________________
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[CHAPTER VI
three chapters (14, 16, 28) belong to that complementary portion which was added to Charaka's Compendium several centuries after its author's death, at a time when probably the tradition of Atrêya's teaching no longer survived. Of the sixth formula unfortunately only the closing words survive. But the phrase ity-aha bhagavan Strêyah, "thus spake the blessed Atrêya,' which they comprise, appears to indicate, as do the similar phrases used .with referenc to Jivaka and Kaśyapa, that the mutilated formula was quoted in the ipsissima verba of Atrêya. The formula attributea to the Asvin pair are the following
(1) Asvin matulunga-gudika, rv. 756-77a. (2) Another Asuint Matulunga-gudikd, v. 80-845 (3). Avina-gulma-chira, v. 85-6 (4) Itoina-haridrl-churna, v. 96-101, (5) Åtvina-lasund-ghrita, v. 216-22. (6) Atvina-joarahara-ghita, v. 223-5. (7) Åsvina-nisha-ghrita, w. 241-4. (8) divina-bindu-ghita, v. 251-5. (9) Amrita-taila, vv. 287-312, (10) Asvina-raktapitta-yoga, vv, 418-25. (11) Kshfra-yoga, v. 575. (12) Ayorajfya-yoga, v. 579.. (13) Abrindr Alva gandhd-vasti, v. 618-25a. (14) Pippall-vardhamana-rasdyana, vv. 716-37. (15) Atvina-rasdyana, vv. 7736-81a. (16) Alvinlya-yoga-traya, v. 810-3.
(17) Asvina-harkakf-kalpa, vv, 917-49. The names of thirteen of these formulæ (Nos. 1-8, 10, 13, 15-17). whch accur in their colophons, assign them to the Asvins. In the case of the remaining four (Nos. 9. 11, 12, 14) the assignment is made in a remark, which is embodied in the formula itself. A similar remark confirming the assignment in the colophon, is embodied also in the text of the five formule Nos. 5, 8, 10, 15, 16.
With regard to the authorship of these remarks, that in the Aévina-rasayana formula (No. 15) is particularly instructive. The last half-verse (v. 7816) implies that by the medical tradition the formula was ascribed to the ancient physician Viśvamitra, apparently the reputed father of Susruta (see Susruta Sanhita VI, 18, v. 1, and 66, v. 1/; pp. 706, 914). That inscription is contradicted, however, by the initial verse (v. 7736) and by the name in the colophon, which attribute the formula to the Asvins, This discrepancy seems best accounted for by the explanation that the initial verse which has no essential connection with the medical prescription, as well as the colophon, are due to the author of the Navanitaka. He would seem to have had reason to believe that the formula was really devised by the Asvins. Accordingly he so named it in the colop bon, and prefixed the initial verse, in order to explain that it was really the Asvins who communicated the forurola to Visvamitra.
The same conclusion is suggested by the Asvina-raktapitta formula (No. 10). Here the actual medical prescription begins with verse 419, and is preceded, in v, 418, by a lengthy explanation that that prescription was taught to Indra by the Asvins, although the attribution to the latter is actually embodied in a brief remark in the final verse 429. In the compilation
