English
5). What upanga exactly means in this connection cannvt easily be satisfactorily explained. Dalhana (A.D. 1100) in explaining the word in his Nibandha-samgraha, says that an upanga is a smaller anga (part)— “‘angam eva alpatvad upangam.” Thus, while hands and legs are regarded as angas, the toes or the palms of the hands are called upanga. The Atharva-Veda contains six thousand verses and about 1 The system of Samkhya philosophy taught in Caraka-samhitd, 1v. 1, has already been described in the first volume of the present work, pp. 213-217. DII 18 274 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. one thousand prose lines. If the Ayur-veda originally contained 100,000 verses, it cannot be called an upanga of the Atharva-Veda, if upanga is to mean a small appendage, as Dalhana explains it. For, far from being a small appendage, it was more than ten times as extensive as the Atharva-Veda. Caraka, in discussing the nature of Ayur-veda, says that there was never a time when life did not exist or when intelligent people did not exist, and so there were always plenty of people who knew about life, and there were always medicines which acted on the human body according to the principles which we find enumerated in the Ayur-veda. Ayur-veda was not produced at any time out of nothing, but there was always a continuity of the science of life; when we hear of its being produced, it can only be with reference to a beginning of the comprehension of its principles by some original thinker or the initiation of a new course of instruction at the hands of a gifted teacher. The science of life has always been in existence, and there have always been people who understood it in their own way; it is only with reference to its first systematized comprehension or instruction that it may be said to have a be- ginning. Again, Caraka distinguishes Ayur-veda as a distinct Veda, which is superior to the other Vedas because it gives us life, which is the basis of all other enjoyments or benefits, whether they be of this world or of another?. Vagbhata, the elder, speaks of Ayur-veda not as an upanga, but as an upaveda of the Atharva-Veda*. The Maha-bharata, 11. 11. 33, speaks of upaveda, and Nilakantha, ex- plaining this, says that there are four upavedas, Ayur-veda, Dhanur- veda, Gandharvaand Artha-sastra. Brahma-vaivarta, a later purana, says that after creating the Rk, Yajus, Sama and Atharva Brahma created the Ayur-veda as the fifth Veda‘. Roth has a quotation in his Worterbuch to the effect that Brahma taught Ayur-veda, which was a vedanga, in all its eight parts®. 1 Caraka, 1.30.24. This passage seems to be at variance with Caraka, 1. 1.6; for it supposes that diseases also existed always, while Caraka, 1. 1. 6 supposes that diseases broke out at a certain point of time. Is it an addition by the reviser Drdhabala? % 2 Caraka, 1. 1. 42 and Ayur-veda-dipika of Cakrapani on it. : Astanga-samgraha, 1. 1. 8. Gopatha-Brahmana, 1. 10, however, mentions five vedas, viz. Sarpa-veda, Pisaca-veda, Asura-veda, Itihasa- veda and Purdna- veda, probably i in the sense of upaveda, but Ayur-veda i is not mentioned in this connection. 4 Brahma-vaivarta-purana, 1. 16. 9, 10. 5 Brahma vedangam astangam dyur-vedam abhdsata. This quotation, which occurs in the Wérterbuch in connection with the word dyur-veda, could not x11] Ayur-veda and the Atharva-Veda 275 We thus find that Ayur-veda was regarded by some as a Veda superior to the other Vedas and respected by their followers as a fifth Veda, as an upaveda of the Atharva-Veda, as an independent upaveda, as an upanga of the Atharva-Veda and lastly as a vedanga. Ail that can be understood from these conflicting references is that it was traditionally believed that there was a Veda known as Ayur-veda which was almost co-existent with the other Vedas, was entitled to great respect, and was associated with the Atharva-Veda in a special way. It seems, however, that the nature of this asso- ciation consisted in the fact that both of them dealt with the curing of diseases and the attainment of long life; the one principally by incantations and charms, and the other by medicines. What Sugruta understands by calling Ayur-veda an upanga of the Atharva-Veda is probably nothing more than this. Both the Atharva-Veda and Ayur-veda dealt with the curing of diseases, and this generally linked them together in the popular mind, and, the former being the holier of the two, on account of its religious value, the latter was associated with it as its literary accessory. Darila Bhatta, in commenting upon Kaustka-sitra, 25. 2, gives us a hint as to what may have been the points of contact and of difference between Ayur-veda and the Atharva-Veda. Thus he says that there are two kinds of diseases; those that are produced by unwholesome diet, and those produced by sins and transgressions. The Ayur-veda was made for curing the former, and the Atharvan practices for the latter!. Caraka himself counts penance (prayas-citta) as a name of medicine (bhesaja) and Cakrapani, in commenting on this, says that as prayas-citta removes the diseases produced by sins, so medicines (bhesaja) also remove diseases, and thus prayas-citta is synonymous with bhesaja*. But what is this Ayur-veda? We now possess only the treatises of Caraka and Suéruta, as modified and supplemented by later revisers. But Susruta tells us that Brahma had originally produced the Ayur-veda, which contained 100,000 verses spread over one thousand chapters, and then, finding the people weak in intelligence and short-lived, later on divided it into eight subjects, be verified owing to some omission in the reference. It should be noted that vedanga is generally used to mean the six avigas, viz. Siksa, Kalpa, Vyakarana, Chandas, Fyotis and Nirukta. 1 dvi-prakara vyadhayah ahdra-nimitta asubhanimittas ceti; tatra ahara- _ samutthanam vaisamya ayurvedam cakara adharma-samutthanam tu sastramidam ucyate. Darila’s comment on Kausika-sitra, 25. 2. 2 Caraka, vi. 1. 3 and Ayur-veda-diptkda, ibid. 18-2 276 Speculations in the Medical Schools [cH. viz. surgery (Salya), treatment of diseases of the head (salakya), treatment of ordinary diseases (kaya-cikitsa), the processes of counteracting the influences of evil spirits (bhita-vidya), treatment of child diseases (kauma@ra-bhrtya), antidotes to poisons (agada- tantra), the science of rejuvenating the body (rasa@yana) and the science of acquiring sex-strength (vajikarana)!. The statement of Susruta that Ayur-veda was originally a great work in which the later subdivisions of its eight different kinds of studies were not differentiated seems to be fairly trustworthy. The fact that Ayur- veda is called an upanga, an upaveda, or a vedanga also points to its existence in some state during the period when the Vedic literature was being composed. We hear of compendiums of medicine as early as the Pratisakhyas*. It is curious, however, that nowhere in the Upanisads or the Vedas does the name ‘‘ Ayur-veda” occur, though different branches of study are mentioned in the former?. The Astanga Ayur-veda is, however, mentioned in the Maha-bharata, and the three constituents (dhdtu), vayu (wind), pitta (bile) and Slesman (mucus), are also mentioned ; there is reference to a theory that by these three the body is sustained and that by their decay the body decays (etath ksinais ca ksiyate), and Krsnatreya is alluded to as being the founder of medical science (czkitsitam)*. One of the earliest systematic mentions of medicines unmixed with incantations and charms is to be found in the Maha-vagga of the Vinaya-Pitaka, where the Buddha is prescribing medicines for his disciples®. These medicines are of a simple nature, but they bear undeniable marks of methodical arrangement. We are also told there of a surgeon, named Akagagotto, who made surgical operations (sattha- kamma) on fistula (bhagandara). In Rockhill’s Life of the Buddha we hear of Jivaka as having studied medicine in the Taxila Univer- 1 Susruta-samhitda, 1. 1. 5-9. 2 R.V. Pratisakhya, 16. 54 (55), mentioned by Bloomfield in The Atharva- Veda and Gopatha-Brahmana, p. 10. The name of the medical work mentioned is Subhesaja. 3 Rg-vedam bhagavo ’dhyemi Yajur-vedam sama-vedam atharvanas caturtham ttihdsa-puradnam panicamam vedanadm vedam pitryam rasim daivam nidhim vako- vakyam ekdyanam deva vidyadm brahma-vidyam bhita-vidyam ksattra-vidyam naksatra-vidyam sarpa-deva-jana-vidyam, Chdndogya, vil. 1. 2. Of these bhiita- vidya is counted as one of the eight tantras of Ayur-veda, as we find it in the Susruta-samhita or elsewhere. 4 Mahd-bharata, 1. 11.25, X11. 342.86, 87, xl. 210. 21. Krsnatreya is referred to in Caraka-samhitda, v1. 15. 129, and Cakrapani, commenting on this, says that Krsnatreya and Atreya are two authorities who are different from Atreya Punarvasu, the great teacher of the Caraka-samhitd. * Vinaya-Pitaka, Maha-vagga, V1. 1-14. x11] Ayur-veda and the Atharva-Veda 277 sity under Atreya!. That even at the time of the Atharva-Veda there were hundreds of physicians and an elaborate pharmacopeeia, treating diseases with drugs, is indicated by a mantra therein which extols the virtues of amulets, and speaks of their powers as being equal to thousands of medicines employed by thousands of medical practitioners?. Thus it can hardly be denied that the practice of medicine was in full swing even at the time of the Atharva-Veda; and, though we have no other proofs in support of the view that there existed a literature on the treatment of diseases, known by the name of Ayur-veda, in which the different branches, which developed in later times, were all in an undifferentiated condition, yet we have no evidence which can lead us to disbelieve Suégruta, when he alludes definitely to such a literature.