A History of Indian Medical Literature v4.c59.648

v4.c59.648

deutsch-nord. Gesellschaft für Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften, Greifswald 1937. b M. Vallauri, Il Jīvānanda (La felicità dell’anima) di Ānandarāyamakhin, G. Caraba, Lanciano 1929. See on the Jīvānanda and its contents: A.L. Basham (1978): 160–161; Carl Cappeller (1914): 107–115, and (1977): 339–347; H. Zimmer (1948): 61–75. References are to page numbers of ed. d, which has a useful Hindī commentary with numerous references to āyurvedic texts. 359 Compare G.J. Meulenbeld (1974): 85 and 154–155. 360 Compare G.J. Meulenbeld (1974): 154: cūrṇaka. 361 The Mādhavanidāna describes six types, but the raktaja type may be regarded as the seventh; the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā has seven types (I.7.7cd–9ab). 362 The Mādhavanidāna describes four types, but the fifth may be saṃgrahagrahaṇī (see G.J. Meulenbeld, 1974: 225); the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā has five types (I.7.7cd–9ab). 363 In agreement with the classical āyurvedic texts. 364 Similar statements are found in the Āyurvedasūtra. See also chapter twenty-five of the Mādhavanidāna and its commentaries. 365 See the sixth act. Bhasmaka does not figure in the classical āyurvedic texts; it is mentioned by Cakrapāṇidatta ad Su.Sū.40.10, in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.27ab) and in many later treatises. 366 Yakṣman is the chief enemy of king Jīva in the Jīvānanda. 367 See on the five sins called mahāpātaka: Manusmṛti 11.55. 368 In agreement with the classical texts. 369 In agreement with the classical texts. 370 In agreement with the classical texts. 371 The Mādhavanidāna does not explicitly state the number of its varieties; the number is four in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.41cd–42a). 372 In agreement with the Mādhavanidāna. 373 In agreement with the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.52cd–53c). 374 In agreement with the Mādhavanidāna. 375 In agreement with the Mādhavanidāna. 376 In agreement with the Mādhavanidāna. 377 Their number is four in the classical saṃhitās, Mādhavanidāna, and Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā. 378 In agreement with the classical saṃhitās. 379 In agreement with the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.71). 380 Their number is five in the Mādhavanidāna, eight in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.80ab). 381 In agreement with the classical texts. 382 In agreement with the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.127cd), disagreeing with the classical saṃhitās and Mādhavanidāna. 383 In agreement with the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā (I.7.146cd–147) and Vāgbhaṭa, disagreeing with the Suśrutasaṃhitā and Mādhavanidāna. 384 Their number is ninety-six in the Carakasaṃhitā, ninety-four in the works ascribed to Vāgbhaṭa and in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā. 385 Their number is eleven in the Suśrutasaṃhitā, nineteen in the works ascribed to Vāgbhaṭa, and ten in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā. 386 This statement is also found in the Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā.