The Identity of Ātreya

Ātreya is a venerable figure in the Caraka Saṃhitā and the names Ātreya and Punarvasu occur almost interchangeably in the same chapter.^[1] The name Kṛṣṇātreya also occurs in the treatise^[2] and certain formulations are attributed to him.^[3] The name is synonymous with Punarvasu Ātreya.^[4] Ātreya denotes “a descendant of Atri” and Atri is a Vedic personage protected by the Aśvins and Indra.^[5] The majority of the hymns of the fifth maṇḍala of the Ṛgveda is attributed to Atri and to the Ātreyas.^[6] According to Sharma,^[7] Ātreya in the Caraka Saṃhitā is not the name of a clan (gotra) but Atri’s son as he is referred to as Atrijaḥ^[8] and Atrijaḥ Punarvasuḥ.^[9] He contends that the name of seer was Punarvasu (named on the basis of the constellation he was born in) who was popularly known as Kṛṣṇa.^[10] However, as Filliozat points out that Punarvasu does not occur as the personal name of Atri or the Ātreyas in the Ṛgveda.^[11] The Mahābhārata gives us the name of Kṛṣṇa Ātreya as a great teacher of Kāyācikitsā.^[12] There is also the view that Ātreya was the son of Candrabhāga^[13] as he is also addressed as Cāndrabhāgin.^[14] The Bhela Saṃhitā supports the view that Ātreya Punarvasu and Cāndrabhāgin are the same person.^[15] However, if he was the son of Atri, then it is also probable that the name Cāndrabhāgin is derived from his residence somewhere near the river Candrabhāga that is now known as Chenab in Punjab.^[16]

In the Caraka Saṃhitā, he is described as the foremost among physicians (viṣagvariṣṭha)^[17] who is well versed in the scriptures (tantravidāha)^[18] and self-controlled (jitātman [jitātmānaḥ]).^[19] He is given the epithet vijvara, implying one who is free of disease^[20] with the ability to look into the past and the future (bhūta-bhaviṣya-diśa).^[21] Ātreya commanded a venerable position among the scholars of medicine for not only medical students like Agniveśa but for other scholars and physicians like Vāmaka, the king of Kāśī, approached him for clarification of their doubts^[22] and he is always shown to be have the final word in all symposia. The appellation Bhagvan prefixed to his name^[23] indicates his esteemed position among the intellectuals of his age.^[24]

A scholar by the name of Bhikṣu Ātreya is known in the treatise^[25] but he appears to belong to a non-Vedic tradition.^[26] The preceptor of the famous physician of Bimbisāra’s time, Jīvaka, was Ātreya of Takṣaśilā who specialised in surgery, from whom Jīvaka learnt the skill of skull-opening.^[27] Thus, this Ātreya belonged to a different medical school. Besides, Punarvasu Ātreya is nowhere shown to be associated with Takṣaśilā but is shown to be sojourning on the banks of the Gaṅgā^[28] or in the Himālayan environs.^[29]

It is difficult to identify Bharadvāja and Ātreya of Caraka Saṃhitā as historical personalities. They are in all likely to be mythical names^[30] selected for their revered position in the Vedas. Filliozat also draws our attention to the position of Atri as one of those “Ancients” by whom human beings traced their link with the gods. The composers of the legend of transmission could find no better suitable personage as he was not only the intermediary between gods and men but also the special ward of the divine physicians and of the instructor god. However by virtue of representing Agni, he could not be placed as the first human who learnt medicine from the gods, and therefore, his descendant was chosen for the same.^[31]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

For eg. at Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 18.2,56; Vimānasthāna 2.2,16.

[2]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 11.64.

[3]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 15.131; 26.278.

[4]:

Cakrapāṇidatta on Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 25.131.

[5]:

J. Filliozat, The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine, Delhi, 1964, p. 7.

[6]:

J. Filliozat, The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine, p. 7.

[7]:

P.V. Sharma, “Caraka” in P.V. Sharma (Ed.), History of Medicine in India from Antiquity to 1000 AD, New Delhi: 1992, p. 177.

[8]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 3.30; 7.66.

[9]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 21.62.

[10]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 21.62.

[11]:

J. Filliozat, The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine, p.7.

[12]:

Gulabkunverba, The Caraka Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p. 45.

[13]:

Gulabkunverba, The Caraka Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p. 52.

[14]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 13.100.

[15]:

Gulabkunverba, The Caraka Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p. 52-53.

[16]:

Gulabkunverba, The Caraka Saṃhitā, Vol. I, pp.52-53.

[17]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 1.5.

[18]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Siddhisthāna 1.6.

[19]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 4.3

[20]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 3.3.

[21]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 5.3.

[22]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 25.5-6.

[23]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 1.2.

[24]:

Gulabkunverba, The Caraka Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p.46.

[25]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 25.24.

[26]:

Gulabkunverba, The Caraka Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p. 179.

[27]:

G.N. Mukhopadhaya, History of Indian Medicine, Vol.3, p.686.

[28]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Cikitsāsthāna 4.3.

[29]:

Caraka Saṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 1.7; Cikitsāsthāna 13.3; 19.3.

[30]:

Filliozat, The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine, p. 4; G.J. Meulenbeld, History of Indian Medical Literature, Vol. I A, p. 342.

[31]:

Filliozat, The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine, p. 7.