पूर्वं शुक्रविषा उक्ता मूषिका ये समासतः |
नामलक्षणभैषज्यैरष्टादश निबोध मे ||३||
लालनः पुत्रकः कृष्णो हंसिरश्चिक्वि(क्कि)रस्तथा |
छुच्छुन्दरोऽलसश्चैव कषायदशनोऽपि च ||४||
कुलिङ्गश्चाजितश्चैव चपलः कपिलस्तथा कोकिलोऽरुणसञ्ज्ञश्च महाकृष्णस्तथोन्दुरः ||५||
श्वेतेन महता सार्धं कपिलेनाखुना तथा |
मूषिकश्च कपोताभस्तथैवाष्टादश स्मृताः ||६||
Meaning of the śloka
The rodents previously described briefly as having reproductive-fluid poison are now to be understood in detail by their names, characteristic signs, and remedies. Eighteen are listed: Lālana, Putraka, Kṛṣṇa, Haṃsira, Cikvira or Cikkira, Chucchundara, Alasa, Kaṣāyadaśana, Kuliṅga, Ajita, Capala, Kapila, Kokila, Aruṇa, Mahākṛṣṇa, Undura, the large white one, the Kapila Ākhu, and the pigeon-coloured Mūṣika; the supplied enumeration and wording require review because the list appears textually difficult.
Where their reproductive fluid falls, or where they touch a body part with something contaminated by it through claws, teeth, or similar means, the blood in that part is said to become disturbed.
The commentary raises an objection: the chapter later summarizes the signs of a bite, so why speak only of reproductive-fluid poison? It explains that ‘claws, teeth, and so forth’ also includes feces and urine, quoting Ālambāyana that rodents transmit poison in five ways—through reproductive fluid, feces, urine, claws, or fangs. It then reports a distinction from another treatise: a bite by a pregnant female is associated with cravings for sour and similar tastes, while a bite by a female in season is associated with bloody urination, abdominal distension, and heightened sexual inclination. These are preserved as historical textual claims.
Key terms
śukra
Reproductive fluid, treated by the source as one possible vehicle of harmful influence.
nakhadantādi (nakha-danta-ādi)
Claws, teeth, and related means of contact; the commentary extends this to urine and feces.
raktaṃ praduṣyati
The text’s statement that blood at the affected body part becomes disturbed.
The general signs attributed to a rodent bite are described as nodules, swelling, a lotus-seed-pod-shaped lesion, circular patches, a severe accumulation of eruptions, spreading lesions, and lesions resembling kiṭibha. The text further lists disruption or pain at the joints, intense pain, fainting, bodily exhaustion, fever, weakness, loss of appetite, difficult breathing, vomiting, and horripilation. It says these signs have been stated briefly and that a detailed account follows.
The commentary introduces these as the general signs of a person bitten by a rodent. It defines karṇikā as having the shape of the seed vessel at the centre of a lotus, parvabheda as a bursting or splitting sensation at a joint, and aṅgasadana as weariness of the limbs.
Key terms
karṇikā
A lesion compared by the commentary to the central seed vessel of a lotus.
visarpa
A spreading lesion or eruption in this symptom list.
parvabheda
A bursting or splitting sensation at a joint, according to the commentary.
For the variety called Lālana, the text describes excessive salivation, hiccup, and vomiting. It then prescribes licking a paste of Taṇḍulīyaka combined with honey.
The commentary says that salivation, vomiting, and hiccup arise from an aggravation of vāta. It classifies the Taṇḍulīyaka paste and similar measures as directed against the disorder, while measures directed against the doṣa are to be inferred from the general treatment—including the separately quoted instruction to burn and drain the bite with heated ghee. The same distinction is to be inferred elsewhere: remedies specified for each rodent variety are generally directed against the manifested disorder.
Key terms
Lālana
The named rodent variety associated in the text with salivation, hiccup, and vomiting.
Taṇḍulīyaka
The plant substance prescribed as a paste in the historical remedy.
vyādhipratyanīka
A treatment understood as opposing the manifested disorder.
doṣapratyanīka
A treatment understood as opposing the implicated doṣa.
For the variety called Putraka, the text describes bodily weakness, pallor, and the body becoming covered with nodules resembling young mice. It prescribes licking a paste of Śirīṣa and Iṅguda with honey.
The commentary explains that the body is covered by nodules compared in appearance to young mice. Such nodules may occur in all rodent bites but are especially associated with Putraka. It quotes Nāgārjuna as saying that the bitten person visibly displays forms like young mice and that this is the distinct sign of a Putraka bite. It also preserves variant readings: Gayadāsa reads ‘powder of Śirīṣa and Iṅguda’ and interprets it as leaf powder of both, whereas Jejjaṭa reads ‘paste of Śirīṣa fruit.’
Key terms
Putraka
The named rodent variety associated especially with characteristic nodules.
A bite from the variety called Kṛṣṇa is said to produce swelling and vomiting of blood, especially on a cloudy or rainy day. The text prescribes drinking Śirīṣa fruit and Kuṣṭha with a preparation made from Kiṃśuka ash.
The commentary says that the general rodent-bite signs, such as nodules, should also be understood here and throughout the following descriptions. Because the verse says ‘especially,’ vomiting of blood may occur at other times as well. It explains Kiṃśuka ash as water prepared with ash of Kiṃśuka flowers.
Key terms
Kṛṣṇa
The named variety associated here with swelling and vomiting of blood.
asṛkchardi
Vomiting of blood.
Kiṃśukabhasman (Kiṃśuka-bhasman)
Kiṃśuka ash, interpreted as water prepared from flower ash.
For the variety called Haṃsira, the text describes aversion to food, yawning, and horripilation. It then directs the person, after thorough therapeutic vomiting, to drink the formulation beginning with Āragvadha.
🔊 Audio coming soon
Hide commentary
ഹംസിരേണേത്യാദി| സുവാന്തഃ സുഷ്ഠു വാന്തഃ||൧൪||
Meaning of the commentary
The commentary explains suvānta as one who has vomited thoroughly.
Key terms
Haṃsira
The named rodent variety associated with loss of appetite, yawning, and horripilation.
annavidveṣa
Aversion to food.
suvānta
One who has vomited thoroughly, according to the commentary.
Āragvadhādi
A traditional formulation whose name begins with Āragvadha.
For the variety called Cikvira or Cikkira, the text describes headache, swelling, hiccup, and vomiting. It directs therapeutic vomiting with decoctions of Jālinī, Madana, and Aṅkoṭha, followed by administration of an alkaline preparation associated with barley stalk, Ṛṣabhī, and the two Bṛhatī plants.
The commentary identifies Jālinī with Kośātakī and Ṛṣabhī with Kapikacchu. It explains that ‘and’ after the two Bṛhatīs connects those plants with the alkaline preparation as well, and that kṣāra here means alkaline water. Gayadāsa preserves a different reading: after thorough vomiting, one should drink the essence derived from Aṅkoṭha with Jālinī decoctions; his text does not include the barley-stalk formulation.
Key terms
Cikvira (Cikkira)
Variant forms of the named rodent variety in the supplied text.
Jālinī
An ingredient identified by the commentary as Kośātakī.
Ṛṣabhī
An ingredient identified by the commentary as Kapikacchu.
kṣāra
An alkaline preparation, interpreted here as alkaline water.
छुच्छुन्दरेण तृट् छर्दिर्ज्वरो दौर्बल्यमेव च ||१६||
ग्रीवास्तम्भः पृष्ठशोफो गन्धाज्ञानं विसूचिका |
चव्यं हरीतकी शुण्ठी विडङ्गं पिप्पली मधु ||१७||
अङ्कोठबीजं च तथा पिबेदत्र विषापहम् |१८|
Meaning of the śloka
For Chucchundara, the text lists thirst, vomiting, fever, weakness, stiffness of the neck, swelling of the back, loss of the sense of smell, and visūcikā. It then prescribes drinking a poison-countering combination of Cavya, Harītakī, Śuṇṭhī, Viḍaṅga, Pippalī, honey, and Aṅkoṭha seed.
The commentary records that Gayadāsa reads both the signs and treatment differently: severe dizziness, neck stiffness, and visūcikā are attributed to Chucchundara, and an alkaline preparation associated with barley stalk, Ṛṣabhī, and the two Bṛhatīs is prescribed.
Key terms
Chucchundara
The named animal variety associated with the listed systemic signs.
gandhājñāna
Failure to perceive smell.
visūcikā
A traditional disease term retained because its precise contextual scope is not established by this passage.
Aṅkoṭhabīja (Aṅkoṭha-bīja)
Aṅkoṭha seed, included in the principal reading’s historical preparation.
For Alasa, the text describes stiffness of the neck, upward-moving vāyu, pain at the bite, and fever, and prescribes licking Mahāgada with ghee and honey. For Kaṣāyadaśana it describes sleepiness, dryness or wasting at the heart region, and emaciation, and prescribes the heartwood, fruit, and bark of Śirīṣa with honey. For Kuliṅga it describes pain, swelling, and streaks around the bite, and prescribes the two Sahā plants together with Sindhuvāra and honey.
For the variety called Ajita, the text describes darkening of the body, vomiting, fainting, and constriction or distress in the heart region. It prescribes licking Pālindī and Mañjiṣṭhā ground with the latex of Snuhī and mixed with honey.
🔊 Audio coming soon
Hide commentary
അജിതേനേത്യാദി| പാലിന്ദീ ത്രിവൃത്||൨൧||-
Meaning of the commentary
The commentary identifies Pālindī as Trivṛt.
Key terms
Ajita
The named variety associated with darkening, vomiting, fainting, and heart-region distress.
hṛdgraha
Constriction or distress in the heart region; the exact clinical sense remains uncertain.
Pālindī
An ingredient identified by the commentary as Trivṛt.
Snuhīkṣīra (Snuhī-kṣīra)
The latex of Snuhī used as the grinding medium in the historical preparation.
Adhikarana ൧൩ (൨൨) · Śloka ൨൩
ചപലേന ഭവേച്ഛര്ദിര്മൂര്ച്ഛാ ച സഹ തൃഷ്ണയാ ||൨൨||
ക്ഷൌദ്രേണ ത്രിഫലാം ലിഹ്യാദ്ഭദ്രകാഷ്ഠജടാന്വിതാമ് |൨൩|
View original
चपलेन भवेच्छर्दिर्मूर्च्छा च सह तृष्णया ||२२||
क्षौद्रेण त्रिफलां लिह्याद्भद्रकाष्ठजटान्विताम् |२३|
Meaning of the śloka
A bite attributed to the rodent called Capala is said to produce vomiting, fainting, and thirst. The passage then prescribes, in its historical treatment account, Triphalā combined with honey, bhadrakāṣṭha, and jaṭā.
The commentary identifies bhadrakāṣṭha as devadāru and jaṭā as jaṭāmāṃsī. It also preserves an alternative reading: some read ghanānvitā, ‘combined with ghana,’ in place of jaṭānvitā, ‘combined with jaṭā.’
Key terms
Capala (capala)
The rodent type associated here with vomiting, fainting, and thirst after a bite.
Triphalā (triphala)
The three-fruit formulation named in the historical remedy.
bhadrakāṣṭha
A substance identified by the commentary as devadāru.
jaṭā
A remedy ingredient identified by the commentary as jaṭāmāṃsī; the reading has a recorded variant.
A bite attributed to the Kapila rodent is said to cause putrefactive change in the wound, fever, nodular swellings, and thirst; a honey-containing preparation involving Śvetā and white punarnavā is then named. With the Kokila type, severe nodules, fever, and intense burning are described, followed by a historical medicated-ghee preparation involving varṣābhū and nīlinī.
The commentary explains kotha as the appearance of putrefaction. It identifies Śvetā as śvetasyandā, while recording that Gayadāsa reads śreṣṭhā, ‘the best,’ instead of śvetā. It does not further explain the second formulation in the supplied commentary.
Key terms
Kapila (kapila)
A rodent type whose bite is associated here with wound deterioration, fever, nodules, and thirst.
kotha
Putrefactive or decomposing change in the wound, according to the commentary.
Kokila (kokila)
A rodent type associated here with severe nodules, fever, and burning.
Śvetā (śvetā)
An ingredient identified as śvetasyandā; Gayadāsa preserves the alternative reading śreṣṭhā.
The text associates the Aruṇa rodent with aggravation of vāta and vāta disorders, Mahākṛṣṇa with pitta, Śveta with kapha, Mahākapila with blood, and Kapota with all four. Their bites are described as producing nodules, circular lesions with raised central tissue, clusters of severe eruptions, and very painful swelling. It then gives historical compound-ghee preparations for these five kinds and directs bloodletting and cleansing procedures when considered suitable.
The commentary gives detailed historical quantities and preparation steps for the first ghee, explaining aṃśumatī as śālaparṇī, gojī as gojihvā, amṛtā as guḍūcī, vakra as tagara, and sarpagandhā as sarpacchatrikā. It records competing readings for samṛttikāḥ: black earth; ahimṛttikā, interpreted as anthill earth; or Jejjaṭa’s agavṛttikā, interpreted as shallakī. A second ghee is understood from the juices of kākādanī and kākamācī, with kākādanī identified as kṛṣṇaśrīphalikā. For the final instruction, ‘appropriate’ veins are those judged suitable and away from vital points. Cleansing extends from emesis through nasal therapy. The commentary notes a restriction concerning people normally unsuitable for emesis or purgation, but also preserves another opinion that a poison-affected person may be made to vomit even when ordinarily unsuitable, citing a supporting verse.
Key terms
Aruṇa (aruṇa)
A rodent category linked in the passage with vāta aggravation.
Kapota (kapota)
A rodent category said here to affect vāta, pitta, kapha, and blood together.
karṇikā
A raised central, ear-like fleshy feature described in the bite lesion.
saṃśodhana
Cleansing procedures, interpreted here as extending from emesis to nasal treatment.
sirā-srāva
The historical practice of releasing blood from selected veins.
The commentary generalizes the measures previously described for Aruṇa and the other types to all cases of rodent poison. It specifically understands ‘this procedure’ to include venesection and the related measures.
Key terms
mūṣika-viṣa
The condition historically attributed to poison from rodents.
vidhi
The therapeutic regimen generalized here from the preceding passage.
sirāvyadha
Venesection, identified by the commentary as part of the generalized historical regimen.
The commentary supplies the omitted detail that cauterization is with ghee heated by fire. It first explains that the bite is incised and drained, then covered with pastes beginning with śirīṣa. It also records another interpretation: some say that blood should be discharged from the incised bite and then a paste of śirīṣa and the other substances should be applied.
Key terms
dagdhvā
Having cauterized; the commentary specifies heated ghee in this historical procedure.
pracchita
Incised or scarified in order to permit discharge.
visrāvayet
To cause fluid, or according to another interpretation blood, to be discharged.
amṛtā
One of the substances included in the topical paste.
Adhikarana ൧൮ (൩൪) · Śloka ൩൪
ഛര്ദനം ജാലിനീക്വാഥൈഃ ശുകാഖ്യാങ്കോഠയോരപി ||൩൪||
View original
छर्दनं जालिनीक्वाथैः शुकाख्याङ्कोठयोरपि ||३४||
Meaning of the śloka
The text gives a historical instruction to induce vomiting with a decoction of jālinī together with the substances called Śukākhya and Aṅkoṭha.
The commentary presents this as an elaboration of the previously stated cleansing treatment. It identifies Śukākhya as carmakāravaṭa but gives no further explanation of the formulation.
Key terms
chardana
Induced vomiting as a historical cleansing procedure.
jālinī
A substance whose decoction is named in the emetic formulation.
Śukākhya (śukākhya)
An ingredient identified by the commentary as carmakāravaṭa.
Aṅkoṭha (aṅkoṭha)
Another ingredient named in the historical formulation.
Adhikarana ൧൯ (൩൪-൩൬) · Śloka ൩൬
ശുകാഖ്യാകോഷവത്യോശ്ച മൂലം മദന ഏവ ച |
ദേവദാലീഫലം ചൈവ ദധ്നാ പീത്വാ വിഷം വമേത് |
സര്വമൂഷികദഷ്ടാനാമേഷ യോഗഃ സുഖാവഹഃ ||൩൫||
ഫലം വചാ ദേവദാലീ കുഷ്ഠം ഗോഭൂത്രപേഷിതമ് |
പൂര്വകല്പേന യോജ്യാഃ സ്യുഃ സര്വോന്ദുരുവിഷച്ഛിദഃ ||൩൬||
The passage describes two further historical emetic preparations for rodent bites. One combines Śukākhya, Koṣavatī, Madana, and a devadālī part with curd; another combines a fruit, vacā, devadālī, and kuṣṭha ground with cow urine and is to be used according to the preceding method. Both are presented as counteracting rodent poison.
The commentary says these are two additional emetic formulations. It identifies Koṣavatī as ghoṣaka and records a variant in which some read ‘fruit’ instead of ‘root.’ For the second formulation, it explains ‘according to the preceding method’ as a linctus made with curd.
Key terms
Koṣavatī (koṣavatī)
An ingredient identified by the commentary as ghoṣaka.
Madana (madana)
A substance named in the historical emetic combination.
mūla/phala
A textual variant reading ‘root’ or ‘fruit’ for one ingredient part.
leha
A lickable preparation; the commentary understands the second remedy as a curd-based linctus.
Adhikarana ൨൦ (൩൭) · Śloka ൩൭
വിരേചനേ ത്രിവൃദ്ദന്തീത്രിഫലാകല്ക ഇഷ്യതേ |൩൭|
View original
विरेचने त्रिवृद्दन्तीत्रिफलाकल्क इष्यते |३७|
Meaning of the śloka
For purgation, the text recommends a historical paste made from trivṛt, dantī, and Triphalā.
शिरोविरेचने सारः शिरीषस्य फलानि च ||३७||
हितस्त्रिकटुकाढ्यश्च गोमयस्वरसोऽञ्जने |३८|
Meaning of the śloka
For historical cleansing of the head, the text names the heartwood and fruits of śirīṣa. As a separate eye application, it describes cow-dung juice made strong with trikaṭuka.
The commentary takes sāra, ‘heartwood,’ and the fruits as belonging to śirīṣa. Gayadāsa instead assigns the heartwood to śāla, tamāla, and madhūka. Trikaṭukāḍhya is explained as heavily concentrated with trikaṭuka. The commentary emphasizes that the eye application is a separate formulation.
Key terms
śirovirecana
A historical cleansing procedure directed toward the head.
sāra
Heartwood; its plant attribution differs between the main explanation and Gayadāsa.
trikaṭuka
A pungent three-substance combination used strongly in the separate eye preparation.
कपित्थगोमयरसौ लिह्यान्माक्षिकसंयुतौ ||३८||
रसाञ्जनहरिद्रेन्द्रयवकट्वीषु वा कृतम् |
प्रातः सातिविषं कल्कं लिह्यान्माक्षिकसंयुतम् ||३९||
तण्डुलीयकमूलेषु सर्पिः सिद्धं पिबेन्नरः |
आस्फोतमूलसिद्धं वा पञ्चकापित्थमेव वा ||४०||
Meaning of the śloka
The text lists several historical pacifying preparations: kapittha juice or cow-dung juice mixed with honey; a morning paste involving rasāñjana, haridrā, indrayava, kaṭvī, and ativiṣā with honey; and medicated ghees prepared with taṇḍulīyaka root, Āsphoṭa root, or the five parts of kapittha.
The commentary identifies these as pacifying formulations. It explains that kapittha juice and cow-dung juice are each separately made into a linctus with honey. Kaṭvī is identified as kaṭurohiṇī. Pañcakāpittha ghee is explained as ghee prepared from the fruit, root, flower, bark, and leaf of kapittha, using both paste and decoction; it is traditionally claimed to counter all rodent poison.
Key terms
saṃśamana
Pacifying treatment, the category assigned to these historical formulations.
kaṭvī
An ingredient identified by the commentary as kaṭurohiṇī.
ativiṣā
A substance included in the morning paste.
pañcakāpittha
A kapittha preparation using its fruit, root, flower, bark, and leaf.
The text says that rodent poison left unremoved commonly becomes aggravated during cloudy or rainy weather. In such a recurrence, it directs use of the previously described regimen together with measures said to counter dūṣīviṣa, a lingering or attenuated poison.
The commentary uses this verse to argue that cleansing measures such as emesis should still be performed even after an earlier flare has settled. It defines ‘this regimen’ as emesis, purgation, head-cleansing, eye applications, and related measures. It also directs the regimen for dūṣīviṣa and concludes that the verse treats rodent poison as similar to dūṣīviṣa.
Key terms
anirhṛta
Described as not removed and therefore liable, in the text’s model, to flare again.
abhra
Cloudy or rainy conditions associated by the passage with recurrence.
dūṣīviṣa
A traditional category of lingering or attenuated poison to which rodent poison is compared here.
vidhi
The previously described regimen, expanded by the commentary into several cleansing and local procedures.
For wounds that are firm or painful and have a raised fleshy projection, the historical instruction directs the physician to open or remove that projection and then cleanse and treat the site according to the involved doṣa, as for a wound.
The commentary says that karṇikā may occur in a wound attributed to rodent poison and also in wounds affected by other poisons. Firmness is interpreted as indicating kapha, while pain indicates vāta. Karṇikā is explained as a fleshy, ear-like projection. The main reading pāṭayitvā is understood as splitting or opening it; some read pācayitvā, ‘having brought it to suppuration,’ and others pātayitvā, ‘having caused it to fall or removed it.’ The commentary adds that regional people should be consulted for knowledge of rodent varieties such as Lālanaputraka.
Key terms
karṇikā
A raised, ear-like fleshy projection in the wound.
pāṭayitvā
Having split or opened; alternative readings change the proposed handling of the lesion.
pācayitvā
Variant reading meaning to bring the lesion to suppuration or maturation.
pātayitvā
Variant reading understood as causing the lesion to fall or removing it.
Lālanaputraka (lālanaputraka)
A named rodent variety whose identification is said to depend on regional knowledge.
When vāyu, disturbed by śleṣman, enters the channels that carry awareness and takes away conscious understanding in dogs, jackals, tarakṣu, bears, tigers, and similar animals, the animal is described as having a drooping tail, jaw, and shoulders, excessive salivation, and extreme deafness or blindness, and as rushing at others. In a person bitten by such an agitated, supposedly poisonous fanged animal, the bite becomes numb and discharges abundant dark blood; the condition is said generally to resemble a wound from a poisoned weapon.
The commentary extends the discussion from rodents to dogs and other fierce, live-bearing quadrupeds because of their shared category. It identifies śvā as dog, śṛgāla as jackal, tarakṣu as a predator locally called jarakha, and ṛkṣa as a very hairy bear, while ‘and others’ includes wolves and citraka-like fierce animals. It explains that vāyu, corrupted by śleṣman and lodged in the saṃjñāvaha channels, removes proper awareness. Prasrasta applies separately to the tail, jaw, and shoulder; the text may also allow bāladhī to mean the genital organ. Excessive saliva, severe deafness or blindness, and charging to bite one another follow. Some read galaskandha instead of hanuskandha, and some substitute a half-verse describing one confused animal running about while biting. In the bitten person, suptatā is interpreted as numbness at the bite, with the remaining signs completing the comparison.
Key terms
saṃjñāvaha
The channels said here to carry awareness or proper cognition.
atilālavān
Having excessive salivary discharge.
suptatā
Numbness or loss of sensation at the bite site in this context.
digdha-viddha
A wound caused by a weapon smeared with poison, used here as a comparison.
A person who repeatedly imitates the movements and cry of the animal that bit him, while losing the ability to perform his own bodily activities, is said to perish.
The commentary presents this as an ariṣṭa, an adverse prognostic sign. Ceṣṭā means the animal's actions, ruta its sound, bahuśaḥ means repeatedly, and pratikurvāṇa means imitating. Kriyāhīna describes the person as deprived of his own bodily activity.
Key terms
ariṣṭa
A sign regarded by the text as indicating a grave prognosis.
ceṣṭā
The characteristic action or movement being imitated.
ruta
The animal's cry or sound.
kriyāhīna
Lacking one's own bodily activity, as explained in the commentary.
दंष्ट्रिणा येन दष्टश्च तद्रूपं यस्तु पश्यति ||४७||
अप्सु वा यदि वाऽऽदर्शेऽरिष्टं तस्य विनिर्दिशेत् |४८|
Meaning of the śloka
If a person bitten by a fanged animal sees the form of that animal reflected in water or in a mirror, the text directs that this be identified as an ariṣṭa sign.
A person who repeatedly becomes frightened without an evident cause on seeing or touching water is described as having jalatrāsa; the text also calls this an ariṣṭa sign.
The commentary explains akasmāt as fear without another cause and takes api to include hearing water as well as seeing or touching it. It calls the condition jalatrāsa and regards it as a fatal sign when it occurs in someone who has been bitten; it notes that fear of water in an unbitten person is discussed separately. Another authority describes disturbed śleṣman entering the mind-carrying channels after the bite of a diseased dog or similar animal and causing loss of awareness immediately or later, followed especially by fear on touching, seeing, or hearing water. Gayadāsa, however, reads the line as ‘even if unbitten,’ preserving a textual disagreement.
Key terms
jalatrāsa
Fear or aversion associated with water in the passage.
akasmāt
Without an otherwise evident cause, according to the commentary.
ariṣṭa
A grave prognostic sign within the text's framework.
cetovāhinī dhamanī
Channels described in the quoted authority as carrying mental function.
Adhikarana ൨൯ (൪൯) · Śloka ൫൦
അദഷ്ടോ വാ ജലത്രാസീ ന കഥഞ്ചന സിധ്യതി ||൪൯||
പ്രസുപ്തോऽഥോത്ഥിതോ വാऽപി സ്വസ്ഥസ്ത്രസ്തോ ന സിധ്യതി |൫൦|
View original
अदष्टो वा जलत्रासी न कथञ्चन सिध्यति ||४९||
प्रसुप्तोऽथोत्थितो वाऽपि स्वस्थस्त्रस्तो न सिध्यति |५०|
Meaning of the śloka
The verse says that an unbitten person who has jalatrāsa cannot be cured, and that a person otherwise considered healthy who becomes frightened after sleeping or on waking likewise does not recover.
The commentary first cites another authority stating that physicians concerned with poison regard jalatrāsa in an unbitten being as an ariṣṭa. It then records a different explanation: fear resembling immersion can arise even without water when accumulated śleṣman occupies the seat of understanding and obstructs cognition, whether the person is awake or asleep. Because treatment that reduces śleṣman, including purification, palliation, and diet, is prescribed until the person returns to normal, this śleṣman-related jalatrāsa is said not to be an ariṣṭa. By contrast, the commentary maintains that it is an ariṣṭa in a bitten person and also treats unexplained fear in an otherwise healthy sleeping or waking person as ominous.
Key terms
adaṣṭa
A person who has not been bitten.
jalatrāsa
Fear associated with water or a sensation like being submerged.
buddhisthāna
The seat of understanding as described in the quoted explanation.
śleṣman
The doṣa whose accumulation is offered as an alternate cause of these symptoms.
For a person bitten by such animals, the text describes making the bite bleed, cauterizing it with ghee, applying antidotal preparations, administering old ghee, giving a purificatory preparation combined with arka latex, and using a mixture involving white punarnavā and dhattūra. It also lists palala, sesame oil, the milk of rūpikā, and jaggery, claiming that these overcome alarka poison like wind dispersing a mass of clouds.
The commentary says that squeezing the bite to discharge blood was intended to remove the supposed seed of poison, cauterization with ghee to destroy what remained, and an agada such as Mahāgada to be applied locally. After bloodletting, external treatment was intended to calm vāta, while old ghee and internal purification are then discussed. It says arka latex was to be combined with an emetic when kapha predominated or with a purgative when pitta predominated. Jejjaṭa instead reads ‘arka latex or ghee,’ while others read ‘give nasal purgation.’ Śvetā qualifies punarnavā, although some identify śvetā as kaṭabhī. Dhattūra is interpreted as its root; Gayī reads a half measure of dhattūra root, and others interpret the fruit. These are preserved as distinct readings.
Key terms
visrāvya
Causing discharge from the bite, explained as squeezing out blood.
agada
An antidotal preparation in the historical treatment system.
arka-kṣīra
Latex of arka, used in the described purificatory preparation.
dhattūra
A toxic plant ingredient whose root or fruit is variously specified.
alarka
A maddened dog or the condition associated here with its bite.
Adhikarana ൩൧ (൫൩-൫൮) · Śloka ൫൯
മൂലസ്യ ശരപുങ്ഖായാഃ കര്ഷം ധത്തൂരകാര്ധികമ് ||൫൩||
തണ്ഡുലോദകമാദായ പേഷയേത്തണ്ഡുലൈഃ സഹ |
ഉന്മത്തകസ്യ പത്രൈസ്തു സംവേഷ്ട്യാപൂപകം പചേത് ||൫൪||
ഖാദേദൌഷധകാലേ തമലര്കവിഷദൂഷിതഃ |
കരോതി ശ്വവികാരാംസ്തു തസ്മിഞ്ജീര്യതി ചൌഷധേ ||൫൫||
വികാരാഃ ശിശിരേ യാപ്യാ ഗൃഹേ വാരിവിവര്ജിതേ |
തതഃ ശാന്തവികാരസ്തു സ്നാത്വാ ചൈവാപരേऽഹനി ||൫൬||
ശാലിഷഷ്ടികയോര്ഭക്തം ക്ഷീരേണോഷ്ണേന ഭോജയേത് |
ദിനത്രയേ പഞ്ചമേ വാ വിധിരേഷോऽര്ധമാത്രയാ ||൫൭||
കര്തവ്യോ ഭിഷജാऽവശ്യമലര്കവിഷനാശനഃ |
കുപ്യേത് സ്വയം വിഷം യസ്യ ന സ ജീവതി മാനവഃ ||൫൮||
തസ്മാത് പ്രകോപയേദാശു സ്വയം യാവത് പ്രകുപ്യതി |൫൯|
The text describes preparing and eating a cake made with śarapuṅkhā root, a smaller amount of dhattūra, rice-water, rice, and unmattaka leaves at a stated treatment time for one affected by alarka poison. It says that while the preparation is digested the patient displays dog-like behavior, which should be managed in a cool, water-free room. After the disturbance settles, the person is bathed the next day and fed śāli or ṣaṣṭika rice with warm milk. The regimen is said to be repeated on the third or fifth day at half the previous quantity. The physician is instructed to provoke the poison before it supposedly erupts by itself, because the text claims that spontaneous aggravation is fatal.
The commentary interprets the dhattūra quantity as half a karṣa of its root fibers and, citing another work, specifies seven dhattūra leaves. It attributes the patient's dog-like actions during digestion to the special efficacy of the compound. The resulting disturbances, understood as those produced by the bite of a maddened dog or similar animal, are to be calmed in a cool room without water. Gayadāsa interprets the food instruction as rice taken with cow's ghee, with a supplied reading that is textually uncertain, rather than warm milk. ‘This procedure’ refers back to the regimen beginning with white punarnavā, and half-measure means half the quantity previously stated. The final lines give the text's reason for repeating the procedure on the third or fifth day.
Key terms
śarapuṅkhā
A plant root used in the historical compound.
dhattūra
A highly toxic plant included in the described preparation.
unmattaka
A plant name used here for the leaves wrapping the cake, understood by the commentary as dhattūra.
alarka-viṣa
The harmful condition attributed to the bite of a maddened dog.
The text describes bathing the affected person at a riverbank or crossroads with cold water from vessels containing seeds, jewels, and medicinal plants while reciting mantras. An offering of sesame oil-cake, oily sesame paste, curd, varied garlands, and cooked and raw meat is then presented. A prayer addresses the Yakṣa lord of Alakā and leader of the hosts of dogs, asking him to remove without delay the alarka affliction from the patient.
The commentary introduces this ritual because it understands alarka poison to have an association with a bhūta and therefore prescribes a Vedic mantra with its rite. It explains piṇyāka as sesame oil-cake and palala as sesame paste retaining oil. The lord of the city Alakā is Dhanada; the Yakṣa is a divine being and is addressed as leader of the dog-hosts. The commentary treats the lord of Alakā, the Yakṣa, and the leader of the dog-hosts as the same addressee, and defines alarka as a maddened dog.
Key terms
bhūtānubandha
An association with a bhūta posited by the commentary for this condition.
piṇyāka
Sesame oil-cake.
palala
Sesame paste that still contains oil.
Alakādhipati
Lord of the city Alakā, identified by the commentary as Dhanada.
After the described bath, the text directs that the person be given strong purification. It claims that if the person has not been purified, the poison may become aggravated even after the wound has healed well.
🔊 Audio coming soon
Hide commentary
ദദ്യാദിത്യാദി||൬൨||-
Meaning of the commentary
The supplied commentary only signals the verse and adds no further explanation.
Key terms
saṃśodhana
Purificatory treatment in the historical therapeutic framework.
tīkṣṇa
Strong or sharp in effect, qualifying the prescribed purification.
The text says that the fanged, supposedly poisonous wild animals described here, beginning with dogs, have been presented in the same category. A bitten person who repeatedly imitates their movements and cries is said to die before long.
The commentary explains that the various maddened wild animals with fanged poison are presented as dog-like because they resemble a maddened dog. It says they are inferred through signs including aggravation of vāta and pitta, dark blood from the bite, and the use of old ghee; these are features of the historical classification rather than separately established conclusions.
Key terms
vyāla
A fierce or wild animal in this passage.
daṃṣṭrāviṣa
Poison attributed to the fangs of an animal in the text's classification.
नखदन्तक्षतं व्यालैर्यत्कृतं तद्विमर्दयेत् |
सिञ्चेत्तैलेन कोष्णेन ते हि वातप्रकोपकाः ||६५||
Meaning of the śloka
The text instructs that wounds made by the claws or teeth of wild animals be rubbed and sprinkled with lukewarm oil, because such injuries are said to aggravate vāta.
The commentary says that the verse presents the treatment for injuries from maddened dogs and similar animals together with its rationale; it offers no further detail beyond the verse's attribution to vāta aggravation.
Key terms
nakha-danta-kṣata
An injury caused by an animal's claw or tooth.
vimardayet
The historical instruction to rub or massage the wound.
koṣṇa taila
Lukewarm oil prescribed for sprinkling in the verse.
The commentary's colophon states that the seventh chapter of the Kalpasthāna is complete in the Suśruta commentary called Nibandhasaṅgraha, composed by Śrī Dalhaṇa; the supplied text displays the commentator's name in the variant-looking form Dalha(hla)ṇa.
Key terms
Kalpasthāna
The section of the Suśruta Saṃhitā in which this chapter appears.
Mūṣikakalpa
The title of the seventh chapter concluded here.
Nibandhasaṅgraha
The title of Dalhaṇa's commentary named in the colophon.