21. The Leaf of the Kharanada-Nyasa Newly Discovered at Gilgit

21. Antiquity of the Lost Medical Treatise by Kharanadi in the Light of the Leaf of the Kharanada-Nyasa Newly Discovered at Gilgit # In my recent article' on the "Nature and Contents of a Lost Medical Treatise by Kharanada or Kharanadi" I tried to record some useful data 2 regarding this lost medical treatise from references to it by Arunadatta (about 1220 A.D.), by Hemadri (between A. D. 1270 and 1300 ), by Kesava (the father of Vopadeva) who was patronized by King Singhana of Devagiri (A. D. 1210-1247) and by Vopadeva himself, the protege and friend of Hemadri. It was also pointed out that Niscalakara in his commentary on Cakrapanidatta's Dravya-guna-Samgraha³ refers to this author as "Kharanada." I Annals (B. R. O. Institute), Vol. XX, pp. 97-102. 1. Vide Poona Orientalist, Vol. IV, pp. 49-62. 2. I have to add the following quotations from Kharanadi given by Srikanthadatta in his commentary called Vyakhyakusumavali or Siddhayoga (Anandashram Series, Poona, 1894):Page 38 - " tatha ca kharanadih pippali pippalimulacavya citrakanagaram | kolamatropayogitvatpancakolakasamjnitam || iti " Page 112 - " yadaha kharanadih :- rasasese hitah svapno gharmambu laghubhojanam | iti " Srikanthadatta mentions a, c (pp. 111, 165, 17, 4). Dr. Hoernle (Osteology, p. 17) states that on the Pathology () of Madhava there exists a commentary called Hg which is a jointwork of vijayaraksita (C. 1240 A. D.) and his pupil srikanthadatta . There is a Ms of Vyakhyakusumavali at the B. O. R. Institute (No. 375 of 1882-83) The Ms used for the Anandashram Edition of this work was dated Saka 1558 = A. D. 1636. 3. Vide folio 11 b of Ms. No. 620 of 1895-1902 in the Govt. Mss Library at the B. O. R. Institute. 126

There is a possibility of Niscalakara being contemporaneous with Hemadri as suggested by me in my article on Kharanadi referred to above. At any rate he can be assigned to a period between A. D. 1250 and 1400.' As regards the limit for the date of Kharanadi I suggested that he must be earlier than A. D. 1150. Since I sent the above paper to the press I received the issue of the Journal of the Mythic Society. Bangalore, containing the "Report on the Gilgit Excavation in 1938" by Pt. M. S. Kaul, M. A.., M. O. L., of Srinagar (Kashmir). This report contains a leaf from the MS of Kharanadanyasa (Plate 1442 A and its Devanagari transliteration on pp. 9-10). Pt. Kaul states that this is a "Commentary on a work of Kharanada on Medicine giving portion of a chapter relating to pregnancy. Both the text and commenatry are known at present in and through quotations only, though the former seems to have been as old as the Astangahrdaya of Vagbhata. The text is quoted by Arunadatta in his commentary on the Astangahrdaya at page 249 and by Vacaspati in his commentary on the Madhavanidana at page 50." 1. Vide p. 61 of Poona Orientalist, Vol. IV. 2. Vol XXX, No. 1 (July 1939) pp. 1-12. Pt. Kaul took his Excavation Party to Nawapura in Gilgit (229 miles from Srinagar) on 4 th August 1938; some mounds excavated at this place brought to light stupas of clay, birch bark Mss, ivory rings, brass rings, one earpendant, some pieces of gold, red and white pearl beads, birch-bark amulets, coral beads, a gold coin, iron and brass pieces, a gold-plated amulet with the image of the Lion-head on both sides.-The Mss excavated include (1) a work called Sanghatastra in Buddhist Sanskrit (about 80 leaves), containing on the the inside of the top-cover paintings of Purisa or Lord of Gilgit and his minister. There are two ladies seated in front of them, (2) Mss in fragments not yet deciphered and (3) Torn leaves from the Ms of Kharanadanyasa, a leaf from a collection of fables, a leaf from the Buddhist Sanskrit Grammar and leaves of a prose composition in Sanskrit recording an incantation to protect the king of Gilgit (whose full name is Sahanusahi Navasurendra Vikramaditya Nandideva") and his queen Anangadevi. According to Pt. Kaul this Manuscript hoard is "not later than the ninth century A. D. ", "nor can it be earlier than the seventh century A. D.". One of the Mss records the year of copying in the "Newari Era which starts with 878 A. D." " 2. Vide p. 17 of Osteology by Dr. Hoernle, Oxford, 1907. Dr. Hoernle assigns Vacaspati to "about 1260 A. D." Vacaspati states (v. 5 of Intro.) that his father Pramoda was chief physician of the court of Mahamada Hammira that is of Muhamad Ghori who reigned in Delhi from 1195 to 1205 A. D.

The reference to Kharanada by Vacaspati (about 1260 A. D.) pointed out by Pt. Kaul is contemporaneous with that by Hemadri and does not help us in deciding the exact antiquity of this author. Pt. Kaul remarks that the text of Kharanada is "as old as the Astangahrdaya of Vagbhata." As the "Astangahrdaya" is assigned by scholars' to "eighth or ninth century the limit for Kharanada's date would not be earlier than say A. D. 700. Let us, however, see the effect of Pt. Kaul's discovery of the leaf of Kharanadanyasa on the date of Kharanada's text itself. ,, Pt. Kaul states that the Manuscript hoard found by him at Gilgit cannot be later than 9 th century A. D. and at the same time cannot be earlier than 7 th century A. D. If these chronological limits are based on correct data we can represent the relative chronology of the text and commentary on Kharanada's work as follows:-Text Ms of Nyasa commentary Date of composition of Nyasa As old as Astangahrdaya 8 th or 9 th century A. D. (Pt. Kaul's view) i.e. between 700 and 900 A. D. Not later than 9 th cen- Between 600 and 900 A.D. tury and not earlier than the 7 th century Earlier than the above Ms Earlier than or contemporaneous with the period A. D. 600 to 900 I am not aware of the evidence, which leads Pt. Kaul to think that Kharanada's treatise " seems to have been as old as the Astangahrdaya' but presuming that his statement is substantiated by reliable evidence it is likely to conflict with the date of the Astangahrdaya given by Dr. Hoernle if we accept the date of MS of the Kharanada Nyasa (represented only by one discovered leaf) as suggested by Pt. Kaul². 1. Ibid, p. 16. 2. Jour. Mythic Soc. (July 1939) p. 8- Pt. Kaul's arguments regarding the age of the Mss. discovered by him are:- (1) The script of the Mss has a close affinity with the Sarada script as used in the Avantivarman's inscription at the Martanda temple. Hence the Mss are not later than the ninth century A. D. (Continued on next page)

In the present stage of the data gathered so far I am inclined to fix A. D. 650 as the terminus before which Kharanada may have composed his work and about 850 A. D. as the terminus before which the Nyasa was composed. As regards the exact name of Kharanada we have already recorded the following forms:according to Arunadatta (1) kharanada (2) kharanada Niscalakara " " (3) kharanadi (4) kharanadi " " Arunadatta (in one place) Hemadri " " (5) Do Kesava ,, ,, (6) Do ,, " Vopadeva (7) Do Srikanthadatta ,, " This testimony divided between the forms kharanada and kharanadi has not much determinative force as almost all the above authors belong to the 13 th century. The Gilgit fragment of A furnishes a better and decisive testimony on this point as the text of this commentary uses the form in the following 1 st line of Plate 1442-A :- " kharanadanyase khundikagarbhava kranti sariram samaptam || " The form kharanada used by the commentator is more akin to kharanada used by Niscalakara and supports the uniform use of the form an adopted by Kesava, Vopadeva and Hemadri. It is a happy coincidence that by the time my article on Kharanadi is prepared and published in Poona, Pt. Kaul should bring forth a leaf of a commentary on Kharanadi's work buried for centuries several feet under ground at Gilgit. I look forward to the day when both the text of Kharanadi's treatise which was extant, say between 600 and 1300 A. D. as also the newly discover- (Continued from previous page) (2) The Mss are not earlier than 7 th century A. D. during which Strong than-blsam-Sgam-po is said to have been converted through the influence of his two wives, one Nepalese and the other Chinese, to Buddhism and to have sent his minister Thonmi to India. who after studying the current Indian alphabet prepared the Tibetan character on the model of the Sarada alphabet and introduced the same in Tibet, etc.. S.I.L.X. 9

130: STUDIES IN INDIAN LITERARY HISTORY ed Nyasa commentary represented by a single leaf would see the light of the day. For the convenience of scholars interested in this problem, I am reproducing in the appendix the contents of Plate No. 1442-A containing the portion of the Kharanadanyasa. APPENDIX ( Contents of torn birch-bark leaf of Kharanadanyasa transliterated in Devanagari characters by Pt. M. S. Kaul ), 1 st line...dhanti tannimitta atmano mukhyajatya dilambha iti || || kharanadanyase khundika garbhavakranti sariram samaptam | sundikapahati garbhavakrantayoreka eva sambadhah dvayo 2 nd line rapi garbhakrantyasyasyaikasyaivarthasyabhidhanat | uta va purvedhyaye matradisambhavo garbha ityetavaduktam na tu yuktirdarsita kaya yuksyetyata iha sa yuktirucyate .nam hi samudayayugapadgarbhasambhavah nam hi 3 rd line tasya yukti pravaksyami prak ca tam bhasitamapiti | tasya garbhe anu- praveso garbhavakrantih sahasvam casya garbhavakrambhyasya vistara nirdesat dhyaham rajasvala bhutva puranarudhire sruta ityadi anisrute hi purane rudhire ma bhavati ga 4 th line bhapattih srutepi vasudata stripumsa yukta bhuta prasacacatta na vindati vikrtam va janayatyata ubhayamuktam manasvini saumanasyadvarbhamadate srigrahanam vandhya nisedhakam ekantaranidesah sukrastha 5 th Line...... payam adhyacitam hi sukram garbhaya bhavati nirantaragamanena tu alpasukravanotpadyate garbho vikrto va jayate || navaham garbhabhagini yasmannavahani rtuh tasmannesu garbham bhajate tatrayugme 6 th Line svahassu stri yugmesu tu puman bhavet yugmayugmatvam caturthadivasat prabhrti caturthasastastama yugma divasah pancamasaptamanavama ayugmah idanim yaya yuktya pumsa yukta stri garbha vindati sa yu 1. The. Carakasamhita (Sarirasthana) has two chapters on garbhavakranti viz. Chap. III (khuddika ga0 ) and Chap. IV (maharta ga0 ) (vide N. S. Press Edn. Bombay, 1922 pp. 305 and 313) Cakrapanidatta explains the term 'khuddika ' as 'alpa ' in contrast with mahati (p. 305). 2. Cf. Carakasamhita (p. 313) - "gate purane rajasi nave cavasthite suddhasnata striyamavyapannayonisonitagarbhasayamrtumatima caksmahe "

th Line ktirabhidhiyate suddhe sthite bijabhute rakta ityadi striya eke su bhadosaduste bijabhute bijavasthe garbhajananasamaye garbhasaye yona- dhasaye va duste | asaye garbhasthanam tasminnitthambhute rakte 8 th Line yonyasaye ca yada striyogat pumsa harsacyutam harsenodiritam sukramadusta- suddham yujyate samsrjyate harsah pratiti vi ...cchukrasonitasamyoge baddham samyujyate '.. 9 th Line yogyanurupaya krtyopetaih samanvitam yuktam sukarmaphalena tam | tadraktam matuh sambandhat ca pituh sambandhat ca sukram satvam carama cetana dhatuh N. B. Chapter II of the Sarirasthana of the Astangasamgraha of Vagbhata I is devoted to garbhavakranti and it begins:- "athato garbhavakranti sariram vyakhyasyamah | iti ha smahuratreyadayo maharsayah " Chap. I of the Astangahrdaya of Vagbhata II begins in an identical manner. [Vide pp. 12 and 98 of the Poona Edn. of the Astangasamgraha edited by Pt. R. D. Kinjavadekar (1938) with Indu's Comm. Sasilekha]. Regarding "Pregnancy" vide pp. 47, 48, 96 and 152 of History of Aryan Medical Science by Thakore Saheb of Gondal, London, 1896. 1. Cf. Carakasamhita (p. 313 ) - " tatha saha tatha bhutaya yada pumanavyapanna- bijo misribhavam gacchati, tada tasya harsadudaritah parah sariradhatvatma sukrabhuto'ngadangat sambhavati, " etc.