A History of Indian Medical Literature v4.c57.428

v4.c57.428

92. 294 Dāha is a complication of madātyaya in the Suśrutasaṃhitā (U.47.50 and 54). 295 See Su.U.47.53 and 67–68ab. 296 Most treatises describe four types, caused by vāta, pitta, kapha and saṃnipāta (Ca.Sū.19.4 and Ni.8.3; Su.U.61.10cd–11ab; A.h.U.7.5cd; A.s.U.10.6cd; Bhela Ni.8.1; Kāśyapa Sū. 27.52). 297 Types of unmāda brought about by a combination of two doṣas are not mentioned in other medical treatises. Insanity caused by poisonous substances is not described in the Carakasaṃhitā; the Suśrutasaṃhitā (U.62.13cd) and the works ascribed to Vāgbhaṭa (A.h.U.6.17 = A.s.U.9.14) acknowledge it as a separate type. 298 A type of unmāda caused by emotions is described in the Suśrutasaṃhitā (U.62.12–13ab) and Vāgbhaṭa’s works (A.h.U.6.15–16 = A.s.U.9.12–14). 299 Possession is dealt with in a separate chapter (III.55). 300 The traditional number of eighty is found at 20.15. 301 This list is peculiar to the Hārītasamhitā. The diseases mentioned form part of diverse groups in the other medical treatises; some belong to the usual groups of vātavyādhi (manyāstambha, hanugraha, jihvāstambha), others to the groups of karṇaroga (karṇaśūla), śiroroga (śaṅkhaśūla = śaṅkhaka, ardhaśīrṣa = ardhābhedaka, dinavṛddhi-samudbhavaroga = sūryāvarta), nāsāroga (nāsikopadrava), and mukharoga (tālūśūla, galaroga); tamaka is a variety of śvāsa; bhrama and tandrā are described in the chapter on mūrchā (III.14); the presence of asṛggada (literally: blood-disease) in the list is difficult to explain. 302 Parīśvāsa, as distinct from śvāsa, is not known from other treatises. 303 This disease is described in the chapter on mukharoga (III.46.26–28ab). 304 Vomiting caused by vāta. 305 An affection of the voice. 306 This list is, as the preceding one, composite. 307 Cf. Ca.Ci.28.50cd–51ab; Su.Ni.1.50cd–58. 308 Cf. Ca.Si.9.12–20; A.h.Ni.15.17cd–20; A.s.Ni.15.18–22; Mādhavanidāna 22.28cd–30; Bhela Ci.26. 309 Apatānaka seizes one half of the body, ākṣepaka the whole body. The Carakasaṃhitā (Si. 9.12–20) mentions that some authorities distinguish apatānaka from apatantraka on other grounds. Vāgbhaṭa separates the two disorders in the way referred to in the Carakasaṃhitā. Ugrāditya’s Kalyāṇakāraka characterizes apatānaka differently (8.15). 310 Daṇḍāpatānaka is described in the Suśrutasaṃhitā as one of the three varieties of apatānaka, which is a form of ākṣepaka (see Su.Ni.1.52–53ab and the commentaries). 311 The description tallies with ābhyantarāyāma of the Suśrutasaṃhitā (Ni.1.54cd–56). 312 The description tallies with bāhyāyāma of the Suśrutasaṃhitā (Ni.1.57). 313 This variety is also described in the Suśrutasaṃhitā (Ni.1.58). 314 This variety is not known from other treatises. 315 Compare ekāṅgaroga of the Carakasaṃhitā (Ci.28.53cd–55) and Vāgbhaṭa’s works (A.h. Ni.15.38cd–40ab = A.s.Ni.15.40cd–42ab). 316 Compare pakṣaghāta of the Suśrutasaṃhitā (Ni.1.60–61). Pakṣavadha is a synonym of ekāṅgaroga in Vāgbhaṭa’s works. 317 Cf. Su.Ni.1.86–87. 318 This list is peculiar to the Hārītasamhitā.