Vṛṇḍa and to be a contemporary of Cakrapāṇidatta. 220 Some clues in Niścala's Ratnaprabhā may point to Govardhana as an author who is later than Ravigupta, Jejjaṭa, Īśvarasena, Īśāna, and Gadādhara, but earlier than Mādhava, Cakrapāṇidatta and Bakula. 221

v3.c43.s2.6

Govardhana is reported to be a son of Cakrapāṇi. 222

v3.c43.s2.7

The Jīvakapustaka

v3.c43.s2.8

The *Jīvakapustaka* is a collection of prescriptions, preserved in Sanskrit and in a Khotanese version.

v3.c43.s2.9

The manuscript of the *Jīvakapustaka*²²³ contains three separate tracts,²²⁴ which means that it is a typical ‘Sammelhandschrift’. Each tract begins with the word *siddham* (success). As neither a title nor a colophon are extant, and as the text has not been traced elsewhere, the convenient label *Jīvakapustaka* has been assigned to it.²²⁵

v3.c43.s2.10

Contents

v3.c43.s2.11

The treatise²²⁶ contains a series of prescriptions, many of which have separate names, together with indications on their use. It begins as an exposition of the Bhagavant to Jīvaka, who is called ‘the king of physicians’ in the Khotanese version. The Sanskrit text is mainly in ślokas and so corrupt that it can hardly be read. The Khotanese translation, based on this corrupt Sanskrit text that was hardly intelligible to the one who rendered it into Khotanese,²²⁷ is also metrical and is enlarged with regard to the Sanskrit original; it enumerates all the items of comprehensive Sanskrit terms like *daśamūla*, etc., and gives detailed instructions on the way the medicines should be prepared. Its most striking feature is the insistence on specifying in each instance the appropriate quantity of each drug and the amount of milk, water or oil required, also when those items are not found in the original Sanskrit. For this purpose a great variety of terms of measure is used.²²⁸

v3.c43.s2.12

The prescriptions are divided into four sections, containing prescriptions for an agada, ghees (ghrta),²²⁹ oils (taila) and powders (cūrṇa). J. Filliozat identified some of the formulae;²³⁰ later, many more could be traced by R.E. Emmerick.²³¹

v3.c43.s2.13

Date

v3.c43.s2.14

One of the clues to the chronological position of the *Jīvakapustaka* consists of the fact that several formulae were borrowed from the *Siddhasāra*,²³² which makes it clear that it is later in date, probably considerably later, than the latter.²³³

v3.c43.s2.15

The MS of the *Jīvakapustaka* cannot be dated precisely. No detailed palaeographical study of the cursive Brāhmī script as used in Central Asia has yet been made. The language of the Khotanese version is ‘late Khotanese’. All that can be said from the point of view of the language is that the text must have been written before the year A.D. 1000, after which no Khotanese was written.²³⁴

v3.c43.s2.16

The Jvarasamuccaya

v3.c43.s2.17

The *Jvarasamuccaya*²³⁵ is an anonymous monograph on fevers, dating from the tenth century.²³⁶

v3.c43.s2.18

Authorities and works quoted are Āśvina, Bhāradvāja, Bheḍa, Bhoja, Caraka, Hārīta, Jatūkarṇa, Kapilabala, Kaśyapa, and Suśruta.²³⁷ The quotations from Kaśyapa often agree with the text of the *Kaśyapasamhitā*.²³⁸ Parts of the long citation from the *Bhālukitantra*, occurring in the *Madhukośa* on the *Mādhavanidāna*,²³⁹ recur, with variants,

v3.c43.s2.19

in the *Jvarasamuccaya*, where they are attributed to Kaśyapa.²⁴⁰

v3.c43.s2.20

The Kriyākālaguṇottaratantra

v3.c43.s2.21

The *Kriyākālaguṇottaratantra*²⁴¹ is a Tantric text bearing upon medicine. It is in the form of a dialogue between Śiva and Kārttikeya. The latter puts questions to his father Śiva, wanting instruction about gāruḍamantras against poison, the characteristics of serpents and of demons, especially those who attack children, about embryology, and other subjects. The work is divided into three kalpas, named after the deities Krodheśvara, Aghora, and Jvareśvara.²⁴²

v3.c43.s2.22

This Tantra dates from before the eleventh century, because Kṣemarāja, the pupil of Abhinavagupta, quotes it several times in his commentary, called *Netroddyota*, on the *Netratantra*.²⁴³ One of its MSS dates from 1184.²⁴⁴

v3.c43.s2.23

The *Kriyākālaguṇottara* is quoted in the *Paraśurāmapratāpa*²⁴⁵ and the *Śiśurakṣāratna*. It was one of the sources of Nāgārjuna’s *Kakṣapuṭa* and is mentioned in the *Mantrakhaṇḍa* of Nityanātha’s *Rasaratnākara*.

v3.c43.s2.24

The Laṅkāvatāra

v3.c43.s2.25

A treatise called *Laṅkāvatāra* is said to be a Tantric work on medicine. One of the MSS dates from A.D. 908.²⁴⁶

v3.c43.s2.26

The Paryāyaratnamālā by Mādhava Bhiṣaj or Mādhavakāra

v3.c43.s2.27

The *Paryāyaratnamālā*²⁴⁷ or *Ratnamālā*²⁴⁸ is a lexicon, written by Mādhava Bhiṣaj²⁴⁹ or Mādhavakāra.²⁵⁰

v3.c43.s2.28

Contents

v3.c43.s2.29

The text of the *Ratnamālā* consists of about 1,300 ardhaślokas, but the edition numbers them from one to 1758 in the following way: ardhaślokas 1–578, pādas 579–1424, ardhapādas 1425–1472, ardhaślokas 1473–1758.

v3.c43.s2.30

The treatise is primarily a nighaṇṭu, and, though it goes beyond the limits of medical terminology, the author wrote it for the sake of physicians, as appears from one of his introductory verses: “What can a valiant man do in a battle if he has no weapons? With regard to therapy the same holds true for a physician who has no (knowledge of) synonyms”.

v3.c43.s2.31

The *Ratnamālā* consists, apart from six introductory (1–12) and two concluding verses (1755–1758), of a synonymous (13–1472) and a homonymous section²⁵¹ (1474–1640), followed by a section containing definitions (1642–1754). The contents are summarily listed in ardhaślokas 9–12. The synonyms are dealt with first in ślokas (13–216) and ardhaślokas (218–578), followed by pādas (580–1424) and ardhapādas (1425–1472). The synonyms are usually given separately, in the nominative, without making making much use of dvandas and ekaśeṣas. The names of plants, animals, inorganic substances, articles of food, etc. (13–854), are accompanied by their vernacular counterparts. The homonyms are divided into apyarthas (words with a single additional meaning each, given in the locative and indicated by the particle api), dvyarthas (words with two meanings) and bahvarthas (words with more than two meanings), distributed as follows: apyarthas (one apyartha in one pāda) (1474–1504), dvyarthas (one dvyartha in one pāda) (1505–1554), dvyarthas (one dvyartha in one ardhaśloka) (1555–1586), and bahvarthas (1587–1640). The bahvarthas have from three to eight meanings and are arranged in such a way that the number of acceptations increases. The section dealing with definitions covers dietary articles (1642–1686), paribhāṣā (technical rules; 1687–1735), and māna (weights and measures; 1737–1754). The junctions between the various parts are indicated in the text itself (217; 579; 1473; 1641).

v3.c43.s2.32

The synonymous section is concerned with medicinal plants (13–188), followed by a heterogeneous series of terms (189–217) and medicinal plants again (218–421). The work proceeds with minerals and metals (422–445), salts and caustic substances (446–451), sugar and related articles (452–455), medicinal substances (456–480), dairy produce (481–486), cow dung (487), names of animals (488–508), human beings and related terms (509–539), various terms (540–561), deities and other non-human beings (562–574), religious terms (575–578), medicinal substances and some medical terms (580–734), various terms (739–822), various terms (823–828), cows and products of the cow (839–848), cereal products (849–862), medical terms (863–876), anatomical terms (877–944), parts of plants (945–954), various terms (955–1296), the seasons (1297–1302), the lunar mansions (1303–1313), colour adjectives (1315–1330), various terms (1331–1388), names of diseases (1389–1424), and various terms (1425–1472).

v3.c43.s2.33

Special features Many rare words are found in Mādhava’s Ratnamālā. The group of medicinal plants called aṣṭavarga is mentioned (3.43–44).²⁵² Unusual names of plants are: āśita(ka) (651);²⁵³ aśokarohiṇī (352);²⁵⁴ aṣṭapādikā (311);²⁵⁵ asthisamhāra (389);²⁵⁶ cela (712);²⁵⁷ coraṣuṇṭhī (295);²⁵⁸ dhustūraka (405);²⁵⁹ hastikarṇadala (= hastikarṇapalāśa; 100);²⁶⁰ hilamocikā (374);²⁶¹ jūrṇā (697);²⁶² kapāṭacakra (416);²⁶³ kāśmīraja as a synonym of kuṅkuma (264);²⁶⁴ kulatthikā (= vanakulattha; 420);²⁶⁵ kumbhāṭa (654);²⁶⁶ madhukukkuṭī (152);²⁶⁷ pītamudga (694);²⁶⁸ poṭagala (463);²⁶⁹ ṛkṣagandhā (= sarpagandhā; 470);²⁷⁰ sarpākṣī (386);²⁷¹ sudarśanā (363);²⁷² timiraka (= nakharāñjaka; 308);²⁷³ uccaṭā (395).²⁷⁴

v3.c43.s2.34

Remarkable words are moreover: antagranthi as a synonym of atisāra (1401);²⁷⁵ bhiṣajita as a synonym of cikitsā (528), though it usually means auṣadha;²⁷⁶ kothaka as a synonym of kukūṇaka (1390); nirvāhin and suvāhikā as names of a disease (1400);²⁷⁷ tarṣabhū as a synonym of kloman (909); vāṭaṇḍa and vradhna as synonyms of the disease called vṛddhi (1415); yonyarśas as denoting (yoni)kaṇḍa (1392).

v3.c43.s2.35

Mādhava and his Ratnamālā are quoted or referred to by Bhānuji Dīkṣita in his Rāmāśramī or Vyākhyāsudhā on the Amara koṣa, written in the first half of the seventeenth century, probably between A.D. 1620 and 1640,²⁷⁸ Hārāṇacandra in his commentary on the Suśrutasaṃhitā,²⁷⁹ Haricaraṇasena in his Paryāyamuktāvalī,²⁸⁰

v3.c43.s2.36

Mallinātha in his Amarapadapārijāta on the Amara koṣa, dating from the fourteenth century,²⁸¹ Medinikara in his Nānārthaśabdakoṣa, written in the thirteenth century, probably between 1200 and 1275,²⁸² Nārāyaṇa Vidyāvinoda in his commentary on the Amara koṣa,²⁸³ Niścalakara,²⁸⁴ Rādhākāntadeva in his Śabdakalpadruma,²⁸⁵ Rāyamukuṭamaṇi in his Padacandrikā on the Amara koṣa, composed in 1431/32,²⁸⁶ Śivadāsasena in his commentary on Cakrapāṇi’s Dravyaguṇa,²⁸⁷ Śivadatta in the auto-commentary on his Śivakoṣa, dating from 1677/78,²⁸⁸ Umeśacandragupta in his Vaidyakaśabdasindhu, and Vandyaghaṭīya Sarvānanda in his Ṭīkāsarvasva on the Amara koṣa, written in 1159/60.²⁸⁹ Mādhava’s lexicon is said to be quoted several times in Vidyāvinoda Nārāyaṇa’s commentary on the Amara koṣa.²⁹⁰

v3.c43.s2.37

A work called Ratnamālā that may be Mādhava’s lexicon is quoted by a Kaumudīkara who was one of Rāyamukuṭamaṇi’s sources.²⁹¹ The Ratnamālā may have been known to Vijayarakṣita who quotes it without specifying the source;²⁹² Vācaspati’s commentary on the Mādhavanidāna contains the same quotation, adding that it is taken from the Abhidhāna,²⁹³ which indicates that it may be different work, whether earlier or later than the Ratnamālā. According to T. Chowdhury’s note to his edition of the text, the work is also quoted in Yādavaprakāśa’s Vaijayantī (eleventh century), Kṣīrasvāmin’s commentary on the Amara koṣa, composed in the first half of the twelfth century,²⁹⁴ and the Dhanvantariyanighaṇṭu. A Nāmanighaṇṭu by Mādhava, quoted by Devarāja Yajvan in his Niruktabhāṣya,²⁹⁵ may be the Paryāyaratnamālā.²⁹⁶

v3.c43.s2.38

The author Mādhava Bhiṣaj was a son of Indrakara and lived at Śilāhrada. D.Ch. Bhattacharyya has observed²⁹⁷ that Śilāhrada appears to have been a famous place, at a considerable distance from Pāṭaliputra, for it is mentioned in an illustration in Vācaspatimiśra’s Nyāyakaṇikā:²⁹⁸ “Someone who has obtained a favour at Pāṭaliputra will certainly not remember it without confusion at Śilāhrada”. The ancient Śilāhrada has been identified as the modern Pattharghaṭṭā near Bhāgalpur in Bihār, at a certain distance from Paṭnā, the ancient Pāṭaliputra.²⁹⁹ This Pattharghaṭṭā is the site of the Vikramaśila university which flourished during the Pāla dynasty.³⁰⁰ The vernacular names of medicinal plants, added to the Sanskrit synonyms of the Paryāyaratnamālā in the margin of the text, are in favour of assigning a Bengal origin to the author,³⁰¹ if they indeed derive from him and have not been added later.

v3.c43.s2.39

Date Since it is an established fact that Vandyaghaṭīya Sarvānanda quotes from the work, the Ratnamālā was composed before A.D. 1159/60. If it could be proved that Yādavaprakāśa used it in composing his Vaijayantī, it would be earlier than the eleventh century. Internal evidence, consisting of the absence of ahiphena and bhaṅgā, together with their synonyms, points to a period preceding the eleventh century.

v3.c43.s2.40

Indicative of a date later than about 800 are the following points. Firstly, the presence of gandhaka (435), pārada (719) and abhra (720), as well as pūti and its synonym khaṭṭāsikā (794). Secondly, the occurrence of vātiṅgaṇa (360), often supposed to be of Persian origin, as a synonym of vārtākī, the eggplant, Solanum melongena Linn.³⁰²

v3.c43.s2.41

Thirdly, the presence of the disease called (yoni)kanda (1392), described for the first time in the Mādhavanidāna, though the term is used in a different sense in the Ratnamālā. The word vradhna as a synonym opf vṛddhi (1415) is adduced by P.V. Sharma as indicating that the Ratnamālā is posterior to Vṛnda’s Siddhayoga, 303 but that argument is not compelling because Vṛnda (40.20) describes vardhma (= vradhna) as separate from vṛddhi, which would rather point to the posteriority of Vṛnda. Unconvincing too is P.V. Sharma’s claim that the last verse of the Ratnamālā imitates a stanza from Māgha’s Śiśupālavadha (2.112), 304 dating from the seventh century. P.V. Sharma’s arguments for regarding the Ratnamālā as posterior to the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha should be regarded as tentative and doubtful. 305

v3.c43.s2.42

Summarizing, it can be said that Mādhava’s Ratnamālā probably dates from the period 800–1000. 306 The earlier view that it was written by the author of the Mādhavanidāna should completely be given up. 307

v3.c43.s2.43

Another work called Paryāyaratnamālā was written by Maheśvara Miśra. 308

Māhuka or Mādhuka

v3.c43.s3.1

Māhuka or Mādhuka was the author of the Haramekhala, 309 a treatise written in Prakrit verse. 310

Contents

v3.c43.s3.t1.1

The work, written in āryā metre, has a total of about 1,500 verses. 311 It is arranged in seven chapters (pariccheda), in conformity with the seven hoods of the serpent Vāsuki, which form the girdle (mekhalā) of Śiva (Hara). 312 The number of verses of some chapters differs in the editions: chapter one 191 (11+19+6+155 in ed. b); chapter two 103 (edition a) or 101 (edition b); 313 chapter three 71 (both editions); chapter four 389 (edition a) or 415 (edition b); 314 chapter five 281 (edition a).

v3.c43.s3.t1.2

The Haramekhala deals with a diversity of subjects. The first chapter, called koūhalāhīara (kautūhalādhikāra), 315 opens with a maṅgala addressed to Paśupati, nine verses on the author, and a verse explaining the purpose of the book. 316 A series of nineteen verses follows, introducing the subject of chapter one by giving examples. This subject consists of unusual phenomena giving rise to curiosity and wonder (kautūhala or āścarya), which are brought about by the power of gems, drugs, and mantras. A series of six verses extols the adroit person who makes a living by producing these phenomena. The remainder of chapter one describes a long series 317 of methods (prayoga) of bringing about these exciting events, which, amongst many other things, consist of recipes to make the mouth beautifully red when chewing betel (21–25), recipes for an ink by means of which one can write a book that may be read in utter darkness (34–35) or which makes letters written on the back of the hand visible on the palm (36), procedures to make madirā smell like water (45), to write letters which remain floating on water (47), to make fruits fall from trees (58–59), and produce objects invisible to the eye (60), procedures that enable a person to swim under water like a fish (100) or to walk on the surface of water (102), etc. The second chapter, called riujaṇadamana (ripujanadamana; 2.101), is, as its title

v3.c43.s3.t1.3

indicates, concerned with procedures to be used against enemies. 318 Chapter three is about subjugation (vaśīkaraṇa). 319

v3.c43.s3.t1.4

The fourth and longest (vipula; 4.1) chapter is the most interesting one with regard to medicine and deals with the treatment of diseases, or, to use the term employed by the author, śarīrapariamma (śarīraparikarman), i.e., body care. The order in which the diseases are mentioned is chiefly, though not consistently, based on the division of medicine into eight limbs: śālākya (2–87), kāya and śalya (88–259), bhūtavidyā (260–265), agada (267–301), kaumārabhṛtya (309–380), rasāyana (385–392), and vājīkaraṇa (393–396). A second and most unusual ordering principle in the sections on śālākya, kāya and śalya is the arrangement of the diseases from top to bottom.

v3.c43.s3.t1.5

The section on śālākya begins with prescriptions which provide even a bald person with a beautifully curly crop of hair (2–10), and proceeds with formulae against diseases of the head (11–30), amongst which those turning grey hair black again have a prominent place (20–28). Thereafter the following subjects are covered: diseases of the ears (31–41), procedures which increase the size of the earlobes and also that of the penis (42–49), eye diseases (50–66), kāmālā (67–69), diseases of the nose (70–71), and diseases of the mouth (72–87). Then vyaṅga is dealt with (88–92), and prescriptions are given which make the face beautiful like the moon (93–105).

v3.c43.s3.t1.6

The section on kāya and śalya is concerned with a long series of subjects: gaṇḍamālā (105–109), apabāhuka and diseases of neck and shoulders (110–111), prescriptions which make the female breasts large and firm, increase the size of the earlobes and also that of the male member again (112–119), plīhodara and udara (120–123), abscesses (124), udara (125), kṛmi (126), kuṣṭha and related disorders (127–142), prescriptions which give beauty to the female and male body and remove a bad body odour (143–149), raktapitta, kāmālā and pāṇḍuroga (150–151), pīnasa (152–153), svarabheda (154), cough (155–156), hiccup, shortness of breath and some other disorders (157–159), kṣaya (160–165), śūla (166–168), atisāra, grahaṇī and viṣūcikā (169–174), prameha (175–176), mūtraṛcchra (177), aśmarī and śarkarā (178–181), gaṇḍamālā and kuraṇḍa (182), diseases of the male organ (183–185), recipes which activate the digestive fire (199–200), vomiting (201), morbid thirst (202–203), fever (204–220), recipes which cause insomnia or cure it (221–225), ūrustambha (226–229), fractures (230), diseases of the feet (231–234), maśa (235–237), burns (238–239), śvayathu (provoked by the fruits of bhallātaka, i.e., Semecarpus anacardium Linn.f.; 240), vraṇa (241–249), naṣṭaśalya (250–251), fístulas (252–254), raktamaṇḍala (255), arbuda, granthi and gaṇḍamālā (256–259).

v3.c43.s3.t1.7

The section on bhūtavidyā is about apasmāra (269), bhūtas and grahas (261–265). A prescription against cāturthaka (266) is loosely inserted. The section on agada is concerned with the poisons of many animals and some poisons of a different origin (e.g., kodrava and dhattūraka, 276; pūgaphala, 277–278). It is followed by prescriptions against pitaka (302–303), jvālāgarbha (304) and śītalikā (305–308).

v3.c43.s3.t1.8

The section on kaumārabhṛtya deals with pradara (309–314), raktagulma and amenorrhoea (315–316), recipes which assure the birth of a son (317–318), promote pregnancy (319–321) or prevent it (322–324), prevent miscarriage (325–328) and bleeding during pregnancy (329); it contains a prescription against pain after an abortion (330), prescriptions assuring an easy delivery and separation of the afterbirth (331–340); it deals with yoniśūla (341–344), the promotion of milk secretion (345–346), diseases of the breasts (346–347), kikkisika, i.e., striae (349), yonivibhramśa (350–351), prescriptions which make the female organs attractive (352–353, 355–358) and devoid of hair (359–361), and the restoration of virginity after intercourse (354). It ends with verses on the protection of children against grahas (362–367), with recipes against children's diseases (368–374), and recipes which assure that children grow up happily and in good shape (375–380).

v3.c43.s3.t1.9

The section on rasāyana and vājīkaraṇa covers the usual subjects. The chapter ends with the treatment of some disorders occurring in cows, buffaloes and mules (398–413), and, finally, a verse on a procedure which controls the colour of the feathers of newly hatched doves (414).

v3.c43.s3.t1.10

Verses 183–206 of this chapter are absent from edition a and replaced there by a text in verse and prose called Puttalikāpañcaviṃśatikā, concerned with harming enemies by means of magical procedures against their effigy (puttalikā).

v3.c43.s3.t1.11

Chapter five³²⁰ is concerned with the making of fragrant compounds and consists, according to the author himself (5.1), of an extract from various extensive works on the subject (gandhaśāstra).³²¹ It deals with³²² ambuvāsanavidhi (the preparation of perfumed water; 3–8), dantakāṣṭhavidhi (toothbrushes; 9–11), kavala (water for rinsing the mouth; 12), madhūcchiṣṭavidhi (beeswax applied to the lips; 13–14), netraparikarmāñjana (collyria; 15), mukhavāsa (perfumed water to scent the breath; 16–32), (sugandha)taila (fragrant oils; 33–58), udvartanasamvidhi (fragrant unguents used in rubbing the body; 59–61), snānakriyā (62–69) and snānapkaraṇa (70–85) (fragrant substances used during and after bathing), patavāsa (fragrant powders used for perfuming clothes, etc.; 86–87), dhūpa (88–109) and dīpavarti (110–120) (various forms of incense), sugandhasamvidhi (perfumes used as ointments; 121–158), various fragrant substances (159–192), substitutes (pratinidhi) for rare and expensive natural perfumes (kastūrikākṛti; 193–195), āsavavidhi (fragrant substances made by means of fermentation; 196–210), substitutes for rare and expensive natural perfumes: karpūrakṛti (211–213), kuṅkumakṛti (249–256), karpūratailakṛti (257–263), lavaṅgakṛti (264), elākṛti (265), and kuṣṭhakṛti (266), sahakāra preparations (267–269), and, finally, puṣpadrāṇayayukti (the extraction of essential oils from flowers, such as mallikā, campaka and ketaki; 270–272).³²³

v3.c43.s3.t1.12

³²⁰ [^320]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.13

³²¹ [^321]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.14

³²² [^322]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.15

³²³ [^323]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.16

Then follows, after an introductory verse (274), a nighaṇṭu, which gives, not in verse but in simple enumerations, synonyms of Prakrit terms, together with their Sanskrit counterparts.

v3.c43.s3.t1.17

Most of these words are names of plants which occur in the verses of the Haramekhala, but they are preceded by names of gods, anatomical terms and names of animals, and followed by technical terms. The chapter ends with some verses on the utility of the Haramekhala and its nighaṇṭu (275–277), its author (280), and the date of its composition (281). One of these concluding verses (278) indicates that the end of the treatise has been reached. Nevertheless a sixth and seventh chapter are known to exist. Chapter six is about arboriculture (pādapaparikarman) and food (āhāravidhi).³²⁴ Chapter seven deals with inorganic substances (minerals, salts, gems,

v3.c43.s3.t1.18

³²⁴ [^324]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.19

and metals).³²⁵

v3.c43.s3.t1.20

³²⁵ [^325]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.21

The Haramekhala is quoted by Basava in his Śivatattvaratnākara, by Kṣīrasvāmin,³²⁶ Niścalakara,³²⁷ in the Paraśurāmapratāpa, by Nityanātha in the Rasaratnākara,³²⁸ Śivadāsasena,³²⁹ Śrīkaṇṭhadatta in the Kusumāvalī,³³⁰ Śrīvallabhagaṇi in his commentary on Hemacandra's Nighaṇṭuśeṣa,³³¹ and Toḍara. It is referred to by Kokkoka in his Ratirahasya,³³² by Nityanātha³³³ and Śrīdāsapaṇḍita. Cakrapāṇidatta may have derived some formulae from it.³³⁴ The Kakṣapuṭa mentions the Haramekhala as one of its main sources.³³⁵ The Kāmaratna contains a recipe said to derive from the author of the Haramekhala.

v3.c43.s3.t1.22

³²⁶ [^326]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.23

³²⁷ [^327]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.24

³²⁸ [^328]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.25

³²⁹ [^329]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.26

³³⁰ [^330]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.27

³³¹ [^331]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.28

³³² [^332]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.29

³³³ [^333]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.30

³³⁴ [^334]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.31

³³⁵ [^335]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.32

A Śivamekhala,³³⁶ quoted by Toḍara,³³⁷ is probably the same as the Haramekhala.

v3.c43.s3.t1.33

³³⁶ [^336]: ...

v3.c43.s3.t1.34

³³⁷ [^337]: ...

Special features

v3.c43.s3.t2.1

Noteworthy terms and features of the Haramekhala and its commentary in the field of nosology are: jhiṇijhiṇiṭā (jhiṇijhiṇikā; 12.15),³³⁸ a disorder explained as suptapādatā (numb feet); the use of the term lūā (lūā; 2.19–20), probably in the sense of inflamed sore; uppiāsa (4.11), explained as a synonym of the disease called dāruṇa, characterized by tvakcaṭana, i.e., cracking of the skin; dāruṇa (dāruṇaka; 4.13) is said to be a disease of the skin of the head and to be the same as uppiāsa; arūsiā (arūṃśikā; 4.16) is said to consist of small pustules; the description of head lice (4.18); pūiroa (pūtiroga; 4.35), the same as karṇasrāva; añjanaguḷi (añjanaguḷikā; 4.66) as a synonym of an eye disease called añjanapiṭakā; khuṃkhuṇaasoṇia (4.70) as designating a nosebleed (nāsikāsirāśoṇita); avvaradigubbhavaghunadantā (aparadigubhavaghaṇadantaka; 4.86); gaṇḍāpaci as a synonym of gaṇḍamālā (4.105); caraṇadadru (caraṇadadru; 4.129), a disease of the skin of the feet; khasarāi (khasarāṇi; 4.130) as a skin disease; dubbhita (durbhita; 4.140) as a synonym of sidhma; rāāmanda (rājamanda; 4.161) as a synonym of rājayakṣman, also called nrpavyādhi; the presence of pariṇāmaśūla (4.166); a variety of śarkarā, called aṭṭaṇḍasakkara (atyaṇḍaśarkarā; 4.180–181); galagaṇḍa as a synonym of gaṇḍamālāpaci (4.182); the term kuraṇḍa (4.186–188), used to designate a swelling of one or both testicles (aṇḍa- or vṛṣaṇavṛddhi); ramhaṇīvāa (raṃhaṇīvāta; 4.228–229) as a synonym of ūrustambha;³³⁹ a disease of the skin of the legs called rattamaṇḍala (raktamaṇḍala; 4.255); the description of keloid, vaṇakiṇagaṇṭhī (vraṇakiṇagranthi; 4.259); a disease of the skin called kīḍapiḍā (kīṭapiḍakā; 4.302); the mention of jvālāgardabha and jālagardabha as synonyms (4.304); the presence of śialia (śītalikā; 4.305–306), put on a par with visphoṭa; the mention of an epidemic form (upasargaja) of this disease (4.306); mahāruhira (mahārudhira; 4.310–311) and atirajas (4.310 and 312) as synonyms of pradara; a disease of the female breasts called thaṇakīkaḍa (stanakīkaṭa; 4.346); the description of varaṅgavibbhamṣa (varāṅgavibhramśa; 4.350), probably to be equated with prolapsus uteri; a children's disease called vacchāruka (vatsārūṃśi; 4.373), characterized by the presence of parasites on the lesions; the head; khuṃkhuṇiā (khuṃkhuṇikā; 4.374) as a synonym of kukkuṇaka; a children's disease called mutthai (mustaki; 4.374), in which small pustules arise on the interior of the eyelids; a disease of horses and mules called variphoḍa (vārisphoṭa; 4.411), characterized by blisters.

First 144 of 1,709 passages. Read on

Linked texts (80)