English
An adherent of Samkhya says that all this world of things is derived from one root cause, because all these are limited and whatever is limited is derived from one root cause. This may be refuted by pointing out that there are many limited things which are derived from more than one root cause. To this the Samkhya adherent replies that only those which are associated with pleasure and pain and ignorance are to be regarded as proceeding from one root cause; but this is an addition which was not contained in the original thesis. 3 This is also mentioned in the Nydaya-siitra, v. 2.7. 4 The nigraha-sthanas mentioned in.the Ny 7ya-siitra, v.2.1,arethe following: pratyna-hani, pratinantara, pratijfid-virodha, pratijfia-sannydsa, hetv-antara, XII] Logical Speculations and Terms 389 After this Caraka further describes the ten categories, a know- ledge of which he thinks is very necessary for a mastery of the subject-matter of Ayur-veda. These are karana (the agent or the mover), karana (the instrument necessary for an agent to bring about an effort), karya-yoni (the material cause by the modification of which effects are produced), karya (that for the production of which the mover makes his effort), karya-phala (that for which a particular effect is intended by the agent), anubandha (the good or bad result which attaches itself to the doer after the produc-. tion of the effect), desa (place), kala (the seasons, days, etc.), pravrtti (the effort and the action needed for the production of the effect) and upaya (the passivity and special aptitude of the agent, the instrument and the material cause which can make the effect possible). The physician is the cause (karana), the medicines the instruments (karana); the want of equilibrium of the dhatus the karya-yoni; the restoration of the equilibrium of the dhatus the karya; the happy state of body and mind the karya-phala; length of life, anubandha; the place and the diseased person, desa; the year and the condition of the diseased person, kala; the efforts of the physician, pravrtii; the qualifi- cations of the physician, the qualities of the medicine, etc., upaya. It may be pointed out in this connection that the Uttara-tantra of Susruta also mentions thirty-two technical terms helpful to physicians in refuting the statements of hostile critics and in estab- lishing their own points, which are called tantra-yukti1. These are said to be adhikarana, yoga, padartha, hetv-artha, uddesa, nirdesa, upadesa, apadesa, pradesa, atidesa, apavarja, vakya-sesa, arthapatti, viparyaya, prasanga, ekanta, anekanta, piirva-paksa, nirnaya, anu- mata, vidhana, anagataveksana, atikrantaveksana, samsaya, vya- khydna, sva-samjna,nirvacana,nidarsana, niyoga,samuccaya, vikalpa and aihya. But these technical terms are maxims for the interpre- tation of textual topics, like the maxims of Mimamsa, and are not points of dispute or logical categories. It is said that these maxims are like the sun to a group of lotuses, or like a lamp to a house, punar-ukta, ananubhdsana, ajnana, apratibha, viksepa, matanujna, paryanuyajyo- peksena, miranuyojyanuyoga, apa-siddhanta, hetv-abhasa. Many of these, however, are not mentioned by Caraka. 1 gsad-vadi-prayuktanam vakyandm pratisedhanam sva-vakya-siddhir api ca kriyate tantra-yuktitah. Susruta-samhita, Uttara-tantra, 65. 5. 390 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. for the illumination or the expression of the subject of discourse?. This remark very much resembles the remark of Vatsyayana that anviksiki (logic) is like a light to all sciences (pradipah sarva-vt- dyanam). But the difference between tantra-yukti and anvikstki is this, that, while the former refers to the laws of thought, the latter refers to technical modes of expression in medical science in general and in the Susruta-samhita in particular. They therefore refer to the ways of deducing the inner meaning or intention of the medical texts from their abbreviated forms of expression. Thus, when one reads in the text, “‘about rasa or dosa,” and nothing else is said, one understands that this style of expression signifies that it is an adhikarana (topic of discourse) and that something is going to be related about rasa or dosa, though it is not explicitly so stated. Now the maxim (tantra-yukti) of yoga means that the verb at a distant part of the sentence may be joined with its relevant case in another part of the sentence?. The maxim of padartha means that, when a word having two or more senses is used, then that meaning alone has to be accepted which suits the previous and the later contexts. Thus, when it is said in a medical text that we shall now describe the origin of the Veda, then only Ayur-veda is to be meant and not Rg, Yajus or Atharva. The maxim of hetv-artha illustrates the condition of invisible things by visible and known examples. Thus it is said that, just as a muddy ball becomes dis- solved and sticky through water, so do milk and other drugs dissolve a boil by their application. The maxim of uddesa is the method of briefly touching a subject without going into details. Thus, when one says “‘disease”’ (Salya), it means both internal and external diseases without any kind of specification. The maxim of nirdesa is the method of describing a thing in detail. The maxim of upadesa is the method of giving a general instruction. Thus it is said that one should not sit up at night nor sleep during the day. This is, however, only a general instruction which has its exceptions. The 1 yathambuia-vanasyarkah pradipo vesmano yatha prabodhyasya prakasarthas tatha tantrasya yuktayah. . Susruta-samhita, Uttara-tantra, 65. 7. tailam pivec camrta-valli-nimba-himsrabhayda-vrksaka-pippalibhih siddham balabhyam ca sa-devaddru hitaya nityam gala-ganda-roge. Ibid. 9, 10. In the above verse it is enjoined that a particular medical decoction is to be made with a number of drugs which are to be boiled (siddham), and this boiled decoction has to be drunk (pivet). But the word pivet is in the first line and the word siddham is in the third line, and it is allowed that these two distant words may be combined (yoga). XI] Logical Speculations and Terms 391 maxim of apadesa is the method of showing the reasons of things. Thus it is said that phlegm (slesman) increases through the taking of sweet things (madhurena Slesma. ’bhivardhate). The maxim of pradesa is the analogy by which a present difficulty is solved in the way in which a past difficulty was solved (prakrtasya atikrantena sadhanam pradesah). Thus it may be said that, since this has cured Devadatta in this way in the past, it would also cure Yajfiadatta in a similar way now. The maxim of atidega is that of anticipating a future event from a present indication or prognosti- cation. Thus from the fact of the increase of uprising wind in a man’s system it may be predicted that he will have a specific bowel-disease (udavarta). The maxim of apavarja consists in allowing exceptions to general directions (e.g. cases of poisoning should not be fomented, except in the case of poisoning through the bites of insects). The maxim of vakya-Sesa consists in supplying an idea suggested by the context, but not expressly mentioned. Thus when it is said “‘of the head, hands, feet, sides, back, belly, heart,”’ it is the whole man that is to be understood though it is not expressly stated in the context. That which is understood, by implication, though not directly mentioned, is called the maxim of arthapatti. Thus, when a man says “‘I shall eat rice,”’ it is under- stood that he is not thirsty, but hungry. The maxim of viparyaya is that by virtue of which from a positive or a negative assertion its contrary is asserted also, e.g. when it is said that those who are lean, weak and of fearful temperament are difficult to be cured. The maxim of prasanga is that by virtue of which allusion is made to things repeatedly described in another chapter. The maxim of ekanta allows of affirming a specific action of things unexception- ably (e.g. madana fruit induces vomiting, i.e. under all circum- stances). The maxim of anekdnta is that by virtue of which one understands that different opinions prevail on a particular subject. Thus some teachers think that substances are the most important, while others think that rasa is so; others, again, think that the inner essence (virya) is the most important, while still others think that chemical action through digestion (vipaka) is so. The maxims of piirva-paksa and uttara-paksa allow of discussing a matter in the form of question and answer. The maxim of anumata is that by virtue of which it is to be understood that, when the opinion of other authorities is referred to and not contradicted, it is signified that it is approved. The maxim of vidhana is that by virtue of 392 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. which one understands that, when certain descriptions follow certain enumerations, the former are to be taken in the order in which the latter are related. The maxim of andgataveksana allows of leaving certain things for future description and elaboration, and atikrantaveksana permits alluding to things described before (e.g. it is said in the Sloka-sthana that this matter will be de- scribed in the Cikitsa chapter, and about another matter it may be said in the Czkitsa chapter that it has been described in the Sloka-sthana). The maxim of samsaya allows a way of statement which may create doubt and confusion in the mind of the reader. The method of elaborate description is called vyakhyana. The method of using words in a sense different from what they have in other literatures is called sva-samjna, i.e. technical use (e.g. mithuna in Ayur-veda means honey and clarified butter). A definition is called nirvacana.