A History of Indian Medical Literature v4.c58.67

v4.c58.67

antardhānika, pauṣṭika, and rājadvārika; the commentator explains these actions and gives examples in verses quoted from unknown treatises; the list may consist of vīryas recognized by other authorities. The items of the first series are accessible to discursive thought (1.30: anumeya), those of the second list are not (see the commentary: acintya, aparimeya). See also N.E. Muthuswami's Intr., 44–46. The vīryas of the first list of the Rasavaiśeṣikasūtra resemble the actions of drugs mentioned in Ca.Sū.4, which are largely based on their prabhāva. 424 See the commentary ad 4.62. 425 See the commentary for explanations and examples. 426 See Sankara Menon's Intr., 14.; J. Filliozat (1979): Intr. X; S. Kuppuswami Sastri (1927). The title bhadanta is also current in Jain literature as a term of respect applied to monks (Bhagchandra Jain Bhaskar, 1972: 178–179). 427 See the colophon at the end of the work. 428 See MW; F. Edgerton's Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit dictionary; The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary. I-ching refers to a biography of the ten Bhadantas (J. Takakusu, 1966: 181). The title of Bhadanta was given to Aśvaghoṣa (A.B. Keith, 1973: 55), Dignāga (S.Ch. Vidyabhusana, 1971: 125), and Tsoṅ-kha-pa (G.N. Roerich, 1976: I, 34). The term is employed to refer to and to address a Buddhist sage in the Harṣacarita (ucchvāsa 8, p.256, 257; translation Cowell and Thomas, p.257). Bhadanta Nāgārjuna is mentioned as a teacher in an inscription, assigned to about A.D. 500, below the feet of a Buddha image found at Jaggayyapeta of Guntur district in Āndhra Pradeś (K.R. Srikantamurthy, 1992b: 293; Srikantamurthy refers to *Sacchidananda K. Murthy, 1978: 14). 429 Ad Su.Śā.4.80. 430 J. Filliozat (1979: Intr. XI–XIII). J. Filliozat posits that the notion of svabhāva, as expounded in the Rasavaiśeṣikasūtra (3.58–60), corresponds to the svabhāvaśūnyatā of Madhyamaka philosophy (see on this point K.G. Zysk's review of J. Filliozat's Yogaśataka, IIJ 23, 1981, 309–313). 431 See N.E. Muthuswami's Intr. 432 See his Intr., 17. 433 See also J. Filliozat (1979: Intr. X–XI). 434 A text called Rasavaiśeṣika is quoted four times by Candraṭa in his commentary on the Cikitsākalikā (ad 16). The first of these quotations is identical with Rasavaiśeṣikasūtra 1.95. The Rasavaiśeṣika quoted by Candraṭa was formerly regarded as different from Bhadanta Nāgārjuna's work (J. Jolly, 1906: 468; AVI 286 and 373). 435 Intr. 18 and 22–23. 436 Sankara Menon adds that, if the author is identical with the famous Buddhist scholar, his period is somewhere near the second century, and, if he is neither this Nāgārjuna nor Narasimha's preceptor, he must have lived between the second and the seventh century. 437 See on the meaning of this term, usually the subdivision of a district: Hobson-Jobson. 438 AVI 373. 439 K.R. Srikantamurthy (1992b: 293) assigns Bhadanta Nāgārjuna to about A.D. 400. 440 J. Filliozat (1979): Intr. XV–XVIII. 441 NCC IX, 359. 442 Sankara Menon's Intr., 23. It can hardly be questioned that Narasimha wrote his commentary in Kerala, because he made use of a method of notating numbers, the so-called nannādi system (see the commentary ad 3.95–96, 98–100), which is current only in Kerala (Sankara Menon's Intr., 98–100).