13 pages

Comparative Studies of Bhanumati and Nibandha Samgraha With Special Reference to Arista Vijnana (Prognostic Science)

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 13
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
  3/21/2017Comparative studies of Bhanumati and Nibandha Samgraha with special reference to Arista Vijnana (prognostic science) Go to:Go to:  Ayu. 2011 Apr-Jun; 32(2): 147–153.doi: 10.4103/0974-8520.92540PMCID: PMC3296332 Comparative studies of Bhanumati   and Ni bandha Samgraha  with specialreference to  Arista Vijnana  (prognostic science) Pradip Kumar Goswami Department of Samhita and Sanskrit, Faculty of Ayurveda, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India Address for correspondence:  Dr. Pradip Kumar Goswami, Department of Samhita and Sanskrit, Faculty of Ayurveda, Institute of Medical Sciences,Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221 005, Uttar Pradesh, India. E-mail: pkgoswamibhu@gmail.comCopyright : © AYU (An International Quarterly Journal of Research in Ayurveda)This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, whichpermits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract  yurveda  is serving the mankind for centuries with a holistic approach. This system has preached to treat the diseaseswhich are only curable by the physicians. It has advised the physicians to strictly avoid treating the incurable diseases. Inorder to assess the incurability of the diseases or the incurable state of a patient; this system has preached the signs andsymptoms of incurability which are known as arista-vijnana , which have been described in  Brhattrayi  of  Ayurveda .Though Caraka has placed them in a separate section of his treatise, Cakrapani  and  Dalhana  have also spent aconsiderable portion in their commentaries dealing with arista-vijnana . They were two renowned scholars who havecommented with a depth of wisdom on Susruta Samhita . In this paper, the author has tried to present the comparativeand critical comments of both commentators based on  Bhanumati  and  Nibandha Samgraha , respectively, over arista-vijnana  as described in Sutrasthana  of Susruta Samhita .  Dalhana  was greatly influenced by Caraka Samhita  withregard to the prognostic science. On the other hand, Cakrapani repeatedly recognized the superiority of the indriya- sthana  of Caraka Samhita  with regard to analysis of prognostic science. Keywords:  Arista ,  Bhanumati , Cakrapani ,  Dalhana ,  Indriya-sthana ,  Nibandha Samgraha Introduction In comparison to Caraka Samhita , Susruta Samhita  does not contain indriya-sthana , which is generally observed insamhitas belonging to  Atreya sampradaya . Susruta  has well discussed concepts of prognostic sciences ( arista-vijnana ) and their importance in medical science and matter related to arista-vijnana  is available in  sutra-sthana . Thethird chapter of  sutra-sthana , i.e.  Adhyayana-sampradaniy-amadhyaya  (slokas 8–9),[1] gives indications of thecontents of arista-vijnana  which are discussed in the chapters 28–33. Cakrapani  while commenting on the beginning of the indriya-sthana  of Caraka Samhita  stated that diseases are to betreated only if they are curable. A physician should know the signs which indicate the incurability of diseases and their complex phenomena leading to the death of a patient.[2]Thus the section dealing with the prognostic aspect of diseases, i.e., indriya-sthana  of any  samhita , is very importantand as such it has been given place before the section of cikitsa-sthana  (treatment).  Indra  here means vital breath/life(  prana ) and its end-indicating signs are rista , which are known as indriya .[3] Thus the section dealing with this is alsoknown as indriya-sthana .[4]    3/21/2017Comparative studies of Bhanumati and Nibandha Samgraha with special reference to Arista Vijnana (prognostic science) Go to:Go to: Materials and Methods The present study is mainly literary in nature and therefore, mainly views of both the commentators are independentlyinterpreted, critically discussed, and later are compared with each others’. Selection of texts  Dalhana ,  Nibandha Samgraha   Tika  on Susruta Samhita  along with  Naya Candrika Tika  on SusrutaSamhita  of Gayadasa , edited by Acharya Yadavji Tikamji, Chaukhambha Orientalia, Varanasi, reprint edition,1992. Cakrapani Dutta ,  Bhanumati Tika  on Susruta Samhita , published by Sri Swami Laxmiram Trust, Jaipur, 1939. Discussion In  sutra sthana  of Susruta Samhita , chapters in which arista-vijnana  have been discussed, i.e. chapters 28–33, thereare some differences in names of chapters as well as minor variation of texts exists in both editions of Susruta Samhita which are taken by Cakrapani  and  Dalhana  [Table 1].Table 1Variation of textsDifferences exist in titles of the chapters 28, 29, and 33. In chapter 33, differences are also found in scripts of SusrutaSamhita  in both Cakrapani  and  Dalhana  versions.[5] These variations of texts are also found in tadapatra (manuscripts). Even  Harancandra  in some points differs from versions of Cakrapani  and  Dalhana .[6]  Dalhana  in the very beginning of his commentary upon 28/3 classifies aristas  into two types–  niyata  (definite) and aniyata  (indefinite).[7] These two types of definite and indefinite aristas  have been explained with the examples of fireand smoke, flower and fruit, and clouds and rainfall. Among these examples, fruit and rainfall are for indefinite whereasfire is for definite. For the indefinite aristas , he stated that these groups of aristas  do not give rise to the effectsinevitably. On the other hand, definite ones surely give rise to the effect and aristas  srcinated by dosas  come under thisgroup. But Cakrapani  accepted niyata-aristas  indicating the certainty of death with quoting the supporting argumentsfrom Caraka , indriya-sthana  chapter 11[8] and chapter 2[9] and accepted that niyata-aristas  are not vyabhicaritvam  as a definite sign of death. Cakrapani  quoting Caraka , indriya-sthana , even discusses niyata  and aniyata  based on avyabhichari  and vyabhichari  (definite and probable indicators of death). Cakrapani  though did not clearly mention  purusa-asrita  and urusa anasrita aristas , but discussed clearly kala mrtyu  and akala mrtyu  with or without aristas  and gave opinion basically dependent on indriya-sthana  of Caraka Samhita .[10]On the other hand,  Dalhana  discussed niyata  and aniyata  based on the examples stated in Susruta Samhita  andindirectly agreed to discuss aristas  based on  purusa anasrita  subjects. Here  Dalhana  had not directly quoted Caraka  but it seems that he got influenced by indriyadhikara  of  Atreya sampradaya .[11]In context of the interpretation of  su. 28/4  regarding the meaning of asu-vyatikramat  , Cakrapani  has taken its meaningin the sense of quick destruction after appearance which happens without taking time. Here he quoted the examples of  vidyut   (thunder), etc.[12] On the other hand  Dalhana  explained that asu-vyatikramat  -as soon as srcin of aristas death takes place, thus like piercing of hundred leaves of utpala  which is not observed.[13] However, some interpretthat the aristas  retract as soon as they appear.[14]According to  Dalhana, kila  (  su. 28/5 ) means traditional scripture ( agama )[15] but Cakrapani  did not interpret theword “ kila ” like  Dalhana  and stated the word brahamana , etc. as that was not relevant to the subject, and gave thesame example in this concern.[16]  3/21/2017Comparative studies of Bhanumati and Nibandha Samgraha with special reference to Arista Vijnana (prognostic science) Susruta Samhita , authority of surgery, deals with wound, abscess, ulcers, etc. Susruta  stated that being the object of   salya-tantra ; examination of vrana  should be based on the perception of indriyas .  Dalhana  (  su. 28/8 ) interprets that adi  means  sabda  and  sparsa  should be taken. He takes  svabhavatah  as  prakrtitah . Vaikrta  is that which is differentfrom  prakrtitah .[17] While commenting on Su. su . 28/9–10    Dalhana  has enumerated the  prakrta gandha  as dwandwaja  that is based on predominance of two doshas  for a particular type of smell such as laja , atasi-oil  , and tila-oil  ; these three are found in vata-pitta , vata-kapha , and  pitta-kapha , respectively.[18] But Cakrapani  interpreted rakrta gandha  as it has a relation with vata .[19] Commenting on vaikrta gandha ,  Dalhana  has stated  putivallura  asdry meeting with pus; matkunah  is a tiny insect growing in bed, etc. whereas Cakrapani  says matkunah  as ungasah (bugs).[20]Both Cakrapani  and  Dalhana  substantiated the view of Susruta  stating the necessity of knowledge of  prakrta awastha and its comparison with vaikrtaawastha  as an indicator of prognosis. Particularly when discussing a prognosis based on varna  (  su. 28/13–15 ),  Dalhana  directly gives indications about what can be features of vranasotha, vidradhi , etc.;simply localized swelling associated with different cardinal signs and symptoms, example.g., dhyama , is discussed as isat krsna [21] by  Dalhana  but Cakrapani  discussed it as  gandhatrna  or dark brick color.[22] The signs and symptoms of different abnormal varna and rasa are to be inferred on a wound based on the predominance of any dosha. Same principles are followed in support of the views of Susruta  in relation to  sabda, sparsa , and akrti  when these get vaikrtaawastha . Both  Dalhana  and Cakrapani  do not elaborate these.  Dalhana  mentions variation of scripts of srcinal text (  su. 28/13 ) but he does not agree with this variation because it isnot accepted by commentators and says that this verse is followed by blind supporters.  Dalhana  has quoted theseverses.[23]The name of chapter 29 has variations in both commentaries as already compared in Table 1.While commenting on  su. 29/3 ,  Dalhana  has explained the word nimitta  as  sarpadidarsana ,[24] (which indicatesauspiciousness and inauspiciousness) whereas Cakrapani  takes it as auspiciousness (  purnakumbhadi ).[25]Discussing the dutadarsana su . 29/5 ,  Dalhana  takes  pakhanda  word for kapalika .[26] But the view of Cakrapani  ismore wide and full of orthodox thinking as he stated “  pakhanda ” as vedabahyasramasthah [27] that means those whodo not believe in vedas , i.e., heterodox thinker and followers of Saugatadayah  (  Buddha , etc.).In the context of explaining the speech of the messenger  su. 29/9 , Cakrapani  has interpreted ruksa  as lasita-viparitam [28] means speech having the absence of affection, but on the other hand  Dalhana  interpreted this term as theunfriendly speaking ( maitrirahitam vacah ).[29] Further, Cakrapani  stated nisthuram  as opposite to soft speaking(  pesalaviparitam ), but  Dalhana  taken nisthuram  as harshly speaking or rugged speaking ( kathoravacanam ).Regarding the day of approach to the physician by messenger  su. 29/19 ,  Dalhana  interpreted the term  sandhi-dinani  asthe date fixed for rituals ( devapretakaryahani )[30] but Cakrapani  has accepted the  sandhi-dinam  as the 15 day of the dark half or every loonier month ( amavasyatithi )[31] and this is related to the Indian calendar.During the interpretation of auspicious  su. 29/27–31 , Cakrapani  has discussed udakumbham  as a pitcher full of water ( udakapurnah kumbhah ) which is auspicious one and in his support he mentions a verse from Caraka Samhitaindriya-sthana [32] and from  Nimitta Grantha ,[33] while  Dalhana  has interpreted it as pitcher full or empty. Further,he indicates that at the time of entry, the pitcher ( kumbha ) should be full and at the time of departure the pitcher should be empty.[34] Cakrapani  accepts  swalankrita  in place of alankrita  and takes it as that which is smeared with paste,etc. ( alepadina manDitah )[35] and some take it as an adjective for a virgin girl, but  Dalhana  stated that alankritakanya  means virgin girl wearing good apparel ( bhusanavatikanya ).[36]  Dalhana  accepts aksata  as lajah , whereas Cakrapani  takes it as unbroken barley ( aksatayavadi ).[37] Again Cakrapani  interprets the word  sumanah  as flower (  puspam )[38] but  Dalhana  says  sumanah  as pleasant disposition of physicians.[39]Explaining  su . 29/41–45 , Cakrapani  has quoted a verse from the text book of astrology which predicts  sakuna ( nimittasastra ).[40]  Dalhana  mentions nimitta  as which indicates well and bad (  subhasubha sucakam ).[41] Here Cakrapani  read lagna  in place of bhagna  in mulapatha and interprets it as the attachment of thorn, etc. in cloth and th  3/21/2017Comparative studies of Bhanumati and Nibandha Samgraha with special reference to Arista Vijnana (prognostic science) others.[42]  Dalhana  interprets bhagna  as breaking and stated that some read lagna  in place of bhagna  and alsointerpreted it as the entanglement of cloth, etc.[43] Further, in the same context  Dalhana  explains daurmanasyam  asderanged mind ( cittavicestitam ).[44]During the interpretation of  su . 29/67  , both Cakrapani  and  Dalhana  have quoted from the same source, e.g., from thefifth chapter of Caraka Samhita   indriya-sthana [45] and forth chapter of Susruta Samhita sarira-sthana .[46] Further, Cakrapani  has described that when the vitiated three doshas  fully cover the manovaha-srotas , then a person dreamswhich has been accepted as aristas .[47] In support of his views, he quoted a verse from the Caraka Samhita indriya -  sthana  fifth chapter.[48]In the context of explaining  su . 30/2 ,  Dalhana  explained  pancendriya  as the five sense organs as ears, etc., their objectsas sound, etc., and faulty perception of these due to less use or excess use. The word  panca  (five) is used for theelimination of motor organs ( karmendriya ) and mind ( manas ), which are both sensory and motor. The motor organs( karmendriya ) are understood by  sarira  itself and the mind is included by indriyas  itself as sensory organs do not perceive their objects without mind[49] while Cakrapani  has interpreted  pancendriyartha  as objects of indriyas ,namely,  sabdadayah .[50] The opposite character of these or other than these may be known as conflicting perception.Here he stated two types of ristas  – (1) bahyabhutadigatam  and (2) antara-sariragatam ,[51] but  Dalhana  has notstated so. Cakrapani  discussed that the previous two chapters have been elaborated for the examination of the bhutadigatam ; after that, the physician examines aturgata-ristas  which are based on the abnormality of objects of thefive indriyas  by visiting the house of patients as described in this chapter.[52]In  su . 30/3, while considering the nature relating to physique and behavior, both  Dalhana  and Cakrapani  haveinterpreted few terms in their own ways. In support of their views, both have cited references from the Caraka Samhitaindriya-sthana  first chapter. Views of both commentators have maximum similarities [Table 2].Table 2Similarities in viewsHere  Dalhana  interpreted  silam  as manasobhavah  and he also quoted others’ interpretation of  silam  as  samadhanayuktammanah [53] while Cakrapani  accepts  silam  as the function of mind ( manovrtti ). He has indicatedthat manah  is characterized by  sila .[54] Explaining the  prakrti ,  Dalhana  cited a reference from Caraka Samhitaindriya-sthana  and mentioned six different types of  prakrti .[55] Cakrapani  has also explained similarly[56] and evenexplained vikrti  by citing references from Caraka Samhita indriya-sthana .[57]During the explanation of  su. 30/10    Dalhana  explained that atisugandhih  here means suddenly becoming excessivelyfragrant without the application of fragrance.[58] Cakrapani  reads  sugandhim-vati  in place of  sugandhirvati  andinterpreted it as the physiology of vata , which means transportation or movement of good fragrance, and even statedgrammatical etymology of vata  as va  =  gatigandhanayoh .[59]Further, in the same chapter,  su . 30/19 , Cakrapani  explains the astapadakaram  as the shape of the  sarika , small pond(  sarikakaram )[60] while  Dalhana  has discussed it as astapadakaram  which means a quadruple playground seen as achessboard marked by lines ( kosthasantana ).[61]During the interpretation of  su. 31/1 , both Cakrapani  and  Dalhana  have stated verses from Caraka Samhita indriya- sthana  and  Dalhana  opined that differences among complexion, luster, and shade are limited not only to characters butalso to number; such as complexion (  prakrtavarna ) is of four types, luster (  prabha ) is of seven types, and shade( chaya ) is of five types.[62]In the context of the discussion of  su. 31/4 , Cakrapani  only defined the term hrih  as  shyness  ( lajja ) and not mentionedother words which are included in the srcinal script of Susruta Samhita .  Dalhana  has defined and interpreted theseterms in his own views.[63] Here  Dalhana  has also quoted other views as variation in the first line of this verse alongwith commentary according to others.[64]  Dalhana  quoted the opinion of others and stated that all abnormalities appear related to behavior excluding luster.
Related Documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!