Bhānumatiṭīkā

This is currently available for the full section of sūtrasthāna. Prof. G.J.Meulenbeld based on the references in commentaries of Śivadasasena; Niścalakara suggests that the commentary may be extending to the whole treatise.

The authorities referred by the Cakrapāṇidatta in Bhānumatī and authorities that quote this commentary has been collected by G.J.Meulenbeld.¹²³

Cakrapāṇidatta’s Comments on Theory and Practice

Āyurveda traditionally viewed as an upāṅga or appendage of Atharaveda. According to Cakrapāṇidatta, Āyurveda is a portion of Atharvaveda¹²⁴. Āyurvedadīpikā is not impressed by the attribution of lābhartha or sense of gaining or profit in other treatise to the root vid¹²⁵. Āyurvedadīpikā also denies attribution of any spontaneous divine origin of Āyurveda¹²⁶. Carakasaṃhitā, a treatise on the kāyaciktsā designed in a comphrehensive and precise manner to suit the needs of contemperory man¹²⁷. Cakrapāṇidatta acknowledges the vastness of Āyurveda system as well as the difficulty in comprehending the system. So according to Āyurvedadīpikā even for a highly intellectual person proper initiation under very learned scholar in good tradition is needed.¹²⁸ Elsewhere he adheres to the convention followed by learned traditional physicians¹²⁹. This shows that Cakrapāṇidatta was upholding a view that in Āyurveda conventions set by traditional practitioners must be given prime importance.

Cakrapāṇidatta explains the traditional conception about the transmission of Āyurveda prvelent in the Kāyacikitsā School¹³⁰. He tries to establish an undeviated or steady flow of tenets from generations to generations. The compelling contemperory situations resulted in the formulation of a concise treatise on kāyacikitsā. ¹³¹

Āyurvedadīpikā refers to the hearsay which equates Bharadvāja with Agniveśa, it rejects this interpretation as it is not substantiated by material evidences with in and out side the treatise.¹³² Vāgbhaṭa’s affliation to the school of Bhaṭṭāraharicandra is revealed in Āyurvedadīpikā¹³³. Kumāraśirabharadvāja is identified as a different from the Bharadvāja, the preceptor of Ātreya¹³⁴. From the term candrabhāgī, Cakrapāṇi identifies Punarvasu Ātreya¹³⁵.

As explained elsewhere in this thesis, Āyurvedadīpikā was well aware of Āyurveda’s epistemological and ontological outlook. His contemporary intellectual sphere was vitiated by struggle between various philosophic schools, who were mutually opposing each other in their process to establish their supremacy. Cakrapāṇidatta very tactfully avoids non pragmatic, lengthy, hairsplitting discussions. Without any pretentions Cakrapāṇidatta honestly accepts his limitations. He expresses the inability of normal human intellect to comprehend the nature and process of combination of mahābhūtas.¹³⁶ Being a commentator of main stream Āyurveda i.e., kāyacikitsā and śalyacikitsā, the words of Cakrapāṇidatta carries the pulse of Āyurveda system of that period. Interestingly out of the eight branches of Āyurveda, as per the view of Āyurvedadīpikā, rasāyana and vājīkaraṇa are exclusively meant for svastvṛtta or the preventive aspect¹³⁷.This reflects that the contemporary physicians of Cakrapāṇidatta were not utilizing the curative possibilities inherent in these branches or Āyurvedadīpikā was not conversant with the clinical application of these drugs. This reveals the popularity of preventive measures of Āyurveda. Āyurvedadīpikā also carries other instances of preventive Āyurveda.¹³⁸ The prevention of disease can be achieved by denouncing actions which are non conducive for the body (ahitakarma).¹³⁹ Rasāyana can act only when the karma or fruits of actions of past life of the individual is favourable. The person’s life span is not affected by unfavourable karma and takes rasāyana, will be benefitted.¹⁴⁰ Interestingly he is not explaining the śalyatantra; definition of śālākyatantra highlights its surgical interventions¹⁴¹; definition of kāumarabṛtya focuses on kumārabharaṇa or childcare. The aspect of dhātriparicaraṇa is missing¹⁴²; and kayacikitsā is explained as the management of antarāgni.¹⁴³Since there is no description of kṣāratantra in the list of aṅgas; Āyurvedadīpikā connotes this coinage to śalyatantra.¹⁴⁴

Doṣas

The usage of term doṣa is interpreted in the technical sense i.e, the one initiate the process of vitiation of bodily elements, that which is culpable for vitiation is termed as dhātus.¹⁴⁵The initiation of the corruption of dhatus by the doṣas is an independent process and is the salient point which distinguishes doṣas from the rest of the bodily constituents.¹⁴⁶ The order in the context of Su.1.57 is explained according totheir successive importance, i.e., vāta is more important than pitta so is pitta when compared to kapha¹⁴⁷. The change in the order of narration of doṣas else is explained as to suit the meter of verse or to signify the contextual importance of any of these doṣas¹⁴⁸. Three doṣas are comprehensive representative of their (infinitely possible) permutation and combination of these three doṣas¹⁴⁹. The narration of three doṣas is to highlight their individual ability to independently initiate disease process¹⁵⁰. In the text, term doṣa is used in moderation to connote non doṣic body elements¹⁵¹. In one instance, Āyurvedadīpikā reports that some scholars interpret the term doṣa in such a way that it will be connoting sense of both doṣas and dhātus.¹⁵² This usage does not warrant an increase in number of doṣas.¹⁵³ The mala is used to connote extremely vitiated doṣas.¹⁵⁴Āyurvedadīpikā explains that the doṣabheda or variety results from the diversity of underlying dhātus¹⁵⁵. Rakta is not a doṣa as it lacks ability to independently initiate the disease process so also there is no prakṛti attributed to rakta.¹⁵⁶ In comparison with the śārīrakadoṣas, the kāyacikitsā branch is not elaborating details about the mānasikadoṣas. There is a lesser importance for mānasika doṣas in the commentary.¹⁵⁷ This shift is again very important even if it is an individual aberration from the part of author. From the doṣas one must also imply the diseases resulted from them.¹⁵⁸ This narration is having affinities with Narasiṃhabhāṣya.¹⁵⁹ Even though vāyu is conceived as anuṣṇaśīta in Vaiśeṣikadarśana, in Āyurveda it is reckoned as śīta due to its alleviation by hot remedies and corruption by cold substances. Similarly though vāyu is devoid of any rasas, the drugs having madhura, amla, and lavaṇa alleviate it. This is so because the rasas of the drugs possesses their accessory qualities like snigdha and such are of opposite qualities of vāta.¹⁶⁰ Thus the narration of doṣaguṇas is mainly focused on the clinical utility. The yogavāhi property of vāta is explained by citing the example of a stone turning hot in contact with heat and acquires cold in contact with cold conditions.¹⁶¹ Vāta is devoid of any parts unlike in the case of pitta or śleṣma, and it is by its nature itself is in motion.¹⁶² The rukṣādiguṇas are real in nature or have existence (bhāvapradhana). Cakrapāṇidatta explains dāruṇatva as calatvaṃ alternatively he is also giving the option of kāṭinyaṃ for it.¹⁶³ Āyurvedadīpikā explains that it is not possible to enumerate qualities of vāta in its entirety. Only a few ones, which can act as the representative qualities of vāta are elaborated. Some of them can be ascertained by direct perception where as some are inferred and some qualities are known only on the basis of scriptural testimony.¹⁶⁴ The usage tantrayantradhara has been explained in two ways, as the sustainer of the body and other as the sustainer of joints.¹⁶⁵ The qualities of vāyu in form of devata are also enumerated along with the qualities of elemental vāyu, thus supernatural qualities narrated here should be understood as related to the divine vāyu.¹⁶⁶

Pitta has been classified in to sadrava and niradrava. The former is having uncoutous qualities and later is the one which had lost this uncoutousness¹⁶⁷. Cakrapāṇidatta reconciles the apparent difference between the treatises of Caraka and Suśruta regarding the rasa of pitta.The former attributes amlarasa and later considers it as kaṭurasa. In the case of Suśruta the narration is focused on the pitta that is having a predominance of tejas where as Caraka speaks about the pitta which is dominated by jala and tejas. Even sasnehata is absent in the narration of Suśruta due to his peculiar positioning. Thus the apparent contradiction should be understood as two facts of the same object¹⁶⁸.

Special doṣic states are there where the state of diminution, excitation and normalcy can be seen simultaneously. According some scholars, these conditions are enumerated as models for clinical practice, where as others consider it as twelve difficult conditions explained by the treatise maker. Cakrapāṇidatta clarifies the condition where the kapha being in state of diminution and vāta in an excited state will produce symptoms of pitta aggravation like dāha etc. Moreover vāta cannot bring forth dāha. The reason for manifestation of paittikavikāras in the absence of derangement of pitta is attributed to the relative augmentation of local pitta by combining with pitta brought about to those loci by vāta. He also introduces an alternative explanation by scholars for this particular doṣic state that pitta, though normal, in contact with morbid doṣas, results in the manifestation of its excited symptoms¹⁶⁹. Interestingly unlike Madhukośa, Cakrapāṇidatta is not using the term āśayāpakarṣagati for explaining this unique situation¹⁷⁰. Again, he is not taking the cognizance of reduction in the number of these special conditions as in the case of Aṣṭaṅgasaṃgraha¹⁷¹.

Cakrapāṇidatta does not grant any role in the disease genesis for the doṣas when they are in their state of diminution. They just represent a deviation from the normal state and in the sense that they cease to manifest their normal signs and symptoms. The state of morbid excitation will produce symptoms in accordance to the degree of aggravation¹⁷². He emphasizes his stand in the sannipātacikitsā.¹⁷³ This view seems to be a non universal one atleast during Cakrapāṇidatta’s time.Narasiṃha considers even doṣakṣaya as a roga. Niścalakara says that the authorites like Svāmidāsa Iśvaraśena deens kṣayāvastha as roga.¹⁷⁴ The permutation and combination of doṣas are only those which are the most common in clinical practice.There can be other types of doṣa combinations depending upon their permutation and combination of varying degree.¹⁷⁵ Since the qualities of doṣas are antagonistic to each other, it may be argued that their combination with each other to result in sannipāta is not tenable. Cakrapāṇidatta clarifies this contradiction by citing the formation of pañcamahabhūtas which involves the combination of jala and agni so is the case of amlarasa, which also involves a domination of two elements in the form of jala and agni which are mutually contradictory in nature. Though there is an inferential contradiction, their own action will negate such contradiction and it is not correct to refute the combination of doṣas with mutually contradictory nature. Further it has been stated elsewhere that in the event of the combination of two objects having mutually contradictory qualities, the stronger one overpowers the weaker one and also that the distinctive feature of a thing is responsible for the diminution of another substance when combined with it This statement will not stand valid if it is argued that there is no contradiction between doṣas having mutually opposite qualities. Cakrapāṇidatta clarifies that this statement applies only to such cases other than doṣas having specific properties. Moreover, such specific properties are determined by a preordained force or adṛṣṭa. To this predestined capacity of prabhava and the adṛṣṭa of individuals are also combine to cause miseries to the individual. Inspiteof their mutual contradictory nature, doṣas are having a capacity to co-exist naturally without disturbing the others properties. This natural co-existence is also pre-ordained by destiny¹⁷⁶.

Cakrapāṇidatta defines gati as a specific state of doṣas¹⁷⁷. Whatever symptoms exhibited is related to the permutation and combination of doṣas.¹⁷⁸ The knowledge of doṣic diminution or excitation independently or in conjugation with other doṣas is called doṣavikalpa.¹⁷⁹ Nānātmajarogas, refers to diseases produced independently by individual doṣas and in sāmānyajarogas, individual disease is produced independently by the respective doṣa and also in combination with other doṣas¹⁸⁰.

Svastavr̥tta

Svasta or healthy individuals are different from each other on the basis of their specific prakṛti or constituition¹⁸¹. Cakrapāṇidatta defines svasta as being in one self, where the doṣas will not be showing any excitement of doṣas and they are in a state of equipoise. Āyurvedadīpikā is not classifying the health individuals as bhiṣakparipāritasvasta and yādriṣcchikasvasta as done by Narasiṃha¹⁸². One must protect the health by two ways viz., by replenishing the diminished dhātus and by removing the factors antagonistic to health. The later can be again grouped in to two: the one that corrupts the doṣas and the second the temporal factors. The maintenance of healthy body is illustrated by the maintenance of the flame of oil litted lamp. The flame of the lamp is maintained by providing oil and wick and also by preventing the other extinguishing agents. Even in the case of svastha Āyurvedadīpikā observes factors that enhances and maintain the positive health and those aspects which will prevent antagonistic factors of positive health from affecting the individual.¹⁸³ The commitment of Āyurveda in the preventive aspect is emphatically established by Āyurvedadīpikā.¹⁸⁴ The positive health can be maintained by righteous intake of food. The mātra or quantity of food intake must be understood separately from the mātra of auṣadha and vyāyāma. It also changes from season to season.The bifold division in form of sarvagraha and parigraha must be also born in mind while fixing the āharamātra.¹⁸⁵ Owing to the importance of cakṣu, ajñana is done for protecting it and there by keeping the positive health intact. The term añjana is also connoted to abyaṅga. To distinguish it from netrājñana, treatise maker is consciously using the term akṣiyañjana.¹⁸⁶ Regarding the performance of añjana, Āyurvedadīpikā refers to a school of thought who held the view that saurājñana must be done daily at night time and like the vamana, rasājñana must be done in the early hours of day.¹⁸⁷

The eight types of undesirable constitutions or ninditapuruṣas are explained from a physical plane only and the psychologically undesirable personalities are not discussed in this section. Of the eight types, the first six are significant only in the sentiments of people and only the last two are significant for Āyurveda. Undesirable conditions like kubjatva are included under this list itself.¹⁸⁸

R̥tus

Regarding construal of ṛtus in the context of svastavṛtta for explaining the regimes specific for each season is different from that meant for sodhana or elimination of doṣas. The six ṛtus are only for context of ṛtucarya. The six ṛtus taken together will consitiute the year and they will be cyclically repeated every year. The northern movement of sun is called uttarāyana and souther movement is called dakṣiṇāyana. The later bestows strength to body and medicinal herbs and former does the reverse to man and earth. Some interpretators see role of soma or moon along with sūrya in determining the nature of ādanakāla or uttarāyaṇa.¹⁸⁹ Kāla is divine in nature and its effect is beyond our normal comprehensive levels and the effect ascribed to kāla is indeed resulted by the movement of sun¹⁹⁰. Though ādana is mentioned first owing to the positive effects of visargakāla on human life it is first elaborated by applying the pratilomavyākhya¹⁹¹. ṛtus comprised of four months each, are grouped in to three, having the qualities of śīta,uṣṇa, and varṣa.¹⁹².

Two orders of counting the ṛtus viz., prāvṛḍādiṛtukrama and śiśīrādi ṛtukrama have been mentioned for the purpose of śodhana and rasotpatti respectively. Prāvṛṭ is defined as ‘prathamaḥ pravṛṣṭaḥ kālaḥ’, which corresponds to āṣāḍha and śrāvaṇamāsa. The successive dual months counts to varṣādi ṛtus, in the first order of counting the seasons- prāvṛḍādiṛtukrama.¹⁹³ Thus the sādhāraṇa kālas viz., prāvṛṭ corresponds to the month’s āṣāḍha, śrāvaṇa; śarat to kārtika and mārgaśīrṣa; and vasanta to phālguṇa and caitra.¹⁹⁴ This order of classification of ṛtus is for administering the śodhana therapies; this set of classification does not count śiśiraṛtu. For svasthavṛtta and rasotpatti, the order of seasons mentioned under tasyaśitīyādhyāya has to be considered viz. varṣa, śarat, hemanta, śiśira, vasanta, and grīṣma.¹⁹⁵ In prāvṛḍādiṛtukrama, the śiśira ṛtu has been omitted, while prāvṛṭ has been left out in śiśīrādiṛtukrama. Cakrapāṇidatta quoting from Kāśyapa, substantiates this variant classifications of the seasons based on the variation in the rain mode in the regions to the north and south of the river Ganga. The rain is heavy in the region to the south of the Ganga, hence the seasons prāvṛṭ, varṣā are counted separately, while to the north of the river Ganga the mist and winter seasons are more hence the seasons hemanta and śiśira are counted separately.¹⁹⁶ This type of classification is based according to the nature of the deśa, and has not been mentioned as that for the purpose of śodhana in the context.¹⁹⁷ This classification has been incorporated in the śodhana krama also. In reality there is no such difference in the seasons, which categorize them into two different orders of classification, but the divisions into prāvṛḍādi and śiśirādi is for the therapeutic (saṃśodhana) convenience.¹⁹⁸

Haṃsodaka is defined in Āyurvedadīpikā as the water purified by the sun and the moon; here haṃsa refers to sun and moon. The nomenclature also implies the purity of water and mythological bird haṃsa is supposed to drink only pure water and this water is adviced in śaradṛtu¹⁹⁹.

The narration of separate chapter on non suppression of natural urges is for maintaining the positive health. Āyurvedadīpikā defines vega and narration of mūtra and purīṣa as well as kṣudpipasa in compounded form to highlight the fact that they are more often manifested together.²⁰⁰ The desire for sex or kamaiṣaṇa is included in prāṇāiṣaṇa and dhānaiṣaṇa as good healthy body and material wealth can bring forth good sexual life. Alternatively, the sexual drive is a natural one and it is too axiomatic to be separately narrated.²⁰¹Accretion of money is advocated only for getting the desired comforts in the life and wealth for the sake of wealth is denounced by Caraka.²⁰²

Pādacatuṣṭaya

The pādacatuṣṭaya or quadruple of therapeutics is only act as cause for effective cure of ailments only when they functions effectively in curing the diseases and their mere presence will not bring in cure.²⁰³ Thus the quadruple of therapeutics will act as cause of effective cure of diseases and not the cure itself.²⁰⁴ Here also we can see the influence of NavyaNyāya in the thought process of Cakrapāṇidatta.²⁰⁵ The diseases which are considered as sādhya further classified in to three (alpamadhyamotkṛṣṭayoga) on the basis of effort required for their cure. Such a classification is not done in the case of asādhyarogas. But the yāpyarūpāsādyarogas are having this three-fold classification on the above mentioned basis. Though they are classified as sadyaprāṇahara etc, their net effect is always incurability.²⁰⁶ The general rule for curability of a disease is breached in certain exceptional cases; it must be understood as the special nature or prabhavā of the diseases²⁰⁷. It is interesting to note that Cakrapāṇidatta attributes the effect of śauca to adṛṣṭa.²⁰⁸ Other qualities of vaidya are also included in these enumerated four qualities.²⁰⁹Cakrapāṇidatta explains bhīrutva and asmṛti as qualities of the patient as it helps in speedy recovery²¹⁰. Āyurvedadīpikā cautions the physician not to treat a patient whose death is imminent since any attempt to treat such a patient will jeopardize the reputation of the physician.²¹¹ Cakrapāṇidatta refers to commercial trade of medicinal drugs.²¹²

Upasthambha is designated so because their support to the life is under the influence of karma, which determines the life span of the individual. This karma is further supported by āhāra, nidra, and brahmacarya. Here āhāra means wholesome food conducive for maintaining health and not the unwholesome one. Brahmacarya includes the control of sense organs and spiritual bliss conducive to the knowledge of Brhaman. The excessive control of senses without well regulated practice as a part of brahmacarya is denounced by Cakrapāṇidatta, as it may cause harm by way of causing mental disturbance. Though the importance of āhāra is emphasised, it does not negate the positive aspects of abhyaṅga.²¹³ Cakrapāṇidatta while commenting on yuktikṛtabala, explains that some commentators explain it as an outcome of utilistaion of rasāyana²¹⁴.

Prakṛti

Cakrapāṇidatta explains the term prakṛti as health; he reminds us that the term is connoted with other shades of meaning in other philosophical systems.²¹⁵ The dhātusāmyaṃ or equilibrium of dhātus in an absolute level is not possible as there will be always a preponderance of doṣas according to physiological conditions and temporal factors. So it is a relative term construed to explain the state of wellbeing of the individual in the mundane level. The negligible variations on doṣas induced by the temporal factors are not counted while construing health. That is why the term sukhasaṃjñakaṃ is used for referring ārogya. The deviation of dhātus from their normalcy is deemed as vikāra or ill health. This vikāra can be of absolute nature and is indicated by the usage dukhameva ca.²¹⁶ The in-equipoise or dhātuvaiṣamya is not the ill health but it is the cause or karaṇa of ill health and its out come is deemed as vikāra or ailment.²¹⁷ The question arises here is whether to place the product of dhātuvaiṣamya under the heading of vikāra or ārogya. It cannot be placed in the later as there is an inequipoise of dhātus. Since it is regarded as the causative factor of disease it cannot be placed under vikāra. One cannot construe a situation where there is an imbalance of dhātus and no vikāra is produced. The moment the derangement of dhātus in the form of diminution or increase, the symptoms of disease is set in. The primary advantage of this interpretation is that the primary meaning of the term dhātyvaiṣamya is kept intact.The disturbances of the equipoise of dhātus as well as its effect are reckoned as vikāras. So, if it is said that any disturbance in the equilibrium of dhātus brings about vikāras, even deficiency in doṣas would lead to diseases. But it is not so. Those who are determined to accept the effects of the disturbance of equilibrium of doṣas as vikāra, for them, unless a distinct vikāra is produced, an ordinary disturbance of the equilibrium of dhātus as it happens during the course of day, night etc. is regarded as a normal condition,is a stage of equilibrium of dhātus. The conditions like vyaṅga etc. are regarded as diseases in Carakasaṃhitā and its pain must be understood as mental agony rather than physical one.²¹⁸

In the context of enumeration of prakṛti, pitta is narrated ahead of vāta; Cakrapāṇidatta is not sure about the impact of this particular sequence in the relative importance of doṣas. One possibility for choosing this sequence is to satisfy the linguistic requirements and other is to signify the relative importance of pitta in genesis of prakṛti. By narration of constitution resulted from individual doṣas one must understand dvandaja prakṛti or constitution resulted by two doṣa.²¹⁹Prakṛti means healthy disposition or dehasvāstyaṃ, the persons having the dominance of individual doṣas or their combination can have a healthy situation if they constantly administer diet and regimens to counter the effect of their individual doṣa or doṣas. They are other wise called as upacārasvasthā.²²⁰ Āyurvedadīpikā explains that in the manifestation of illness and during its course nidānas play the decesive role in determining the course of the disease and prakṛti will not cause any excitation of the disease process nor will the nidanas alter the state of prakṛti.²²¹

Ojas

The ojas being the quintessence of dhātus, it can be understood from the enumeration of dhātus. But the narration of ojas separately is done owing to its importance in maintance a psychosomatic complex.²²² Āyurvedadīpikā reveals that the concept of ojas was having an equivocal status among the Āyurveda scholars. Some regarded it as a product of śukra,²²³ while others regarded it as an upadhātu²²⁴ .He also reckons that the term ojas is also connoted with rasadhātu²²⁵. In context of pāṇdū, ojas is related to rakta²²⁶. Ḍalhaṇa also cites the tradition of calling rasa and rakta as ojas²²⁷ .But in this context ojas refers to the essences of all śārīrikadhātus and hence it is neither a dhātu nor an upadhātu.²²⁸ It is the essence of all dhātus, before the yoking of śukra and śoṇita, the reproductive elements are the representatives of ojas or the essence, after combining in the state of kalala, the essence is manifested in the form of rasasāra and finally ojas manifests as itself after the formation of all bodily parts. Cakrapāṇidatta referring to an anonymous text (tantrāntare) and classifies the ojas into two: para (superior) and apara (inferior)²²⁹.According the Cakrapāṇidatta the former one which is having quantity of aṣṭabindhupramāṇa is situated in hṛdaya,²³⁰ it is śkula in colour in combination with rakta and pītā,²³¹ and the later is the ślaiṣmikaujas having ardhānjalipariṇāma related to daśadhamanis attached to hṛdaya.²³² The aparaojus is drained out of the body in prameha, even a slight variation in paraojus will lead to death of person. The narration of diminution of ojas in the treatise related to the inferior variety or ślaiṣmikaujas²³³. It should be taken in to cognisance of the fact that Cakrapāṇidatta is explaining the divisions of ojas on basis of the usage ‘parasya’ in Carakasaṃhitā. This usage does not invite antagonistic positioning in the form of apara. Position of Āyurveda community of that period on this matter can be known only after screening the earlier commentaries.²³⁴ Cakrapāṇidatta says that ojas is not granted the status of upadhātu as it lacks poṣaṇa or nourishing. Further he is not favouring allusion that it is the essence of śukra²³⁵.