A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c43.s29.t2: Date

A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c43.s29.t2

Language: English

Date

v3.c43.s29.t2.1

The terminus post quem of Śārṅgadhara can be inferred from information contained in the commentaries on his saṃhitā by Āḍhamalla and Kāśīrāma. The former has recorded that Śārṅgadhara consulted a commentary on Vṛnda's Siddhayoga, ¹¹²⁸ while the latter has mentioned that Śārṅgadhara was acquainted with Tiṣaṭa's work. ¹¹²⁹ Kāśīrāma's commentary contains two remarks ¹¹³⁰ which imply that Śārṅgadhara made use of Vāṅgasena's work, one of these ¹¹³¹ pointing to his posteriority to Trivikrama, who evidently commented upon Vāṅgasena's treatise, and finally a remark ¹¹³² suggesting that Vopadeva preceded Śārṅgadhara.

v3.c43.s29.t2.2

¹¹²⁸ *Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā* 1.1.1 (p. 1).

v3.c43.s29.t2.3

¹¹²⁹ *Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā* 1.1.1 (p. 2).

v3.c43.s29.t2.4

¹¹³⁰ *Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā* 1.1.1 (p. 2) and 1.1.2 (p. 3).

v3.c43.s29.t2.5

¹¹³¹ *Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā* 1.1.2 (p. 3).

v3.c43.s29.t2.6

¹¹³² *Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā* 1.1.1 (p. 2).

v3.c43.s29.t2.7

These data, if reliable, lead to the conclusion that Śārṅgadhara cannot have lived earlier than about 1300, which conflicts with P.V. Sharma's ¹¹³³ and Atrideva's ¹¹³⁴ claims that he is quoted by Hemādri. ¹¹³⁵ The latter's so-called quotation from Śārṅgadhara can, however, be disregarded as a clue to his date, because no source is mentioned by Hemādri and, moreover, only the first of the two verses quoted is found in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā.

v3.c43.s29.t2.8

¹¹³³ P.V. Sharma, *op. cit.*, p. 18.

v3.c43.s29.t2.9

¹¹³⁴ Atrideva, *Introduction* to his edition of the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā, p. 12.

v3.c43.s29.t2.10

¹¹³⁵ *Caturvargacintāmaṇi* 1, p. 336.

v3.c43.s29.t2.11

The often repeated ¹¹³⁶ claim that Śārṅgadhara must be earlier than Vopadeva, because the latter wrote a commentary on the former's saṃhitā is not valid since such a commentary has never been written. The error derives from Weber's Catalogue of Berlin MSS, where MS Nr. 937 is described as containing the Dīpikā, called Gūḍhārthadīpikā, composed by Vopadeva, son of Keśava, on the pūrvakhaṇḍa of

v3.c43.s29.t2.12

¹¹³⁶ E.g. by Jolly, *Indian Medicine*, p. 12.

v3.c43.s29.t2.13

the Śārṅgadharapaddhati. ¹¹³⁷ As those parts of the text which were printed in the catalogue verbally agree with Kāśīrāma's commentary, called Gūḍhārthadīpikā, the MS evidently contains the first part of that work.

v3.c43.s29.t2.14

¹¹³⁷ Weber, *Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin*, Vol. 5, p. 306.

v3.c43.s29.t2.15

Indications with regard to Śārṅgadhara's terminus ante quem are provided by the authors and works referring to or quoting him. The earliest of these are the Paraśurāmapratāpa, dating from the first half of the sixteenth century, ¹¹³⁸ and Gaṇeśadaivajña's commentary, composed in 1528. ¹¹³⁹

v3.c43.s29.t2.16

¹¹³⁸ P.V. Sharma, *op. cit.*, p. 19.

v3.c43.s29.t2.17

¹¹³⁹ P.V. Sharma, *op. cit.*, p. 19.

v3.c43.s29.t2.18

The evidence collected shows that the author of the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā lived later than Trivikrama (of unknown date), who wrote a commentary on Vāṅgasena's treatise (A.D. 1050–1100), or even later than Vopadeva (second half of the thirteenth century), if Kāśīrāma's remarks are trustworthy and correctly interpreted, and before the author of the Paraśurāmapratāpa and Gaṇeśadaivajña. So he should be placed in the period 1100–1500 or 1300–1500. Śārṅgadhara may have borrowed the definitions of a series of technical terms from Vāṅgasena, ¹¹⁴⁰ which would corroborate his posteriority to the latter. P.V. Sharma's assertion ¹¹⁴¹ that Śārṅgadhara used Soḍhala's Gadanigraha as a model for his work, which would prove that Śārṅgadhara is later than Soḍhala, is not convincing, because the order of the pharmaceutical preparations in the two works differs considerably, while, moreover, identical prescriptions seem to be absent, though a restricted number of recipes from the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā also occur in Vāṅgasena's treatise and the Cakradatta. ¹¹⁴² The much more developed stage of rasaśāstra in Śārṅgadhara's work, compared with Vāṅgasena's treatise and the Cakradatta, as well as the changes in the pharmacopoeia, are indicative of a considerable interval of time between the latter two works and the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā.

Cites (5)

Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā — Śārṅgadhara (physician), Sanskrit
Cakradatta (Cikitsāsaṅgraha) — Cakrapāṇidatta, Sanskrit
Siddhayoga (Vṛndamādhava) — Vṛnda, Sanskrit
Śārṅgadharapaddhati — Śārṅgadhara, Sanskrit
Caturvargacintāmaṇi — Hemādri, Sanskrit