A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c43.s3.t4: Date
A History of Indian Medical Literature v3.c43.s3.t4
- Language
- English
Date
v3.c43.s3.t4.1
The *Haramekhalā* was completed on the seventh day of Māgha of the year 887 of an unspecified era,³⁹² said to be the Vikrama era by the commentator, i.e., A.D. 829/830. This date was accepted by the editors of the two editions of the text, but rejected by D.Ch. Bhattacharyya.³⁹³ According to the latter, no king, called Dharaṇīvarāha, reigned in the region of Citrakūṭa (i.e., Chitor) about 830. Two kings of this name are known; one of these, a Dharaṇīvarāha of the Cāpa family, ruled in Vardhamāna (modern Wadhwān in Kāthiāwār), and the other, a Paramāra prince, in Candrāvatī and
v3.c43.s3.t4.2
Arbuda (near Chitor) in 1002. Since Wadhwan is a long distance from Chitor, D.Ch. Bhattacharyya assumes that the Paramāra king was Māhuka's patron and that the *Haramekhalā* was composed in 887 of the Śaka era, i.e., 965/966. In his view, this date is corroborated by Māhuka's reference to Māgha as a distant forefather. A.N. Upadhye³⁹⁴ also argued that the Śaka era may be preferable, but he prefers to identify the patron as Dharaṇīvarāha, the Cāpamahāsāmantādhipati, who was a feudatory of Rājādhirāja Mahīpāla I of the Gurjara-Pratīhāra dynasty of Kanauj.³⁹⁵ It is not yet possible to decide which view should be preferred.
v3.c43.s3.t4.3
The terminus ad quem of the *Haramekhalā* can be established as the eleventh century, because the work was put to use by Cakrapāṇidatta in the eleventh century and was quoted by Kṣīrasvāmin in the first half of the twelfth century.
v3.c43.s3.t4.4
Another medical treatise by an unknown author and of unknown date, called *Haramekhalātantra*, has summarily been described by P.V. Sharma.³⁹⁶ It is completely different from Māhuka's work and referred to by the author as a mahauṣadhisamuccaya.
v3.c43.s3.t4.5
The commentary on the *Haramekhalā*, written by an anonymous author, gives a Sanskrit chāyā of the Prakrit verses and explanations in Sanskrit. It is not only valuable with regard to information on plants, animals,³⁹⁷ etc., but also in providing detailed instructions on the preparation of medicines and perfumes, and in specifying the diseases mentioned in the text. Quotations are rare; the definitions of pāmā (4.136),³⁹⁸ jvālāgardabha (4.304)³⁹⁹ and kukkūṇaka (4.374)⁴⁰⁰ are quoted from an unnamed source, as well as the definition of the maximum length of life (paramāyus) in man and various animals (4.389),⁴⁰¹ the rules for cleansing the teeth (dantadhāvanavidhi; 5.11), and the definition of a gaṇḍūṣa and a kavala (5.12). In one case only the author names his source, namely Vāgbhaṭa (4.204).⁴⁰² He also summarizes in some verses at the end the topics dealt with in chapter four,⁴⁰³ and gives, in a series of about thirty verses at the end of chapter five, technical rules (paribhāṣā) for preparing the substances prescribed by Māhuka.
v3.c43.s3.t4.6
The maṅgala of the commentary indicates that its author was a Śaiva. That he was not the first commentator on the *Haramekhalā* is evident from a remark referring to predecessors.⁴⁰⁴ The date of the commentary cannot be established.
Cites (1)
- Haramekhalā — Māhuka or Mādhuka, Sanskrit