Index talk:The materia medica of the Hindus (1877).djvu
Noting Index:The Materia Medica of the Hindus.djvu 1922 edition
THE
MATERIA MEDICA
OF THE HINDUS,
COMPILED FROM SANSKRIT MEDICAL WORKS,
BY
UDOY CHAND DUTT,
Civil Medical Officer.
WITH A GLOSSARY OF INDIAN PLANTS,
BY
GEORGE KING, M. B., F. L. S.
SUPERINTENDENT, ROYAL BOTANICAL GARDEN, CALCUTTA
AND THE AUTHOR.
CALCUTTA:
THACKER, SPINK & Co,
1877.
PREFACE.
THIS work is not a literal translation of any particular treatise, but a compilation from standard Sanskrit medical works, arranged somewhat upon the plan of Waring's Manual of Therapeutics, and intended to give a concise exposition of the Materia Medica of the Hindus. Dr. Wise, in his Commentary on the Hindu system of Medicine, has given a pretty full and accurate account of the Anatomy, Surgery and Pathology of the Hindus. With regard to his work I may here repeat what I have stated in the preface to my translation of the Nidána, "That the natives of India cannot be too grateful to him for the trouble he has taken in bringing to light the contents of their ancient medical works, and establishing their right position in the history of Medicine." The scope and plan of his book did not, however, admit of his treating of Sanskrit Materia Medica in the manner of modern works on the subject. I have, therefore, undertaken to publish this work under the impression that it will prove an acceptable contribution to the history of drugs, and will form a basis for further researches on indigenous medicines.
In the first part of the work I have given an account of the mineral medicines used by the Hindus, the mode in which they are prepared for use, their chemical composition, and the principal combinations in which they are employed in different, diseases. With regard to the Vegetable Materia Medica, I have endeavoured to give the correct scientific names of the plants described, by procuring the drugs through practising kavirajas or native physicians, and having them identified in the Royal Botanic Gardens.
In describing the general properties of individual articles I have not followed the Sanskrit texts literally. Sanskrit writers, under this head, after recounting their sensible properties, enter into minute details regarding their cooling or heating effects on the system, and their special influence on the humours which are supposed to support the machinery of life, namely, air, bile, phlegm and blood. These details are not so much the result of observation and experience as the outcome of an erroneous system of pathology and therapeutics. I have, therefore, selected for notice such portions of the texts as relate to the practical use of the drugs and their tangible effects on the system. This latitude in departing from the texts, has enabled me to bring together in one place, useful hints regarding the uses of particular drugs from different Sanskrit treatises on therapeutics. I have occasionally added remarks on their history and economic uses where I thought I had new or additional information to afford on the subject. These remarks are for the most part based on personal knowledge.
In describing the preparation and uses of medicines employed in different diseases I have confined myself strictly to the texts of the authors whom I have quoted, and have given the original Sanskrit verses in foot-notes. I have not incorporated with them the results of modern researches on indigenous drugs, or my personal experience of their use. These I have reserved for a future essay. My object here has been to show the extent of knowledge attained by Hindu physicians by their own practice and observation.
In the selection of the prescriptions for illustrating the uses of medicines in individual diseases I have, as a rule, given preference to such recipes as are commonly used by native physicians. Where there are several well-known medicines of similar composition and use, I have described in detail only one, and given under it the names of the others with a brief allusion to their composition. My main object in including the names of the principal or generally known preparations of the Hindu Materia Medica in the text and index, is to enable the practitioner of European Medicine to get an idea of their nature and composition when he comes to hear of their having been used by patients who had been under native treatment before coming under his care, as is very often the case. The list is by no means an exhaustive one, nevertheless I have, at the risk of being tedious, endeavoured to include under some head or other most of the combinations which were pointed out to me by experienced native physicians, as generally used in practice.
In detailing the uses of particular combinations of medicines, Sanskrit writers are, sometimes, in the habit of indulging in exaggerated statements. Thus for example a medicine, which is really used in a special disease, say jaundice, is described in the chapter devoted to the treatment of this disease, but a host of other diseases may also be recited as cured by it. Native physicians who regard these writings as sacred, explain these irrelevant statements by saying that they are secondary uses. I have, for the most part, omitted them in my translations of the texts, hence their English renderings will sometimes appear deficient or incomplete.
The names of the works given below the Sanskrit texts merely shew that those texts are to be found in them, and not that they were originally composed by the authors or compilers of those books. The combinations or formulae generally used, are to be found in most compilations, and it is not always practicable to trace them to their original sources. In quoting these authorities I have, as a natural consequence of the principle upon which the prescriptions were selected, had to give preference to works that are used as text books by native physicians.
The number of Sanskrit medical works, and especially of small compilations on the treatment of diseases, is too numerous and indefinite to admit of detailed enumeration here. The enquirer after them is sure to find, in different parts of the country or seats of learning, many little manuals, essays and digests of which he did not hear before. It would seem that in the absence of printing, teachers of medicine used to prepare small compilations containing such prescriptions as they were in the habit of using, for the guidance of their pupils, who copied them for personal use. These manuals are often dubbed with fancy names, and have more or less circulation according to their merit or the extent of influence of their authors. There are however a few works which owing to their comprehensive character, ancient date, or real merit, are well known throughout India. I will here notice them briefly.
The two works called Charaka Sanhitá and Susruta A'yurveda are the oldest and most celebrated treatises on Hindu medicine now extant. An older work called A'yurveda is mentioned in both these works as having formed a part of the Atharva Veda. It is said to have been originally composed by Brahma, the creator, and to have consisted of a thousand chapters and a hundred-thousand slokas. Afterwards, in consideration of the short lives and small intellects of human beings, it was abridged into eight chapters as follows:
1. Salya or surgical treatment.
2. Sálakya or diseases of the head, eyes, ears and face.
3. Káyachikitsá or treatment of general diseases.
4. Bhutavidyá or diseases caused by evil spirits.
5. Kaumára-bhritya or the treatment of infants and of the puerperal state.
6. Agada or antidotes to poisons.
7. Rasáyana or medicines which promote health and longevity.
8. Vájikarana, or aphrodisiacs.
The A'yurveda with a hundred thousand slokas is probably a myth, but the abridged A'yurveda with its eight divisions seem to have had a real existence, although it is not available in the present day. It probably became obsolete after the works of Charaka and Susruta were composed.
Charaka is generally believed to be older than Susruta and consequently to be the oldest work on Sanskrit Medicine now extant. In the introduction to this work it is said that A'treya, a learned devotee, taught the holy A'yurveda to six pupils; namely, Agnivesa, Bhela, Játukarna, Parsára, Hárita and Kharapáni. Agnivesa first wrote a treatise on medicine, and afterwards Bhela and others followed, each producing a separate work and thereby acquiring great renown. The work of Agnivesa was regarded as the best. It was edited or corrected by Charaka in whose name it is now current. At the end of each book of this work it is said, that this tantra or scientific treatise was composed by Agnivesa and corrected by Charaka. A later writer Vágbhatta in his introduction to his Ashtanga-hridaya-sanhitá says, that that work had been compiled from the treatises of Agnivesa, Hárita, Bhela, Sásvata, Susruta, Kavala, and others. From this it would seem that the six disciples of A'treya, mentioned in Charaka, were not mythical beings, but authors of books, for two of them, namely, Agnivesa and Bhela are mentioned by Vágbhatta. It would appear also that at the time Vágbhatta lived, Agnivesa's work was not called by the name of Charaka, and Susruta had also been written. Hence it follows that Charaka's edition of Agnivesa, that is the work now called Charaka, was probably edited after Susruta had been written. A'treya is said to have lectured somewhere near the Himalaya, and his name occurs very frequently in the Vedas. His father Atri was a renowned sage, and the author of a law treatise which is current in his name. There is no clue to the nativity of Charaka, but Dridhabala, who added some chapters to his work, calls himself a native of Panchanada or the Panjab.* Susruta, on the other hand, is said to have been written in Benares. From the facts detailed above it is clear that the work called Charaka was composed at a very early age. I will not attempt to hit at the century before Christ in which it was probably written as it is a question which can be best discussed by professed antiquarians. I may notice, however, that the book is composed in an antiquated style and appears to have been written before the spread of the Puranic form of Hinduism, as the names of modern gods and goddesses do not occur in it, and the author does not, at the commencement of the work, offer his salutations to any mythological deity, as is usual with later writers. Beef was not then, apparently, a forbidden food, for Charaka speaks of it as an article of diet that should not be taken daily. The work next in point of age, namely, Susruta, is more systematic in its arrangement, contains better details of anatomy and pathology, and shews on the whole a more advanced state of knowledge, both of general principles and of details of treatment.
The origin of the Susruta A'yurveda is thus described in the introduction to that work. Dhanvantari, the surgeon of heaven, descended upon earth in the person of Diva dása, king of Benares, for the purpose of teaching surgery along with the other branches of medical knowledge by which the gods preserve themselves from decline, disease and death. Susruta and other pupils besought him for instruction in surgical knowledge. Dhanvantari asked them what they wished to learn. The pupils replied "you will be pleased to make surgical knowledge the basis of your instruction, and to address your lectures to Susruta, who will take notes." Dhanvantari replied, "be it so. For surgery is the first and most important part of the A'yurveda, inasmuch as the healing of wounds was the first necessity for the medical art among the gods on account of their battles with the demons. Besides surgical treatment effects rapid cures, has recourse to instruments, mechanical appliances, caustics and the actual cautery and is intimately connected with the other branches of medical science." Accordingly we find that Susruta devotes the greater portion of his work to such subjects as anatomy, surgical instruments and operations, inflammation and surgical diseases, care of the king and his troops in the battle-field, obstetrical operations, poisons, etc.
The general diseases such as fever, diarrhoea, chest diseases, etc., are treated of in the last book called "Uttara-tantra," but there are reasons for believing, that this portion did not originally form a part of the work, but was subsequently added by some writer with the object of giving completeness to it. This is evident from several reasons. The very name Uttara "supplemental" is enough to suggest the idea of its being an after thought, if not a subsequent work. Had it been an integral part of the original treatise, it would have been included in the original scheme. But at the end of the first chapter of the first book an analysis of the contents of the entire work is given wherein it is said that this work consists of five parts containing 120 chapters in all.* This is followed by a line to the effect that in the Uttara-tantra the remainder of the subject will be described. This last line, however, is evidently an interpolation, for if the original writer of the work had divided his book into six parts, he would not have said that it consisted of five parts. Besides the Uttara-tantra has a separate introduction in which the writer says it is compiled from the works of learned sages on the six divisions of Káyachikitsá or the treatment of general diseases, and from the work of Videhidhipa on Sálakya Sástra or diseases of the head, eyes, ears and nose.
If therefore we leave out of consideration the Uttara-tantra of Susruta, the work resolves itself mainly into a treatise on the principles of medicine as bearing on surgical diseases. It would thus appear that from a very early age, Hindu medical practitioners were divided into two classes, namely, Salya chikitsaka or surgeons and Káyachikitsaka or physicians. The surgeons were also called Dhanvantaryia sampradáya after Dhanvantari the reputed teacher of Susruta, or from Dhanvantari the mythological surgeon of the gods. This division existed before the work of Charaka was compiled, for as pointed out by Kavirája Brajendrakumar Sen Gupta, Charaka, like our modern physicians, refers his readers to surgeons when surgical aid is necessary, as for example in the passage quoted below. We may conclude, therefore, that Charaka is the oldest treatise on Medicine and Susruta the oldest treatise on Surgery now extant.
These two works, namely, Charaka and Susruta mark the highest phase of development of the Hindu system of Medicine in ancient times. Their comprehensive character and superior merit probably led, in course of time, to the extinction of the manuscripts of authors who had preceded them. Succeeding writers and practitioners came to regard these works as of divine origin and beyond the criticism of man. Accordingly they dared not add to or amend what these ancient sages had recorded regarding the general principles of medicine and special pathology, but confined their labours to making better arranged and more compendious compilations for the use of students, and to explaining or dilating upon the texts of Charaka and Susruta, while in the matter of surgical practice, there has been a gradual decline in knowledge and experience till at the present day an educated surgeon of the Dhanvantariya sampraáya is a phenomenon unknown in Hindustan.
The next compilation on Hindu Medicine is said to be the Ashtanga-hridaya-sanhitá by Sinha Gupta Sena Vágbhatta. This work is a mere compilation from Charaka and Susruta methodically arranged. It contains little or nothing that is original or that is not to be found in the works from which it was compiled. This circumstance, together with the fact of Vágbhatta being always mentioned by later writers as an old authority, seems to show that his work was compiled not long after those of Charaka and Susruta. Like these two writers he does not mention the use of mercury in the treatment of diseases.
Next in point of age, are the two works called respectively the Nidána by Mádhava Kara and Chakradatta-sangraha by Chakrapani Datta. The first is a concise treatise on the causes symptoms and prognosis of diseases, compiled from various authors, and has been used from a long time as the text-book on pathology by students of Hindu Medicine throughout India. Professor Wilson is of opinion that "the Arabians of the eighth century cultivated the Hindu works on Medicine before those of the Greeks; and that the Charaka, the Susruta, and the treatise called Nidana were translated and studied by the Arabians in the days of Harun and Mansur (A. D. 773), either from the originals, or more probably from translations made at a still earlier period into the language of Persia." The treatise called Chakradatta-sangraha, describes in detail the treatment of diseases arranged in the order in which they are described in the Nidána of Mádhava Kara, and to which it is a companion volume. Its author deals chiefly with vegetable drugs. He gives a few prescriptions containing mercury, in which this metal is mixed with sulphur and vegetable substances, but the preparations of mercury produced by sublimation and chemical combination with salts, etc., were unknown to him. It would appear, therefore, that mercury was just coming into use in his time. He does not mention opium, so that his work, and consequently the Nidána, must have been composed before the introduction of this drug into India by the Mussulmans.
The last great work on Hindu Medicine is that called the Bhávaprakása, compiled by Bhava Misra. It is a comprehensive treatise, compiled from the works of preceding authors, with much additional information on the properties of drugs, accounts of new drugs, and of some new diseases, as for example the syphilis introduced into India by the Portugeese and described in this work under the name of Phiringi-roga. By the time this work was composed, opium had been largely employed in practice, the use of mercury had extended to almost all diseases, various preparations of gold, silver, tin, copper, orpiment, arsenic, etc., had come into fashion, superseding to a considerable extent the vegetable drugs of the older writers; in short Hindu pathology and therapeutics had reached their acme. Dr. Wise says that the Bhávaprakasa was composed about three hundred years ago. It cannot, at any rate, be a much older work. China root, called Chob-chini in the vernacular, is described in it. According to Fluckiger and Hanbury the use of this drug as a remedy for syphilis was made known to the Portugueese at Goa by Chinese traders, about (A. D. 1535). Hence the Bhávaprakasa must have been compiled after this period.
Besides the systematic treatises on the description and treatment of diseases above noticed, there are several works in Sanskrit devoted especially to the description of the synonyms and properties of individual medicines and articles of diet. The oldest treatise on this subject is the one called Rajanirghantu. It is generally ascribed to Dhanvantari, but Pundit Madhusudan Gupta estimated the age of this work at 600 years. As both mercury and opium are mentioned in this treatise, it cannot be older. Some later compilations on this subject are in general use at the present day. In the North-West Provinces, the Nirghantu, compiled by Madana-pála, is generally perused by students. In Bengal, a very superficial compilation, under the name of Rájavallabha, is in currency. In Orissa, a superior work, called Satkantha-ratnábharana, is used.
The progress of chemistry or rather of the art of calcining, subliming and of otherwise preparing mineral substances for medical use, was comparitively slow in the early ages. Susruta used the natural salts, such as chloride of sodium, impure carbonates of potash and soda, borax, etc.; he employed iron in anæmia, and briefly referred to the supposed properties of silver, copper, tin, lead and the precious stones, but he gave no detailed instructions regarding their calcination, preparation or administration in special diseases. Chakradatta gives some processes for reducing to powder iron, copper and talc, and a few prescriptions containing these remedies. The oldest work containing a detailed account of the calcination or preparation of the different metals (such as gold, silver, iron, mercury, copper, tin and lead), for internal use, with formulae for their administration, is I believe a concise treatise on medicinal preparations by Sárangadhara. Opium and pellitory root are mentioned in this work, hence it must have been compiled during the Mussulman period. Since then a host of works on metallic preparations and combinations have been prepared both in Bengal and the North-West Provinces, and mineral medicines have been largely adopted in the treatment of diseases. The more important parts of the information contained in these works are embodied in the Bhávaprakása and the two works on inorganic medicines generally used in Bengal, namely, Rasendra-chintámani and Rasendra-sárasangraha. As observed on page 54, most of the mineral medicinal preparations of the Hindus consist of their few metallic remedies combined or mixed together in an endless variety of forms. Nevertheless we cannot help admiring the ingenuity and boldness of the Hindu physicians, when we find that they were freely and properly using such powerful drugs as arsenic, mercury, iron, etc., while the Mussulman Hakims around them, with imperial patronage and the boasted learning of the west, recording such remarks regarding them as the following: -
"Soomboolkhar, 'the white oxide of arsenic.' There are six kinds of this, one named Sunkia, the third Godanta, the fourth Darma, the fifth Huldea. The Yunani physicians do not allow this to form a part of their prescriptions, as they believe it destroys the vital principle. The physicians of India, on the contrary, find these drugs more effectual in many disorders, than others of less power, such as the calx of metals. For this reason too I am in the habit of seldom giving these remedies internally, but I usually confine my use of them to external application and as aphrodisiacs which I prescribe to a few friends, who may have derived no benefit from Yunani prescriptions. It is better however to use as few of them as possible."[1]
"Para, 'Mercury.' It is very generally used throughout India in many ways, both in its native and prepared state, but in the latter we ought to be very cautious, for it is seldom sufficiently killed or removed from its native state, in which it is a dangerous drug." [2]
"Loha, 'iron.' It is commonly used by physicians in India, but my advice is to have as little to do with it as possible." [3]
At the end of the present work is appended a glossary of Indian plants described by Sanskrit writers. In the body of the work I have selected for notice only such drugs and plants as have some definite use in a particular disease, or class of diseases. Numerous other plants used in medicine incidentally, or for economic purposes, are mentioned by Sanskrit writers, but these are not of sufficient importance in a medicinal point of view to deserve detailed notice in a work of this sort. I had prepared an alphabetical list of these plants with their vernacular and scientific names for my personal use. Dr. King kindly undertook to revise this glossary for me, and, at his suggestion, it is printed as an appendix to this work. The Bengali equivalents of the Sanskrit terms in the glossary-have been taken mainly from Sir Rájá Rádhakánta Deva's Encyclopedia of Sanskrit learning entitled the Sabdakalpadruma. The Hindi names have been obtained from the vernaculars given in the Bháprakása; the Amrita-ságar, a Hindi translation of a treatise on Sanskrit medicine; and the Kesava-binoda-bhásá Nirghantu, a Hindi treatise on therapeutics translated from the Sanskrit by Pandit Kesava-prasáda Dvivedi of the Agra College.
The scientific equivalents of these Sanskrit and vernacular terms have been gleaned chiefly from Roxburgh's Flora Indica, Jameson's Report on the Botanical garden of the North-West Provinces for 1855, O'Shaughnessy's Bengal Dispensatory, Powell's Report on Panjab Products, etc. The translations of these writers have been verified, whenever it was practicable to do so, by identifying the plants in the Royal Botanic Gardens. The rest have been given chiefly on the authority of Roxburgh after carefully comparing his descriptions with the characters assigned to them by Sanskrit writers. Some plants, the identification of which was doubtful, have been omitted from the list. The scientific names of many of these plants have been ascertained for the first time, by Dr. King, after examination of specimens procured by me. Dr. King has also furnished the recent botanical names of numerous plants the old names for which have now become obsolete. With regard to the spelling of the Sanskrit and vernacular terms, I should mention that professor H. H. Wilson's system of transliteration, or as it is now sometimes called the Hunterian System, has been adopted, so far as is necessary to arrive at the correct pronunciation of the words, but the minute distinctions between the two varieties of the dental and palatal S, the four varieties of N, and the long and short sounds of some of the vowels, which are not always practically observed in pronouncing them, have not been insisted upon in correcting the proof-sheets. The vernacular terms have been for the most part, spelt as they are written in standard Bengali and Hindi dictionaries. The spoken language varies so much in different parts of the country and among different classes of people, that it would be hopeless to attempt any thing like a complete vocabulary of names as pronounced by the people of the different provinces of which Hindi and Bengali are the vernaculars.
One great peculiarity of the Sanskrit language consists in its having numerous synonyms for material objects, and medicines form no exception to this rule. Almost all well-known plants have several synonyms, and some have as many as twenty to forty names; gulancha has thirty-nine, chebulic myrobalan thirty, the lotus thirty-eight, with half as many for its varieties, and so on. Native physicians learn these synonyms by rote, just as they do their grammars and dictionaries. Sanskrit medical works, like most other works in the language, are composed in rhyme, and any one of the numerous synonyms of a drug may be used to designate it in prescriptions containing the article according to the fancy of the writer and the necessities of metrical composition. Many names again are common to numerous articles, and it is often impossible without the help of annotations to make out which drug is meant by a particular term. In the absence of any scientific description of plants, however, these synonyms sometimes serve to describe their prominent characters, and thus prove an aid to their identification. In the glossary appended to this work, I have not attempted to give a complete list of all these synonyms. As a general rule I have given only the principal or current name of each plant. Some plants have however more than one well-known and currently-used names. In such instances I have given those names in the first column only, with a reference to the synonyms under which their vernacular and Sanskrit equivalents have been given.
I avail myself of this opportunity, publicly to tender my cordial thanks to those gentlemen who have assisted me in carrying this work through the press. To Dr. George King, Superintendent of the Royal Botanic Gardens, I feel myself particularly beholden. He has helped me most materially in a variety of ways, and has thereby enabled me to avoid many errors and mistakes. On many occasions he has spent hours in identifying various drugs for me; and he has revised nearly all the last proofs, before the sheets were printed. The recent names of plants in the glossary are entirely due to his pen, and they entailed on him considerable and tedious labour. Without these names I should have been obliged to content myself with the old names, gleaned from the works of Roxburgh and others, which are now only tolerated as synonyms, and which would have seriously impaired the usefulness of the glossary as a work of reference. I am indebted to him, likewise, for his permission to allow Babu Prasanna Kumar Sen, overseer of the Royal Botanic Gardens, to assist me in my enquiries, and this has enabled me' to solve many a doubtful point in the translation of the scientific names of plants into the vernacular. During the absence of Dr. King from the Gardens Mr. S. Kurz cordially helped me whenever I had occasion to seek his aid in identifying native medicines.
Dr. Norman Chevers kindly corrected for me some of the forms, and put me in the proper way of doing this work. Rai Kánái Lal Dey Bahadur has, at considerable sacrifice of his valuable time, analyzed the mineral substances and preparations, the chemical composition of which has been described in the first part of this work. Most of these preparations have now for the first time been analyzed by him. To Dr. Rájendralala Mitra, I am indebted for valuable advice regarding the plan of getting up this work, and for explanations of some obscure questions regarding the history of Indian medical works.
To Kaviraj Binod Lal Sen, my grateful acknowledgments are due for the very liberal manner in which he has furnished me with lists of medicines generally used in practice, supplied me with specimens of native medicine, and practically shewn and explained to me the processes by which metallic medicines are prepared in the dispensary under his charge. His cordial assistance has enabled me to bring out this work with greater confidence than if I had had to depend upon my knowledge of Sanskrit books alone.
Kaviráj Brajendra Kumár Sen Gupta, son of the late learned. Hárádhan Sen Gupta, the leading native physician of his time in Calcutta, and latterly physician to his Highness the Maharaja of Kashmere, has interpreted for me the meanings of many obscure passages in Sanskrit, furnished me with specimens of drugs from his dispensary, supplied me with a list of the preparations ordinarily used by him in practice, and cordially rendered me such other assistance as I had occasion to seek from him.