A History of Indian Medical Literature v4.c58.240

v4.c58.240

has been based are incomplete, as is indicated by the absence of a maṅgala at the end. The Tanjore MS ends with chapter thirty, said to conclude the sixth sthāna, called Uttarasthāna. 204 Kriyākalpa 69 = A.s.Sū.29.10; kriyākalpa 78 = A.s.Sū.29.9. 205 Intr. to the ed., 16. 206 Examples are: kaśāyaparīṣiṣṭa 205–206 = A.h.Sū.15.24–25; 243–244 = A.h.Sū.15.43–44; 245 = A.h.Sū.15.21–22. 207 The Vīrasiṃhāvaloka (47) quotes Ārogyacintāmaṇi 11.16, but a particular formula, the agnimukhacūrṇa (Vīrasiṃhāvaloka 47–48), said to agree with Dāmodara’s views, cannot be traced (Ārogyacintāmaṇi 11.10–11 has a different formula of the agnimukhacūrṇa). The Ārogyacintāmaṇi quoted by Vīrasiṃha is regarded as different from Dāmodara’s work in the NCC (II, 165). 208 Ārogyacintāmaṇi 3.28, 19–20, 15, and 36 = Ṭodara I: 30.44–48. 209 Dāmodara follows Vāgbhaṭa, who includes these disorders among the śirorogas (A.h.U. 24; A.s.U.28), whereas they are described among the kṣudrarogas by Mādhava. 210 This disorder is also mentioned in the Hāritasamhitā (III.38) and the Rājanighaṇṭu (varga 20). Compare Kālidāsa’s Vaidyamanoramā. 211 The pariśiṣṭa chapter on kaśāyas gives formulae to be used in antravṛddhi (249–254). 212 The same chapter has formulae for cases of visarpa (361–363). 213 This disease is also mentioned in Kālidāsa’s Vaidyamanoramā. 214 Bheṣajakalpa 40; pratyauṣadhapariśiṣṭa 7. See Kālidāsa’s Vaidyamanoramā. 215 Kaśāyaparīṣiṣṭa 371. 216 27.11; viṣapratyauṣadha 26. Dhattūra(ka) is already found at A.h.U.24.30 and 38.37; A.s. U.35.38. 217 Pratyauṣadhapariśiṣṭa 9. 218 Kriyākalpa 83. It is also mentioned in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (II.9.201); according to Ādhamalla it is a synonym of sallakī; this agrees with the Bhāvaprakāśanighaṇṭu (vaṭā- divarga 22) and with the Ārogyacintāmaṇi itself, which gives synoyms of sallakī (kriyā- kalpa 83ab). 219 A.C. Burnell (1880): 65–66 (Nr. 5,436): father’s name Bhaṭṭa Viṣṇu; P.P.S. Sastri (1933): Nr. 11040: idem. Compare NCC IX, 16. S. Viswanatha Sarma (Intr. to the ed., 16) argued that the fact that many of the fruits familiar in North India are nowhere mentioned, makes it likely that the author was not a resident of that part of the country. The subject needs further study. 220 A.C. Burnell (1880): 65–66, Nr. 5,436) suggested that Dāmodara was perhaps the father of the author of the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā; see: Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā. 221 S. Viswanatha Sarma, Intr. to the ed., 16. 222 One of the MSS (Bodleian d.711) was completed in 1482; see D. Wujastyk (1990): 92. 223 P. Hymavathi (1993: 60–62) regards Dāmodara’s father as identical with Sarvajñaviṣṇu, the guru of the Mādhava who wrote the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha. 224 NCC IX, 16. 225 Cat. München Nr. 401. CBORI XVI, 1, Nr. 235. 226 STMI 464. 227 Cat. Madras Nr. 13145. 228 Cat. Madras Nr. 13190. 229 NCC IX, 228–229: Dhanvantarinighaṇṭu or Dravyāvalinighaṇṭu or Dhanvantarīyadravyā- valinighaṇṭu or Nighaṇṭunāmamālā. Check-list Nrs. 227 and 228 (Dhanvantarinighaṇṭu),