Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Medical Literature v4.c58: Part 7: Authors and works from A.D. 600–1500

A History of Indian Medical Literature v4.c58

Language
English

Contents

Part 7: Authors and works from A.D. 600–1500

v4.c58.2

1 NCC I, 459. Check-list Nr. 48. STMI 625–626. Edition: The Aṣṭāṅga Nighaṇṭu of Ācārya Vāhaṭa, ed. by Dr. P.V. Sharma, The Kuppuswamy Sastri Research Institute, Madras 1973 (previously published in the Journal of Oriental Research, Madras, 38, 1968/69, I–XXIII, 1–52, I–XI, and *39, 1969/70, I–XI, 1–12). This ed. is based on two MSS (Cat. Madras Nr. 13256 and Cat. Tanjore Nr. 11297). See on these MSS: P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., I–V (there are considerable differences between the two MSS; their texts are very corrupt and had to be reconstructed on the basis of the Amarakoṣa and the Dhanvantarinighaṇṭu). 2 Cat. Tanjore Nr. 11297. 3 Verse 202: “After describing those drugs which are (contained) in the gaṇas of the Saṃgraha and Alpasamgraha (= Aṣṭāṅgahṛdaya)...” P.V. Sharma is wrong in asserting that the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu describes the drugs according to the gaṇas of the Aṣṭāṅgahṛdaya (Intr. to his ed., XIX). 4 See A.h.Sū.15.9–45 and A.s.Sū.16.2–37. The eight groups of A.h.Sū.15.1–8 are not discussed. 5 Stanza 30. 6 It may be a later addition, because A.s.Sū.16.40 speaks of a total of twenty-five groups, though the number is actually twenty-six. 7 See the long series of examples in P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., XXI–XXII. 8 The synonyms of katphala are omitted in the parūṣakādi-, lodhrādi- and surasādigaṇa, those of śāka in the asanādivarga. See on some more peculiarities: P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., XXII–XXIII. 9 Compare AVI 342. 10 P.V. Sharma (DGV IV, 269) considers the author to be a Vāhaṭācārya who is different from Vāgbhaṭa. P. Hymavathi (1993: 48–49) regards a Bāhaṭācārya as the author of the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu and the Bāhaṭagrantha. 11 See P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., VII–VIII (the examples are from verses 380–400). The date of the Amarakoṣa remains uncertain, but it may have been composed in the sixth century (C.Vogel, IL 309–310). 12 See P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., XII, where nine quotations, which, in P.V. Sharma’s view, can only be from the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu, are listed. See Indu for a critical evaluation of this, not sufficiently established, claim. 13 P.V. Sharma places Indu in the thirteenth century in the Intr. to his ed., XII. 14 Ad A.h.Sū.6.77 (synonyms of gojihvā). Compare Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu 243ab. 15 See P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., XII–XIII. 16 Acc. to P.V. Sharma, Vandyaghaṭīya Sarvānanda (author of the Ṭīkāsarvasva on the Amarakoṣa, completed in A.D. 1159/60; see C. Vogel, IL 315) also quotes it as Vāhaṭa ad Amarakoṣa, vaiśyavarga 43 (AVI 373, n.3; DGV IV, 269–270). 17 See P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., XVI. 18 See P.V. Sharma’s Intr. to his ed., XIV–XVIII. Compare G.J. Meulenbeld (1979): 68–70. 19 Intr. to the ed., XVIII.

v4.c58.3

20 This agrees with P.V. Sharma's date of Jejjaṭa, whom he assigns to the ninth century. 21 Intr. to his ed., IX and XVI–XVIII. 22 Compare G.J. Meulenbeld (1979): 71. P. Hymavathi (1993: 48–49) is not very helpful in expressing as his opinion that the author of the Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu may have lived during the last quarter of the thirteenth and the first quarter of the fourteenth century because his work is quoted or referred to by other scholars from the middle of the fourteenth century onwards. 23 NCC I, 444. 24 NCC: not recorded. Check-list Nr. 75. 25 G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 468) credits Nityanātha, the author of the Rasaratnākara, with the composition of the Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā. 26 Yogatarangiṇī 71.55–56 (pippalyādiguṭikā). 27 According to Cat. IO Nr. 2709. 28 D.Ch.Bhattacharyya (1947b): 136. 29 Ad II.9.93–98 (on lākṣāditaila). 30 Ad Cakradatta, kṣudraroga 66–71. 31 According to HIM I, 147. 32 Yogaratnasamuccaya 8.640 (the properties of tapasvinī and muṇḍī), 10.18 (on the treatment of kāsa), 16.150–159 (a recipe deriving from Brahmā). 33 Bṛhadrasarājasundara 442 (the formula of pāradādicūrṇa). 34 Bṛhadyogatarangiṇī 84.31–41: the formula of rasādiguṭī is from the Aśvineya; compare Bhāratabhaiṣajyaratnākara III, Nr. 4383. 35 Vaidyacintāmaṇi 232–233 (the formula of elādicūrṇa). 36 This Aśvinasaṃhitā contained quotations from earlier authors, such as Bhoja (see Yogaratnasamuccaya 20.57). 37 According to A.F.R. Hoernle (see Bower MS I.8, footnote). 38 See one of the quotations from Candraṭa in Anantakumāra's Yogaratnasamuccaya (16. 277–280). 39 Ad A.h.Sū.5.21cd-23ab (on the properties of cow's milk) and 6.54 (on the properties of the flesh of the eṇa). 40 Pākapradīpa 465–466 (pāthāvaleha). 41 Gadanigraha, prayogakhaṇḍa, cūrṇādhikāra 7–9 (hīṅgvādyacūrṇa). 42 Vaidyacintāmaṇi 341–342 (the formula of mahāhīṅgvādicūrṇa). 43 Vaṅgasena, gulma 76–78 (dvitīya hīṅgvādyacūrṇa). 44 Yogaratnākara 522 (hīṅgvādicūrṇa). 45 P. Cordier (1903b): 343–344. 46 Hemarājaśarman 14 and 118. 47 Yogaratnasamuccaya 24.568–572. 48 See: Anantakumāra. 49 NCC I, 444. Cat. BHU Nr. 246. AVI 318. Compare CBORI XVI, 1, Nr. 307: Saṃnipātacikitsā, forming part of an Aśvinisaṃhitā according to the colophon. 50 NCC I, 144. 51 NCC I, 444. 52 NCC I, 444. P. Cordier (1903b): 349–350. 53 NCC: not recorded. Cat. Mysore XIII, Nr. 41811; from the thirteenth prakaraṇa of the Aśvinisaṃhitā.

v4.c58.4

54 NCC I, 444; IX, 293. HIM I, 147. See: Rasaśāstra texts. 55 P. Cordier (1903b): 349. Two versions of this Harītakikalpa were communicated to A.F.R. Hoernle by P. Cordier. These two versions, a shorter (27 verses) and a longer one (37 verses), were published in Balwant Singh Mohan's edition of the Nāvanītaka (i.e., the Bower MS). 56 According to Vācaka Dīpacandra (see JAI 155). 57 See JAI 157. 58 See: Nidānadīpikā. 59 Yogaratnasamuccaya 30.35–39. 60 NCC I, 444. STMI 132. Cat. BHU Nr. 247. Cat. Tanjore Nr. 11145. 61 CC: not recorded. 62 JAI 129. Rājkumār Jain (1981): 87. 63 JAI 159: the same author wrote a commentary on Vopadeva's Śataślokī. 64 NCC I, 444: Aśvininighaṇṭu. 65 See: Nāḍīśāstra texts. 66 CC I, 479. G. Hāldār held the view that the Aśvinikumārasaṃhitā was composed by an author called Aśvinikumāra, Nityanātha, or Siddhanātha, who also wrote the Rasaratnākara, Rasaratnamālā, Kāmaratna, Yogasāra, etc. (Vṛddhatrayī 468). 67 See on a number of these formulae: HIM I, 149–177. The Aśvins are also designated as the Dasras (see, e.g., Bṛhadyogatarangiṇī 103.87–90: dādimādyaghrta, and 147.381–383: mahāsugandhaitaila), Kumārakas (see, e.g., Bhāratabhaiṣajyaratnākara Nr. 6159: romavedharasa), Nāsatya (see, e.g., Bhāratabhaiṣajyaratnākara Nr. 5597: māṇikyatilakarasa), Sahasrakaraputrabhaiṣagvaras (see, e.g., Yogaratnākara 372: bhārṅgīharītakayavaleha; compare Yogatarangiṇī 30.3–5: the same formula, expounded by the two Bhiṣagvaras to Indra), and Vaidyakumārakas (see, e.g., Rasakāmadhenu IV.1.261–263: romavedharasa). The literature on the Aśvins is extensive. See: Th. Baunack (1896); A. Bergaigne (1883): II, 431–510, III, 5–20, 208–209, 250; C.J. Blair (1961); F.D.K. Bosch (1967); N.G. Chapekar (1964); Dowson; G. Dumézil (1968): 69–70, 78, 87–89, 285–287; E.N. Ghosh (1930); R.P. Goldman (1977); Th. Goldstücker (1967); J. Gonda (1959a): 115–120, (1960), (1974); see index s.v.); T.A. Gopinatha Rao (1971): II, 2, 541–545; H. Güntert (1923): 253–276; J. Haudry (1988); A. Hillebrandt (1965): I, 54–70; HIM I, 146–177; Hopkins; K.B. Iyer (1947); W.A. Jayne (1925): 163–164; G.C. Jhala (1978): 1–101; K.P. Jog *(1964), (1965a), (1965b); Jyotir Mitra (1979); A.B. Keith (1937a), (1976); A.A. Macdonell (1981): 49–54; V. Machek (1946); S.F. Michalski (1961); J. Muir (1967): V, 234–254; R.F.G. Müller (1960a); L. Myriantheus (1876); H. Narayanaiah (1944); Th. Oberlies (1993); H. Oldenberg (1923): 207–215; E. Pirart (1995); R.K. Prabhu (1965/1966); J. Przyluski (1936); J. Puhvel (1970); D.V.S. Reddy (1943a); C. Renel (1896); L. Renou (1939); L. Renou et J. Filliozat (1947): 322–323; R. Śāstrī (1977): 257–277; W. Schwartz (1888); H.A. Shah (1935/1936); R. Shama Shastry (1929); M. and J. Stutley (1977); P.S. Subrahmanya Sastri (1945); Sūramcandra (1978): 25–33; V.H. Vader (1932); Vettam Mani 69–71; D. Ward (1968): 9–29; A. Weber (1862): 264–266, (1879): III, 465–470; S. Wikander (1957); W.J. Wilkins (1974): 44–47; G. Zeller (1990). 68 Brahmavaivartapurāṇa, Brahmakhaṇḍa 16.13–22. Compare N. Gangadharan (1997): 64; HIM I, 146; Vṛddhatrayī 6. 69 Rendered as 'Selected essence' by Rechung (1973: 11–12). An alternative translation may be 'Precious collection'.

v4.c58.5

70 Rendered as ‘Precepts radiating from the valley of light inside the body’ by Rechung (1973: 11–12). An alternative translation may be ‘Emanations (hphro-ba) from the valley (lun) of light (hod) consisting of precepts (khrims) concerning the interior of the body (khog)’ (the sense of byan is not clear). 71 See: commentaries on the works of Vāgbhaṭa. 72 See: commentaries on the works of Vāgbhaṭa. 73 NCC VI, 355–356. Kavindrācāryasūcipatram, Nr. 1033 (Madanādinighaṇṭa). Candranandana does not mention the name of his nighaṇṭu. The colophons of the Kottayam edition call it Madanādinighaṇṭu, a title easily explained since the first drug described is called madana. Edition: Candranandana’s Madanādi-nighaṇṭu, ed. by Aṣṭa Vaidya Vayaskara N.S. Mooss, Vaidyasarathy Sanskrit Series, Book No. 8, Kottayam 1985. This edition is based on four MSS, three from South India and one from Paris (see the Intr. to the ed. 11–17); it does not present the viprakīrṇadravyaprakaraṇa, because of the bad state of this part of the text in the only MS containing it that was available to N.S. Mooss. A fifth MS, deposited at the Asiatic Society, Calcutta (*Nr. G.8426) was examined by P.V. Sharma. His observations on this MS (see his articles: 1985b and 1986b) show the title of the work to be Madanādinighaṇṭu; as an alternative title, Gaṇanighaṇṭu is written on the margin in a different hand. P.V. Sharma also discovered that the Calcutta MS resembles the Paris MS very closely, which indicates a common source for both. The readings of the Calcutta MS enabled P.V. Sharma to improve numerous readings of the Kottayam edition and to fill part of its gaps. The section on miscellaneous drugs (viprakīrṇadravya) forms part of the Calcutta MS and of one of those from Kerala. It has been separately edited by P.V. Sharma. The Miscellaneous portion of Madanadi Nighantu of Chandranandana, Supplement to BIIHM 16, 1986, published in 1987. Unfortunately, neither N.S. Mooss nor P.V. Sharma made use of the quotations from the Madanādinighaṇṭu and the synonyms found in Candranandana’s Padārthacandrikā to improve the readings of the text they edited. 74 NCC III, 96; V, 239; VI, 355–356: Oṣadhinighaṇṭu or Gaṇanighaṇṭu; recorded separately from the Madanādinighaṇṭu. Check-list Nr. 295: Gaṇanighaṇṭu. STMI 44: Oṣadhinighaṇṭu. P. Cordier (1901c: 185) referred to Candranandana’s nighaṇṭu as Gaṇanighaṇṭu, and once, erroneously, as Guṇanighaṇṭu (1903b: 350). The work is called Gaṇanighaṇṭu in J. Filliozat’s list of MSS of the collection P. Cordier in Paris (Liste Nr. 31), although the title page of the MS itself clearly indicates its title as Gaṇanighaṇṭu (see Intr. 14 to the Kottayam ed.); the Paris MS is a copy of a MS preserved in the Palace library of Bikaner (see Intr. 17 to the Kottayam ed.). A Gaṇanighaṇṭu by Candranandana, mentioned by Bāpālāl Vaidya (1968, Intr. 37) is probably a misprint for Gaṇanighaṇṭu. 75 See preceding note. 76 The Tibetan translation of the Madanādinighaṇṭu (see below) only contains the synonyms. 77 Actually, Vāgbhaṭa describes thirty-three groups (see A.h.Sū.15.46), which was a source of confusion to N.S. Mooss (see the Intr. to his ed. 14–6; compare N.S. Mooss, 1980: 25), who tried to solve the difficulty, in conformity with a tradition prevalent in Kerala, by splitting up gaṇa six, the dūrvādigaṇa, into two groups, a dūrvādigaṇa proper and a sthirādigaṇa. P.V. Sharma gave a different and more convincing explanation by pointing out that gaṇas five and six, the bhadrārvādi- and dūrvādigaṇa, describe drugs subduing vāta and

v4.c58.6

pitta, and that the group subduing kapha has deliberately been left out because it consists of substances already mentioned as forming part of preceding groups. 78 The viprakīrṇadravyaprakaraṇa is not a later addition, but belongs to the original Madanādinighaṇṭu since it forms part of the Tibetan translation and is quoted under Candranandana’s name by Kṣīrasvāmin. 79 Vāgbhaṭa only mentions the chief actions of the gaṇa to which a drug belongs. 80 According to P. Cordier the correct Tibetan title is Yan-lag brgyad-pa-nas bstan-paḥi sman-gyi min-gi rnam-graṅs, i.e., Aṣṭāṅgopadiṣṭabheṣajanāmasūcī. See on the Tibetan translation: Vaidya Bhagwan Dash (1987) (based on the Tibetan text, with Sanskrit equivalents, botanical identifications, and notes); P. Cordier (1903a): 615–616; P. Yonten Arya (1998): XIV. 81 E.g., ad Amarakoṣa 2.4.98 (Madanādi 24.11 is quoted). 82 Kṣīrasvāmin repeatedly quotes, the names Candra and Candranandana, from the Madanādinighaṇṭu, e.g., ad Amarakoṣa 2.4.30 (Madanādi 1.26–27), 37 (Madanādi 15.16), 49 (Madanādi, viprakīrṇa p.4), 98 (Madanādi 24.11), 107 (Madanādi 5.3), 127 (Madanādi 21.26), etc. The Candra and Candranandana quoted by Kṣīrasvāmin are sometimes regarded as two different authors (AVI 380–381; DGV IV, 277 and 278). 83 Śivadatta quotes the Madanādinighaṇṭu as Candranandana ad Śivakoṣa 340 (= Madanādi 24.11); two other quotations from Candranandana agree only partially with verses from the Madanādinighaṇṭu (compare the quotations ad Śivakoṣa 2.31 with Madanādi 8.21, and the quotation ad 441 with viprakīrṇa, p.13: tāmalakī). 84 Candra and Candranandana are quoted ad Nighaṇṭuśeṣa 84–85ab (= Madanādi 3.7–8), 91–92ab (= 16.19), 130cd–131ab (= 1.26–27), 135cd–136ab (= viprakīrṇa, p.13), 137 (= 1.8), 244 (= viprakīrṇa, p.28), 256–257ab (compare Madanādi 24.7), 260–261ab (compare Madanādi 5.3), 307ab (= 24.11), and 325 (= 31.26). 85 See: Indu. 86 This Gaṇanighaṇṭu is a different work, for the quotations from it are not traceable in the Madanādinighaṇṭu. See: Bṛhannighaṇṭuratnākara. 87 Vidula is identified as Acacia sinuata (Lour.) Merr., Barringtonia acutangula (Linn.) Gaertn., Calamus rotang Linn., and Salix caprea Linn. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nrs. 25, 214, 290, 1426). 88 Śvetakāmbojikā is mentioned at A.h.U.34.2. This plant is identified as Securinega leucopyrus (Willd.) Muell.-Arg. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 1464). 89 This list does not general not imply that Vāgbhaṭa is unacquainted with these distinctions and additions. 90 E.g., kurūṭa (19.19) instead of kuraṇṭa, jharaśī (22.18) instead of saraśī. 91 Identified as Artemisia nilagirica (C.B. Clarke) Pamp. and A. sieversiana Ehrh. ex Willd. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nrs. 168 and 171). See on the role of damanaka during the Kāma festival: J.J. Meyer (1937): I, 38–53. 92 Identified as Mucuna monosperma DC. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 1137). 93 P.V. Sharma (1986b) was temporarily convinced the two are different; in earlier publications he assumed the two to be identical (AVI 208–209 and 380; 1976a: 107); in a recent publication (1993: Intr. 34) he returned to his early views on this issue. C. Vogel (1965: 15–16) is doubtful on this problem. Usually, however, both authors are regarded as identical (see, for example, Mooss’s Intr. to his ed. of the Madanādinighaṇṭu, 7–11; STMI 44). 94 See P.V. Sharma (1986b).

v4.c58.7

95 See P. Cordier (1903a); Vaidya Bhagwan Dash (1987). 96 The Tibetan equivalent of Candranandana is Zla-ba-la dgah-ba. See M. Taube (1981: 22) on the confusion of Zla-ba mnon-dgah and Zla-ba(-la) dgah-ba. 97 The Tibetan equivalent is, according to P. Cordier, Chags-la mnon-par dgah-ba in the Madanādinighaṇṭu, Chags-pa-la dgah-ba in the Padārthacandrikā; P. Cordier renders these names as Ravinandana, adding that Prema- or Ānandanandana are more literal translations. Vaidya Bhagwan Dash renders Chags-pa-la mnon-par dgah-ba as Ratyabhinandana; C. Vogel (1965: 15), who reads Chags-pa-la dgah-ba, gives Ratinandana as its Sanskrit equivalent (zla-ba is the Tibetan equivalent of Sanskrit candra, chags-pa of rati, mnon-par of abhi, and dgah-ba of nandana). 98 NCC VI, 355. See the colophon and translator's postscript to the Tibetan version of the Padārthacandrikā, where Candranandana's grandfather is called Mahāśrīnandana (Mooss's Intr. to the Madanādinighaṇṭu, 10). Compare on Candranandana's genealogy: L. Rabgay (1981): 16. 99 See the introduction to this commentary by Candranandana himself. 100 As indicated in the Tibetan translation of the Padārthacandrikā (see P. Cordier; C. Vogel, 1965: 15). Candranandana is regarded as a contemporary of king Abhimanyu II (A.D. 958–972) of Kaśmīr (see P. Cordier, 1909–15: *III, 472, referred to by C. Vogel, 1965: 15). The author's colophon and translator's postscript to the Tibetan translation of the Padārthacandrikā praise a king Thakhana, who is identified as the Śāhi ruler Thakkana, a contemporary of Abhimanyu II, against whom Yaśodhara, the latter's commander-in-chief, undertook a military expedition (Mooss's Intr. to the ed. of the Madanādinighaṇṭu, 9–11, based on information supplied by C. Vogel). 101 R.E. Emmerick (1977): 1136. C. Vogel (1965): 15. The colophon and postscript to the Tibetan translation of the Padārthacandrikā mention that it was made by the Indian professor Jārandhara and the monk Rin-chen bzań-po (Mooss's Intr. to the Madanādinighaṇṭu, 10). Vaidya Bhagwan Dash gives A.D. 1013 as the year in which this translation was made. P.V. Sharma (AVI 208) mentions the period 1033–35. See on Rin-chen bzań-po: Bhagwan Dash (1976): 44; T. Clifford (1984): Intr. XVI; G. Huth (1895a): 281; G.N. Roerich (1976; see index); D. Snellgrove (1987): II, 477–479; Tsepak Rigzin (1984); G. Tucci (1993); C. Vogel (1965: 20–21). 102 This biography has been translated into English: Rechung Rinpoche (1973). See on Candra(deva): Rechung (1973): 187, 203, 209, 228, 236, 243, 298. See on the Elder G-yu thog-pa: T. Clifford (1984): 56–58. See on the Elder and Younger G-yu thog-pa: W.A. Unkrig's Einführung to P.C. von Korvin-Krasinski (1953): 21–22. Compare the Tibetan sources on Nāgārjuna. 103 R.E. Emmerick (1977): 1163. Rechung (1973): 209–210. Bhagwan Dash calls the Candradeva, visited by the elder G-yu thog-pa, Candranandana (Bhagwan Dash, 1976: 4; 1987: Preface 8) and Candrābhinandana (Bhagwan Dash 1976: 15); he calls the latter a physician who may or may not be identical with Candranandana. C. Vogel (1965: 15–16) is of the opinion that Candranandana may or may not be identical with the physician Candrābhinandana (Zla-ba-la mnon-dgah), who is said to have assisted Vairocana in putting the Rgyud-bźi into Tibetan at the time of king Khri-sron lde bćan (A.D. 755–797), or with the medical lexicographer Candranandana. Lokesh Chandra (Intr. to Terry Clifford, 1984: 16) asserts that Candranandana rendered the Sanskrit original of the Rgyud-bźi into Tibetan. Terry Clifford too (1984: 42) is in error when claiming that Candranandana wrote down in Sanskrit the teaching of the Rgyud-bźi and gave it to the Tibetan translator

v4.c58.8

Vairocana on the occasion of the latter's pilgrimage to India; he regards Candranandana as a pupil of Aśvaghoṣa. Most sources relate that Vairocana, after receiving the original, translated it into Tibetan. See on Vairocana: Bhagwan Dash (1976a): 18; Rechung (1973): 17, 187, 203, 298. See on the Rgyud-bźi: Vāgbhaṭa. Rechung (1973: 14) relates that, according to the Tibetan tradition, Zla-ba mnon-dgah was a paṇḍit from Kaśmīr and a disciple of Aśvaghoṣa; to this Aśvaghoṣa, who was a prolific author, a number of medical treatises are attributed: Yan-lag brgyad-pa chen-po, Yan-lag brgyad-pa-la hjug-pa, and Yan-lag brgyad-pa ni sñin-po bsdus-pa. Similar statements about Aśvaghoṣa are found in Terry Clifford (1984: 42), who renders the titles of these medical treatises (correctly) as ‘The great eight branches’, ‘Entering the eight branches’ and ‘Collection of the essence of the eight branches’; he adds, as a fourth treatise, an autocommentary on the last work of the three; one of his notes says (1984: 245) that, according to the Tibetans, Aśvaghoṣa and Vāgbhaṭa are the same person (see also: P. Yonten Arya, 1998: X); T. Clifford (1984: 42) ascribes to Candranandana, Aśvaghoṣa's pupil, a commentary on his teacher's works, a dictionary of their medical terms, and major volumes of his own. 104 R.E. Emmerick (1977): 1136. See on this issue also R.F.G. Müller (1932): 793–794. Emmerick's view is criticized by M. Taube (1981: 18–19, 22, 28). 105 G. Huth (1895a): 270–271, (1895b): 280–281; compare P. Cordier (1901c): 180. Huth transcribed Candranandana's name wrongly as Candrānanda (see C. Vogel, 1965: 15). The NCC (I, 464) places Candranandana in the tenth century; P.V. Sharma (1993: Intr. 34) assigns him to about A.D. 1000. 106 NCC VI, 354. 107 The NCC (VII, 26) calls this commentary Yogaratna, which may be based on a confusion with Candraṭa's Yogaratnasamuccaya. See for the editions: Tiṣaṭa. References are to ed. d. See on Candraṭa and his commentary: R.P. Bhatnagar (1992): 280–282; P.V. Sharma's Intr. to ed. d, 5–8; P.V. Sharma (1972b). See for the shorter and longer version of Candraṭa's commentary ed. a. 108 See the commentary ad 161–162; 208–211; 212–215. 109 See on Candraṭa's views regarding some basic concepts: R.P. Bhatnagar (1992): 281–282; P.V. Sharma's Intr. to ed. d; P.V. Sharma (1972b). 110 See the comments ad 10–12. 111 See the commentary ad 80. 112 See, for example, his comments ad 118, 130 and 270. 113 See, e.g., his comments ad 124. 114 According to P.V. Sharma (Intr. to ed. d, 7), Dalhaṇa seems to have followed Candraṭa in a number of interpretations. 115 See, e.g., the commentary ad 48: balā = samaṅgā; ad 51: uccaṭā = kapikacchu or guñjā; ad 61: moraṭa = aiṅkolapuṣpa; ad 371: moraṭa = apāmārga. 116 See, e.g., the commentary ad 208–211. 117 See the commentary ad 340 and 354–355. 118 See the comments ad 341. 119 Probably Bhaṭṭāraharīścandra. Compare: Haricandra. 120 I.e., Śukra. Compare: Śukra. 121 Compare: Bhaṭṭa. 122 I.e., Videha. Compare: Videha.

v4.c58.9

123 At least one of the quotations (the first one) is indeed from the Rasavaiśeṣikasūtra (it is identical with Sūtra 1.95). 124 Siddhasāra 30.11 is quoted. 125 Compare: Bhṛguja. 126 The recipe of prācetasacūrṇa; Candraṭa explains that it derives from Pracetas = Varuṇa. 127 Compare: Janakātmaja. 128 P.V. Sharma suggested that an anonymous quotation may be from Vāgbhaṭa’s Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā (Intr. to ed. d, 6). 129 CC I, 180 and 730. NCC VI, 354. 130 Cat. IO Nr. 2646. The MS is incomplete, covering only chapters 12 and 13 of the Sūtrasthāna, the whole of the Nidāna- and Śārīrasthāna, and the greater part of the Uttaratantra; explanatory notes are added above and below the text, which are, according to Hoernle (1906a: 292–293), extracts from Ḍalhaṇa. Another, also incomplete, MS forms part of the collection of the Rajasthan Oriental Institute at Udaypur; this MS, *S.No. 1806(3), copied in A.D. 1407, covers the Kalpasthāna only (see R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 287). 131 See also Niścala ad Cakradatta, kāsa 59–64. 132 A.F.R. Hoernle (1978): 100. 133 A.F.R. Hoernle (1906a): 293. 134 A.F.R. Hoernle (1906a). 135 AVI 66–67. This opinion is repeated by K.R. Srikanta Murthy (1992): 200–201. 136 Additions of Candraṭa are, according to P.V. Sharma: Su.Sū.24.11 and 45.18–19, Ni.5.33–34, the references to blood as a fourth doṣa (e.g., Su.Sū.21.3), and the references to the medicinal plant called aśvabalā (Su.Sū.46.256 and 261, Ci.1.113 and 6.8); he also detected influence from the side of Candraṭa in Su.Sū.6.17–20. 137 Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya contains about 190 quotations from the Pāṭhaśuddhi; the Mahāpāṭhaśuddhi is cited at least twenty-eight times (probably some quotations from a text indicated as Mahā- are also from the Mahāpāṭhaśuddhi). 138 Identical are, for example: Yogaratnasamuccaya 2(sveda).10 and Su.Ci.32.23; 2(vamanaviracana).35–37 and Su.Ci.33.24–26; 2(basti).36cd–37ab and Su.Ci.37.60; 2(basti).42cd–43ab and Su.Ci.37.69; 2(basti).76cd–80ab and Su.Ci.38.96–99; 2(basti).80cd–81ab and Su.Ci.38.118; 4.7 and Su.Śā.8.10; 4.57–59 and Su.Sū.13.5–7; 4.68 and Su.Sū.13.18; 8.177cd–181ab and Su.Sū.45.98–103; 8.306cd–307ab and Su.Sū.45.38; 8.396 and Su.Sū.46.351cd–352ab; 8.397–398ab and Su.Sū.46.357cd–358; 8.398cd–401ab and Su.Sū.46.353cd–356ab; 8.401cd–402ab and Su.Sū.46.363; 8.410cd and Su.Sū.46.73ab; 8.414 and Su.Sū.46.95; 8.416 and Su.Sū.46.110; 8, prose between 416 and 417 and Su.Sū.46.112; 8.427cd–428ab and Su.Sū.46.80; 8.438cd–440ab and Su.Sū.46.55–56; 8.451cd–452 and Su.Sū.46.87–88ab; 8.454 and Su.Sū.46.88cd–89ab; 8.471 and Su.Sū.46.111; 8.481cd–482ab and Su.Sū.46.115; 8.506cd and Su.Sū.46.265ab; 8.508 and Su.Sū.46.260; 8.626cd and Su.Sū.46.215cd; 8.631 and Su.Sū.46.236; 8.786cd–787ab and Su.Sū.46.161; 8.994cd–995 and Su.Sū.46.231–232ab; 8.1021cd–1022ab and Su.Sū.46.201; 8.1036cd–1037 and Su.Sū.46.202–203ab; 8.1091cd–1094ab and Su.Ci.24.67cd–70ab; 8.1095–1099 and Su.Ci.24.73cd–74ab; 8.1100–1102 and Su.Ci.24.81–83; 8.1103 and Su.Ci.24.88; 8.1104 and Su.Ci.24.87; closely related are, for example: 8.99–100 and Su.Sū.45.51cd–53ab; 8.403cd–404 and Su.Sū.46.364cd–365; 8.436cd–437ab and Su.Sū.46.63cd–64ab; 8.446–447ab and Su.Sū.46.64cd–65ab; 8.780 and Su.Sū.46.168; 8.1042 and Su.Sū.46.309; related are, for example, 8.511cd–512ab and

v4.c58.10

Su.Sū.46.261a–d; disagreeing are, for example: 8.617–619ab and Su.Sū.46.213–214ab; 8.627ab and Su.Sū.46.219ab; 8.782ab and Su.Sū.46.170; 8.1040ab and Su.Sū.46.203cd–204ab; 8.1040cd and Su.Sū.46.204cd; 8.1094cd and Su.Ci.24.71cd; absent from the Suśrutasaṃhitā are, for example, 8.617 and 8.630cd. Examples of quotations from the Mahāpāṭhaśuddhi, found in the Suśrutasaṃhitā, are 3.1 (= Su.Ci.40.62) and 3.11cd–12ab (= Su.Ci.40.67cd–68ab). 139 CC I, 181 and 479; II, 111. NCC VI, 354. Check-list Nr. 1058. STMI 45: one of the MSS contains 4,580 verses. CBORI XVI, 1, Nrs. 176–177; Nr. 176 can be regarded as a complete MS (R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 283); Nr. 177 contains the cūrṇādhikāra (R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 283). Cat. BHU Nr. 143 (contains the text from ghṛtādhikāra up to mukharogacikitsā; see R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 285). Cat. Anup Sanskrit Library Nrs. 4182–83 (these two MSS belong together and contain a complete text: 4182 contains the text up to bastividhi, 4183 is a continuation in a different hand to the end of the kalpādhikāra; compare R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 283–284). MSS 4816 E (P.M. Jinavijaya, 1965: II B, 230–231: dating from the seventeenth century, Appendix 164: extract) and *8662 of the Rajasthan Oriental Research Institute, Jodhpur. *MS Nr. 34 of the Sāhitya Saṃsthān, Udaypur (this MS contains the kalpādhikāra; see R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 284). Three more MSS are available in collections in Calcutta, Kāṭhmaṇḍu and Mysore (see R.P. Bhatnagar, 1992: 285). 140 CBORI XVI, 1, Nr. 176. 141 It also gives details on the preparation of compound medicines (STMI 45). 142 A vraṇādhikāra of Candraṭa is referred to in one of Anantakumāra’s quotations (Yogaratnasamuccaya 5.5cd–6ab); it may form part of the gadaśānti section. 143 The ghṛtādhikāra is referred to by Niścala ad Cakradatta, vraṇasotha 49. 144 The order of the diseases in the chapter on gadaśānti differs from that of the Mādhavanidāna; pāṇḍuroga comes after gulma and kāsa after vātavyādhi, while upadaṃśa and ślīpada are treated in one chapter (see Cat. BHU Nr. 143). 145 See the third introductory verse (CBORI XVI, 1, Nr. 176). See also Cat. BHU Nr. 143. Niścalakara (ad Cakradatta, svarabheda 13) refers to a paribhāṣādhikāra; he quotes two paribhāṣās ad raktapitta 28–29. 146 R.P. Bhatnagar (1992): 285. 147 P.K. Gode (1944e). Gode’s sources consisted of the two BORI MSS: Nr. 147 of A. 1882–83 (identical with Cat. BORI, XVI, 1, Nr. 176) and Nr. 1072 of 1886–92 (identical with Cat. BORI XVI, 1, Nr. 177). 148 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, kuṣṭha 29. 149 Confirmed by a quotation from Candraṭa in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya (16. 277–280: the Āśvinasaṃhitā is mentioned in the quotation). 150 Bhadraśaunaka according to R.P. Bhatnagar (1992: 286). 151 The same as Bhadravarman. Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, kuṣṭha 32; visarpa 22 and 30. 152 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, unmāda 34–37; prameha 22–26 and 30–37. 153 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, galagaṇḍa 31; mukharoga 111–112. 154 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, śūla 12. 155 This work is not the same as the Nāvanītaka that forms part of the Bower MS according to P. Cordier (1903b: 342). R.P. Bhatnagar (1992: 286) notices that seventeen recipes are quoted from the Nāvanītaka. Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, arśas 120–126; raktapitta 79–81.

v4.c58.11

156 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, vraṇaśotha 76–80. 157 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, visarpa 14. 158 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, kṣudraroga 66–71. 159 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b: 152) studied *MS Nr. 5168 of the Royal Asiatic Society, Calcutta. 160 See NCC VII, 30. 161 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya claims in another publication (1947a: 122) that the Yogaratnasamuccaya quotes the recipe of vijayabhairavataila (Rasaratnasamuccaya 21.148–151) from Rasavāgbhaṭa; this claim is unfounded, because the Rasaratnasamuccaya leans heavily on earlier sources and is later than Candraṭa. 162 AVI 285. R.P. Bhatnagar (1992): 286. 163 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, raktapitta 39–42 (a quotation from Acyuta’s Āyurvedasāra). 164 Compare NCC I, 346. 165 Undoubtedly the same as Amitaprabha. 166 See NCC VII, 27. 167 See NCC IV, 31. 168 Confirmed by Niścala ad Cakradatta, śūla 50–51 and 54. 169 CC: not recorded. 170 When compared with P.K. Gode’s list. 171 Ad Cakradatta, kuṣṭha 131–133. 172 Ad Cakradatta, kuṣṭha 134–135; nāsāroga 29–31; vṛṣya 15–25; nirūha 22–25 and 28–30. Compare Candraṭa’s quotations from some tantrāntara in Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya (9.514cd–520; 12.260; 14.473; 30.222–223). 173 See Yogaratnasamuccaya 30.224. 174 See Yogaratnasamuccaya 21.261–262. 175 See Yogaratnasamuccaya 21.221–222. 176 Yogaratnasamuccaya 14.301–302. 177 Identical according to R.P. Bhatnagar (1992): 282. 178 CC I, 180. NCC VI, 354. This confusion may find its source in the second introductory verse of the Yogaratnasamuccaya, where Candraṭa claims to have extracted the essence from the ocean of āyurveda, as if it were the amṛta (uddhṛtyāmṛtavat sāram āyurvedamahodadheḥ). 179 See: Niścala. The majority of Niścala’s quotations are from the Yogaratnasamuccaya. 180 See: Soḍhala. 181 See Niścala ad Cakradatta, kuṣṭha 25 and 30; vṛṣya 15–25; nirūha 22–25 and 28–30; Śivadāsasena ad Cakradatta, jvaracikitsā 75 (he states that this yoga is also found in Candraṭa’s śamanādhikāra, which is the same as the gadaśāntyadhikāra; Niścala states that it occurs in Candraṭa’s work, although deriving from Hārīta); vraṇaśotha 52 (Niścala claims that the verse is from the Siddhasāra); vṛṣya 15–24. 182 Bṛhadrasarājasundara 459 (the formula of rasādigutikā). 183 Bhāratabhaisajyaratnākara IV, Nr. 6103. Rasayogasāgara, yakārādi 124. 184 Another work of this title was compiled by Anantakumāra. 185 See: Hemādri. 186 Anantakumāra’s Yogaratnasamuccaya contains more than eighty quotations from Candraṭa. These quotations baffled N.S. Mooss (1979: XX), because he failed to distinguish between Anantakumāra’s and Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya.

v4.c58.12.1

187 Śivadāsasena refers consistently to Candraṭa as Candraṭa. 188 Toḍara IX: 1.132. 189 Niścala ad Cakradatta, grahaṇī 77–85. 190 See Niścala ad Cakradatta, arocaka 2 and 4; unmāda 21–28; upadaṃśa 4 and 5; karṇaroga 8, 11, 30. 191 Not recorded as a work of Candraṭa in the NCC. 192 NCC: not recorded. 193 AVI 209 and 426 (repeated by B. Rama Rao, 1992: 305). The Dravyāvalī is also called Dravyakoṣa or Vaidyakoṣa (AVI 209 and 426.). Candraṭa’s Dravyāvalī (also called Vaidyakoṣa) is quoted by Niścala according to G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 53). 194 CC I, 180. 195 NCC VI, 354. 196 NCC: not recorded. Ad Cakradatta, agnimāndya 87. 197 CBORI XVI, 1, Nr. 176. 198 The same applies to Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya, as becomes apparent from remarks of Śivadāsasena in his commentary on the Cakradatta. See, e.g., his comments ad jvaracikitsā 75, where he states that this yoga is also found in Candraṭa’s śamanādhikāra (= gadaśāntyadhikāra), and those ad vraṇaśothacikitsā 52 and vṛṣyādhikāra 15–24. 199 Ad Siddhayoga 74.16–17. 200 AVI 209, 271, 286. P.V. Sharma placed Jejjata in the ninth century (AVI 207–208, 271, 286) and concluded, because Tiṣaṭa and Candraṭa are quoted by Cakrapāṇidatta, that both lived in the tenth century (AVI 271 and 286). R.P. Bhatnagar (1992: 287) agrees with P.V. Sharma, but, on another page of the same article (1992: 280), he assigns Candraṭa to the middle of the fifth century. 201 Jejjata lived, in my opinion, in the seventh or eighth century.

v4.c58.12.2

202 In his commentary on the Cikitsākalikā and in the Yogaratnasamuccaya. 203 In the Yogaratnasamuccaya, as claimed by D.Ch. Bhattacharyya. 204 Ad Cakradatta, agnimāndyacikitsā 39. 205 A.F.R. Hoernle (1978: 100) placed both authors in the ninth or tenth century on faulty grounds, because he departed from a wrong chronology of Dṛḍhabala, while D.Ch. Bhattacharyya, assuming, on weak grounds, that both lived after Vṛnda, places them in the first half of the tenth century (1947a: 124–125; 1947b: 151–153). The quotation from Vāṅgadatta in Candraṭa’s Yogaratnasamuccaya (see AVI 285) has no certain chronological value, because Vāṅgadatta is absent as one of Candraṭa’s sources from the lists compiled by P.K. Gode and D.Ch. Bhattacharyya. 206 P.V. Sharma (AVI 213) calls the author Govardhana(datta). 207 P.V. Sharma (1993: Intr. 21 and 22) regards the Bṛhattantrapradīpa as a work of Bhavyadatta in his edition of Niścalakara’s Ratnaprabhā; formerly (AVI 213), he attributed it to Naradatta, Cakrapāṇi’s teacher. In spite of these claims, it may have been written by Bindusāra (see Niścala ad Cakradatta, jvara 232–233 and jvarātīsāra 16–25). The references to the Bṛhattantrapradīpa and Bhavyadatta in the Ratnaprabhā (ad mukharoga 1) need not imply that Bhavyadatta wrote the treatise; Bhavyadatta may have been acquainted with it. 208 NCC III, 205. 209 NCC VI, 183. 210 NCC VI, 183: not mentioned as a work of Govardhana.

v4.c58.12.3

The Nyāyāsāradī, quoted once by Niścala (ad Cakradatta, gulma 57–59), may be identical with the Nyāyasārāvalī (see D.Ch. Bhattacharyya, 1947b: 144: P.V. Sharma, 1993: Intr. 20). 211 NCC VI, 183: not mentioned as a work of Govardhana. 212 See: Niścala. 213 See: Niścala. 214 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b): 147. 215 P.V. Sharma (1993): Intr. 23. 216 See: various authors of undetermined date. 217 See Niścala ad Cakradatta, kuṣṭha 29: the Karmamālā is acquainted with a verse of Amitaprabha. 218 See Niścala ad Cakradatta, raktapitta 14: Mādhava's Svalpayogavyākhyā agrees with Govardhana's Paribhāṣāvalī. Niścala refers several times to Govardhana and an unidentified Mādhava (who may be earlier than Govardhana) as authors with the same opinion; see Niścala ad kāsa 59–64; unmāda 29–30; gulma 9–10; udara 57. 219 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b): 144. 220 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b): 155. G. Hāldār (Vṛddhatrayī 52 and 463) regards Govardhana(datta) as a friend of Cakrapāṇidatta; he is credited with the Cikitsāleśa and a commentary on Naradatta's Tantrapradīpa. 221 See Niścala ad Cakradatta, jvara 64; madātyaya 11–12; udara 57; śotha 48–51. 222 NCC VI, 183. 223 NCC: not recorded. *India Office Library manuscript Ch ii.003: incomplete, contains no colophon; extant are the folios numbered in the margins from 44 to 116. A.F.R. Hoernle (1917) studied part of the MS;

v4.c58.12.4

he provided a transcription of the Khotanese and the Sanskrit texts, a restoration of the Sanskrit, and a translation of the Khotanese text of Jivakapustaka [1]–[3] and [18]. A facsimile of the text was published by H.W. Bailey (Codices Khotanenses, 1938, 71–141), as well as a transcription of the Sanskrit and Khotanese texts (Khotanese Texts I, Cambridge 1945, 136–195). The Khotanese text was edited, with an English translation and a vocabulary, by S. Konow, A medical text in Khotanese, Ch. II 003 of the India Office Library, with translation and vocabulary; Avhandler utgitt av Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo, II. Hist.-Filos. Klasse, 1940 No. 4, Oslo 1941 (reviewed by H.W. Bailey, BSOAS 10, 1939/42, 1021–1023, M. Leumann, OLZ 1942, 11/12, 465–467, and *H. Oertel, KZ 67, 1942, 244). H.W. Bailey (1983) translated part of the first tract of the Jivakapustaka. Hoernle intended to publish a study of folios 44–72recto under the title of ‘An ancient medical manuscript from Eastern Turkestan’ as volume 2 of his ‘Manuscript remains of Buddhist literature found in Eastern Turkestan’ (Vol. 1 was published at Oxford in 1916; second edition, Delhi 1988); his planned edition included a lengthy introduction on the manuscript, its script, and its language, and contained besides his edition and translation of the Khotanese text his reconstruction of the Sanskrit text (see R.E. Emmerick, 1982; 1984a: 142; 1992: 61; 1992a: 43); A.F.R Hoernle's article was published in: S.K.

v4.c58.12.5

Belvalkar (1917): 415–432. R.E. Emmerick (1992, 1994) edited, translated and annotated the Sanskrit and Khotanese versions of Jivakapustaka 44recto1–47verso3 (the Svastika antidote) and 51recto4–52verso3 (the Mahāsauvarcalādi ghee). Some parts of the Jivakapustaka (text, English translation, glossary) are (imperfectly) reproduced, without mention of the source and the name of the work, in Kshanika Saha (1985). See on some other medical texts in Khotanese: H.W. Bailey (1983): 1234; R.E. Emmerick (1979b): 49, (1992a): 45.

v4.c58.13

224 Text 1 runs from 44recto1–47verso3 (an agada), text 2 from 47verso4–88verso1 (ghees), text 3 (incomplete) from 88verso1–116verso5 (oils and powders); these texts consist of collections of formulae, written in Sanskrit and Khotanese (R.E. Emmerick, 1992: 60). R.E. Emmerick distinguishes four tracts in a later article (1994: 29); he divides text 3 into two sections, on oils (88verso1–105recto2) and powders (105recto2–116verso5) respectively, since the word siddham occurs at 88verso1 and 105recto2. 225 H.W. Bailey gave the work this title on account of the reference to Jīvaka. 226 See R.E. Emmerick (1979a). 227 R.E. Emmerick (1979a): 243. 228 These terms were studied by R.E. Emmerick (1979a). 229 See on the mahāsauvarcalādighṛta: R.E. Emmerick (1994), (1997). 230 See J. Filliozat's review of H.W. Bailey's Khotanese Texts I in JA 235, 1946–47, 134–135. For five prescriptions he gave references to Caraka, but one of these passages corresponds only in content, not in formulation; it has nevertheless proved possible to identify this passage (R.E. Emmerick, 1979a: 236). The earliest author to identify one of the prescriptions of the Jivakapustaka as being from Caraka was A.F.R. Hoernle (1917): 415–432; see on this article R.E. Emmerick (1982): 343. 231 A total of twenty-nine formulae has now been traced; see the list in R.E. Emmerick (1979a): 236. The Khotanese text of the Jivakapustaka has ninety-two sections and counts ninety formulations in S. Konow's edition. An additional formula, almost complete, is found at the end of the Sanskrit text, but without a Khotanese rendering. 232 Fifteen formulae were borrowed from the Siddhāsara. 233 R.E. Emmerick (1979a): 237; (1979b): 48–49. 234 See R.E. Emmerick (1992): 60. See on Khotan in general: H.W. Haussig (1983; see index); P. Hopkirk (1984; see index); D. Snellgrove (1987): II, 331–343; A. Stein (1971; see index). 235 CC and NCC: not recorded. 236 See Hemarājaśarman 13, 20 and 118: one MS was completed in A.D. 924, the other one is said to be 700–800 years old. 237 Hemarājaśarman 14 and 118. 238 Hemarājaśarman 20 and 118. The majority of these quotations are from the older part of the Kāśyapasamhitā, a minority is from its Khilasthāna. Fragments of the text of the Jvarasamuccaya which agree with the Kāśyapasamhitā are to be found at the end of Hemarājaśarman's upodghāta (118–120). 239 Ad Nidāna 2.18–23. 240 See Hemarājaśarman 118–119 for the pertinent fragment of the Jvarasamuccaya. Some of these verses are very close to passages of the Kāśyapasamhitā (Kalpasthāna, viśeṣakalpādhyāya, 215). Compare G.J. Meulenbeld (1974): 165–167. 241 NCC V, 131; VII, 153 (Janiḍoṣapratikāra, from Kriyākālaguṇottara). Filliozat, Liste Nr. 27. STMI 101: in five chapters (paṭala). The Check-list (Nr. 400) records a Kriyākalapaguṇottara. 242 Tāntrika Sāhitya 164. Compare the anonymous Bālacikitsā. 243 NCC V, 163: Netratantra; X, 218: Netroddyota, a Śaiva Tantra, by Rājānaka Kṣemarāja. See on the Netratantra: S.C. Banerji (1988): 396–397; T. Goudriaan and S. Gupta (1981): 127; Tāntrika Sāhitya 347.

v4.c58.14

245 Har Dutt Sharma (1942): 13. 246 CC: not recorded. H.P. Śāstrī (1905): 140 (Nr. 1647): cikitsāśāstram ārogyārthaśāntisvastayanādisahitam. AVI 313. J. Jolly (1901): 125 (C.G. Kashikar 151). See the description of a photograph of this MS in Gambier Parry, Nr. 48: an ancient treatise on medicine, recited to Vibhīṣaṇa, the pious brother of the wicked Rāvaṇa. 247 NCC XI, 239. Editions: *a Ed. by Viṭṣarakāra, Calcutta 1891/92. *b C. Bhaṭṭācārya under the title Ratnamālābhidhānaṃ arthāt Vanauṣadhivarga (see T. Chowdhury's Intr. to ed. c). c by Tarapada Chowdhury, Patna 1946 (reprinted from *Patna University Journal, Vol. 2); reviewed by K.V. Sarma, The Journal of Oriental Research (Madras) 19 (1949), part 1, 94–95. This is a critical edition, based on eight MSS, which are described in the Intr. In addition to these, T. Chowdhury made use of a printed ed. (b) and the quotations found in the Śabdakalpadruma and Umeśacandragupta's Vaidyakaśabdasindhu, the authors of which often quote from the Ratnamālā and had access to independent MSS. Among Chowdhury's MSS there is only one that reaches the end (Cat. Skt. MSS Calcutta Sanskrit College X, 41, Nr. 51: Ratnamālā by Mādhavakara.). Another complete MS was described by R. Mitra (Notices X, Nr. 3150: 221 verses). Compare G.J. Meulenbeld (1974): 10–11. References are to c. 248 The title of the work is Ratnamālā according to its concluding stanzas; it is also quoted under that name. 249 Concluding stanzas of the Ratnamālā. One MS ascribes the work to Rājavallabha (*R. Mitra, Notices I, Nr. 207; see S.K. De, 1937/38: 275). 250 According to the colophon. 251 See on homonyms: J. Gonda (1936a). 252 The term aṣṭavarga is absent from the Bṛhattrayī and the Aṣṭāṅgasaṃgraha. See on the history of the aṣṭavarga: V.K. Joshi (1983). 253 Unidentified. 254 Already mentioned at Ca.Sū.4.18. A climber, the leaves and flowers of which resemble those of the aśoka. Identified as Erycibe paniculata Roxb. by T.B. Singh and K.C. Chunekar (1972). The same as kaṭukā according to P.V. Sharma (1997) and others (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 1282). Kaṭukā is identified as Picrorrhiza kurroa Royle ex Benth. (see G.J. Meulenbeld, 1974: 533–534; T.B. Singh and K.C. Chunekar, 1972; WIRM VIII, 49) and P. scrophulariiflora Pennell = P. kurroa auct. non Royle (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 1282; compare S.S.R. Bennet, 1987 and WIRM VIII, 49–50). 255 Compare Dhanvantarinighaṇṭu 5.134 (aṣṭapadī = mallikā) and Rājanighaṇṭu 10.225 with Paryāyaratnamālā 311. Identified as Vallaris solanacea Kuntze = V. dichotoma Wall. in MW. 256 Usually identified as Cissus quadrangularis Linn. 257 A small variety of karkāru: identified as Cucumis sativus Linn. (M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 527), Cucurbita pepo Linn. (M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 530; P.V. Sharma in his ed. of the Kaiyadevanighaṇṭu; P.V. Sharma, 1997; T.B. Singh and K.C. Chunekar, 1972), and Benincasa hispida (Thunb.) Cogn. = B. cerifera Savi (M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 228; H. Losch, 1959).

v4.c58.15

258 Unidentified. 259 Several species of Datura. 260 Identified as Butea monosperma (Lam.) Taub., B. superba Roxb., and Leea macrophylla Roxb. ex Horn. See M. Abdul Kareem (1997), Nrs. 275 and 1008; Bāpālāl (1982): 89–91; P.V. Sharma (1985a): 354–355, (1997); R.S. Singh and A.N. Singh (1981). 261 Enhydra fluctuans Lour. (M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 673; Chopra's Glossary; DGV V, 275; DWH II, 266; P.V. Sharma, 1997; WIRM III, 173). 262 Several species of Sorghum, great millet (see P.K. Gode, 1944f; P.V. Sharma, 1997). Also identified as Thysanolaena maxima (Roxb.) Kuntze and Th. procera Mez. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nrs. 1618–1619). 263 Unidentified. 264 This may the first occurrence of kāśmīraja in a nighaṇṭu, though the word is already used by Vāgbhaṭa (A.h.U.37.44); the closely related kāśmīrajanman is found in the Amarakoṣa (2.6.124). 265 Cassia absus Linn. (DGV V, 323). Mentioned in the Suśrutasaṃhitā (Ci.16.26). 266 This plant may be the same as kumbhāḍulatā = kaṇṭākumbhāḍu, and Typha species (see P.V. Sharma, 1985a: 349). Kumbhāṭa is identified as Careya herbacea Roxb. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 330; P.V. Sharma, 1997). 267 Identified as Citrus limetta Risso (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 422) and C. limettioides Tanaka = C. medica var. limetta Wight et Arn. (Vanauṣadhicandrodaya VI, 22). 268 Also mentioned by Dalhaṇa ad Su.Sū.36.27. 269 Identified as Arundo donax Linn. (P.V. Sharma, 1997), Lobelia nicotianaefolia Roth ex R. et S. (see S.S.R. Bennet, 1987), Phragmites karka Trin. ex Steud., and Typha australis Schum. et Thonn. (see M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nrs. 177, 1033, 1268, 1661). Also identified as Saccharum spontaneum Linn. (MW). 270 Sarpagandhā is usually identified as Rauvolfia serpentina Benth. ex Kurz. 271 Usually identified as Ophiorrhiza mungos Linn. (M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 1202; Chopra's Glossary; DGV V, 291; Nadkarni I, Nr. 872; P.V. Sharma, 1997); its identity is, however, disputed (see Bāpālāl, 1982: 320–321; DGV V, 291; K.V. Nair et al., 1984: 65). 272 Usually identified as Crinum latifolium Linn. or C. asiaticum Linn., sometimes as Tinospora sinensis (Lour.) Merrill = T. malabarica Miers ex Hook.f. = T. tomentosa Miers ex Hook.f.; see M. Abdul Kareem (1997), Nrs. 505, 507, 1621; Chopra's Glossary; DWH III, 464–466; Nadkarni I, Nrs. 699 and 2475; P.V.Sharma, (1979a): 133 and (1985a): 354. 273 Lawsonia inermis Linn. = L. alba Lam., the henna plant (M. Abdul Kareem, 1997, Nr. 1005; AVI 352). See on this plant and its names P.K. Gode (1947d). 274 Of uncertain identity. Mentioned in the Carakasaṃhitā, etc. See DGV V, 60–64; T.B. Singh and K.C. Chunekar, 1972. 275 One of Jīvaka's patients suffered from a disease called antagaṇṭhābādha (see K.G. Zysk, 1990: 122–123); this term may the Pāli equivalent of antagranthi. 276 Compare, e.g., Aṣṭāṅganighaṇṭu 405. 277 It may be the same as pravāhikā. 278 C. Vogel, IL 316. Mādhava is quoted ad Amarakoṣa 1.10.37 (= Ratnamālā 279), 2.4.28 (= 348), and 2.4.49 (= 286). 279 Paryāyaratnamālā 950 is quoted (ad Su.Sū.14.18) as being from Mādhava. 280 Haricaraṇasena refers to Mādhava's Ratnamālā in the introductory verses of his work. 281 C. Vogel, IL 315. See A.A. Ramanathan (1971: Intr. 47); Ratnamālā 54 is quoted ad Amarakoṣa 2.4.23cd–24ab. The quotations in this commentary from an author called Mādhava are not from the Ratnamālā.

v4.c58.16

283 Quoted as Mādhava and Ratnamālā; see T.R. Chintamani (1938).

v4.c58.17

284 Quoted as Ratnamālā ad Cakradatta, atisāra 31–32 (= Paryāyaratnamālā 1649–1651); raktapitta 39–42; rājayakṣman 65–66 (refers to 1748). G. Häldär (Vṛddhatrayī 53) correctly identified Niścala's Ratnamālā. D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b: 147) and P.V. Sharma (1993: Intr.23) are wrong in regarding it as a work of Govardhana.

v4.c58.18

286 C.Vogel, IL 315. Mādhava (Ratnamālā 279) is quoted ad Amarakoṣa 1.10.37; the Ratnamālā is also quoted, according to Th. Aufrecht (1874: 116).

v4.c58.19

287 Śivadāsasena quotes, without indicating his source, Ratnamālā 1652–53 (ad madyādivarga 25), 1669–70 (ad kṛtānnavarga 48), 1665–66 (ad kṛtānnavarga 49), 1671–73 (ad bhakṣyavarga 9), and 1676–78 (ad bhakṣyavarga 13).

v4.c58.20

288 C. Vogel, IL 377. Mādhava is quoted ad Śivakoṣa 51 (= Ratnamālā 290), 66 (= 348), 85 (=265), 195 (= 286), 221 (= 1664), 244 (= 632), 428 (= 286), and 441 (= 434). The quotation from Mādhava ad 151 cannot be traced.

v4.c58.21

289 At least five quotations are found in this commentary: vol. 1, 112: tathā ca ratnamālā (= Ratnamālā 1324); vol. 1, 203: iti ratnamālāyāṃ mādhavah (= 185–186); vol. 2, 81: iti mādhavah (= 348); vol. 3, 245: tathā ca ślokārdhaparyāye mādhavah (= 439); ibid.: iti ślokaparyāye mādhavah (= 451 and 446). Variants have been disregarded. According to T. Chowdhury's notes to ed. c, Sarvānanda quotes moreover: 17 (ad Amarakoṣa 2.4.51); 54; 122 (ad 4.126–127); 161 (ad 5.4.54); 227 (ad 2.4.98); 338 (ad 2.4.74); 632 (vol. 2, 91); 773–774 (vol. 1, 188); 925 (vol. 2, 332); 1036 (vol. 3, 31); 1323 (vol. 1, 112); 1663–1664 (vol. 3, 282).

v4.c58.22

290 T.R. Chintamani (1938).

v4.c58.23

291 Th. Aufrecht (1874): 112. The identity and date of this author are unknown; he is different from Nārāyaṇaśarman, who wrote his Padārthakaumudī on the Amarakoṣa in 1618/19 (NCC I, 327 and XI, 104; C. Vogel, IL 316).

v4.c58.24

292 Ratnamālā 1506b is quoted ad Mādhavanidāna 2.10–11.

v4.c58.25

294 C. Vogel, IL 314. The Mālā and Mālākāra's work, repeatedly quoted by Kṣīrasvāmin, do not resemble the Paryāyaratnamālā.

v4.c58.26

297 D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b): 154.

v4.c58.27

298 *Ed. Chowkhamba 301 acc. to D.Ch. Bhattacharyya: na khalu pāṭaliputra upalabdhāsya prāsādasya śilāhrade smarann abhrāntaḥ. Vācaspatimiśra lived about A.D. 850 (Winternitz III, 436–437).

v4.c58.28

299 AVI 374; DGV IV, 270; P.V. Sharma (1976a): 98. This identification of Śilāhrada was originally proposed by G. Häldär in his Vṛddhatrayī (as P.V. Sharma informed the present author by letter). P.C. Choudhury identified Śilāhrada with the village of Śilā near Barpeta in Kāmarūpa (see his Intr. to Brajanāthaśarman's Vaidyakasāroddhāra, 7).

v4.c58.29

300 P.V. Sharma (1976a: 98; see also DGV IV, 270) supposes that Mādhava was attached to this university as a teacher.

v4.c58.30

301 N.N. Das Gupta (1936/37): 155. D.Ch. Bhattacharyya (1947b): 153–154. S.K. De (1937/38: 275) regarded this argument as hardly conclusive.

v4.c58.31

302 The same word is found in the Vaijayantī (3.3.102); related words occur in Puruṣottamadeva's Trikāṇḍaśeṣa (vātingaṇa; 2.4.27), Medinī's Nānārthaśabdakoṣa (vāṭiga; gāntavarga 47), the Kaiyadevanighaṇṭu (vātingiṇī; 1.576cd), and the Śabdataratnāvalī (according to the Śabdakalpadruma). The Persian form of the word is bādingān. Compare Mayrhofer III, 186: not a Persian loan-word, but belonging to a group of non-Indo-european names of plants; the word vātingaṇa is found in Pāli texts (see T.W. Rhys Davids and W. Stede, 1972).

First 34 of 752 passages. Read on

Linked texts (101)