English
One should not climb into bad vehicles, lie on hard beds, or beds without sheets or pillows, should not climb steep mountain sides or trees or bathe in fast flowing rivers with strong currents; one should not go about places where there are great fires raging, or laugh loudly or yawn or laugh without covering the face, or pick one’s teeth. Again, one should not break the laws ordained by a large number of persons, or other laws in general; should not go about at night in improper places, or make friends with youngsters, old or greedy people, fools, sinners or eunuchs; one should not be fond of wines, gambling, prostitutes, divulge secrets, insult others, be proud or boastful or speak ill of old people, teachers, kings or assemblages of persons, or talk too much; one should not turn out relations, friends or those who know one’s secrets. One should attend at the proper time to every action, should not undertake to do anything without properly examining it, or be too procrastinating, or be under the influence of anger and pleasure; one should not be very down-hearted in afflictions, or too elated in success, or too disappointed in failures; should practice sex-continence, try to be wise, make gifts, be friendly and compassionate to all and always contented. It is needless to continue to enumerate all the qualities, which would commonly be included within the requisites of a good life. In this Caraka seems to cut an absolutely new way, and in no other branch of Indian thought can we note such an assemblage of good qualities of all the different kinds necessary not only for a virtuous life, but for the healthy and successful life of a good citizen. It has already been pointed out that error of judgment or delusion, in whichever sphere it may be exercised, is the root of all mischiefs and all troubles. And Caraka demonstrates this by enumerating in his schedule of good conduct proper behaviour in all the different concerns and spheres of life. To Caraka the con- -ception of life is not as moral or immoral, but as good (Ata) and bad (ahita). It is true, no doubt, that here and there stray statements are 422 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. found in the Caraka-samhita which regard the cessation of all sorrows as the ultimate end of life; but it is obvious that Caraka’s main approach to the subject shows very clearly that, though moral virtues are always very highly appreciated, yet the non-moral virtues, such as the proper taking care of the well-being of one’s own body and the observance of social rules and forms of etiquette or normal prudent behaviour, are regarded as being equally neces- sary for the maintenance of a good life. Transgressions and sins are the causes of mental worries, troubles and also of many mental_and physical diseases, and one ought therefore to take proper care that they may not enter into one’s life; and it is said that the diseases produced by strong sinful acts cannot be cured by the ordinary means of the application of medicines and the like, until with the proper period of their sufferings they subside of themselves. But sins and transgressions are not the only causes of our desires, accidents and other domestic, social and political troubles. It is through our imprudent behaviour and conduct, which are due to error of judgment (prajfiaparadha), as our other sins and immoral acts are, that all our bodily and mental troubles happen to us. A good life, which is the ideal of every person, is a life of peace, contentment and happiness, free from desires and troubles of all kinds. It is a life of prudence and well-balanced judgment, where every action is done with due consideration to its future consequences and where all that may lead to troubles and difficulties is carefully avoided. It is only such a life that can claim to be good and can be regarded as ideal. A merely moral or virtuous life is not our ideal, which must be good in every respect. Any transgression, be it of the rules of hygiene, rules of polite society, rules of good citizenship, or any deviation from the path which prudence or good judgment would recom- mend to be wise, may disturb the peace of life. A scheme of good life thus means a wise life, and observance of morality is but one of the many ways in which wisdom can be shown. Ayur-veda, or the Science of Life, deals primarily with the ways in which a life may be good (hita), bad (ahita), happy (sukha) or unhappy (asukha). A happy life is described as a life undisturbed by bodily and mental diseases, full of youth and proper strength, vitality, energy, power of launching new efforts, endowed with wisdom, knowledge and efficient sense-organs—a life which is full of all kinds of desirable enjoyments and in which the ventures that xu] Ayur-veda Literature 423 are undertaken are all successful. The opposite of this is what may be called an unhappy life. The happy life thus represents a life so far as it is happy and enjoyable and so far as it satisfies us. The good life is the life as it is moulded and developed by our -tight conduct. In a way it is the good life that makes a happy life. They who seek a good life should desist from the sins of taking other people’s possessions and be truthful and self-controlled. They should perform every action with proper observation, care and judgment, and should not be hasty or make mistakes by their care- lessness ; they should attend to the attainment of virtue, wealth and the enjoyments of life without giving undue emphasis to any of them ; they should respect those who are revered, should be learned, wise and of a peaceful mind and control their tendencies to attach- ment, anger, jealousy and false pride; they should always make gifts; they should lead a life of rigour (tapas) and attain wisdom, self-knowledge or philosophy (adhyatma-vidah), and behave in such a way that the interests of both the present life on earth and the life hereafter may be attended to with care and judgment, always remembering the lessons of past experience!. It is now clear that the ideal of good life in Caraka is not the same as that of the different systems of philosophy which are technically called the Science of Liberation (moksa-sastra). The fundamental idea of a good life is that a life should be so regulated that the body and mind may be free from diseases, that it should not run into un- necessary risks of danger through carelessness, that it should be virtuous, pure and moral; that it should be a prudent and wise life which abides by the laws of polite society and of good and loyal citizens, manifesting keen alertness in thought and execution and tending constantly to its own good—good for all interests of life, body, mind and spirit. Ayur-veda Literature. The systematic development of Indian’ medicine proceeded primarily on two principal lines, viz. one that of Susruta and the other that of Caraka. It is said in Susgruta’s great work, Susruta- samhita, that Brahma originally composed the Ayur-veda in one hun- dred verses, divided into one thousand chapters, even before he had created human beings, and that later on, having regard to the _ shortness of human life and the poverty of the human intellect, 1 Caraka-samhitd, 1. 30. 22. 424 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. he divided it into the eight parts, Salya, Salakya, etc., alluded to in a previous section. But this seems to be largely mythical. It is further said in the same connection in the Susruta-samhita, 1. 1 that the sages Aupadhenava, Vaitarana, Aurabhra, Pauskalavata, Karavirya, Gopuraraksita, Sugruta and others approached Dhanvantari or Divodasa, king of Kasi, for medical instruction. Susgruta’s work is therefore called a work of the Dhanvantari school. Though it was revised at a later date by Nagarjuna, yet Susruta himself is an old writer. A study of the Jatakas shows that the great physician Atreya, a teacher of Jivaka, lived in Taxila shortly before Buddha!. It has been said in a preceding section that in the enumeration of bones Sugruta shows a knowledge of Atreya’s system of osteology. Hoernle has further shown in sections 42, 56, 60 and 61 of his “‘ Osteology,” that the Satapatha- Brahmana, which is at least as old as the sixth century B.C., shows an acquaintance with Susruta’s views concerning the counting of bones. But, since Atreya could not have lived earlier than the sixth century B.C.,and since the Satapatha-Brahmana of about the sixth century B.C. shows an acquaintance with Susruta’s views, Hoernle conjectures that Sugruta must have been contemporary with Atreya’s pupil, Agnivesa?. But, admitting Hoernle’s main conten- tions to be true, it may be pointed out that by the term veda- vadinah in Susruta-samhita, 11. 5. 18 Susruta may have referred to authorities earlier than Atreya, from whom Atreya also may have drawn his materials. On this view, then, the lower limit of Susruta’s death is fixed as the sixth or seventh century B.c., this being the date of the Satapatha-Brahmana, while practically nothing can be said about the upper limit. But it is almost certain that the work which now passes by the name of Susruta-samhita is not identically the same work that was composed by this elder Susruta (vrddha Susruta). Dalhana, who lived probably in the eleventh or the twelfth century, says in his Nibandha-samgraha that Nagarjuna was the reviser of the Susruta-samhita® ; and the Susruta-samhita itself contains a. supple- mentary part after the Kalpa-sthana, called the Uttara-tantra (later work). In the edition of Susruta by P. Muralidhar, of Pharuknagar, there is a verse at the beginning, which says that that which was ! Rockhill’s Life of Buddha, pp. 65 and 96. * Hoernle’s Medicine of Ancient India, Part I, ‘“‘Osteology,” pp. 7 and 8. ° Pratisamskartaptha Nagarjuna eva.