________________
CHAPTER VII]
BOWER MANUSCRIPT.
Ixxix
treatises, those three metres occur 933, 121, and 109 times respectively, and among them, again the álóka is by far the predominating metre, taking up about 70 per cent of the whole.
The total number of different metres is twenty-three. Of these, Part I, in proportion to its extent, contains an extraordinarily large number, not less than 19, distributed over 132 verses. In Part II there are 9 metres to 1,119 verses, and in Part III, 4 metres to 72 verses. It is evident from this familiarity with metrical writing that the author of the three medical treatises was well-versed in Sanskrit composition. Of course, the substance of Part II is not actually his own original composition, for as he informs us himself in the opening verse of that treatise it is a compilation of extracts from the standard medical works and the floating medical tradition of his time (see details in Chapter VI). Still there are in it certain portions which have every appearance of being his own contribution. These comprise, above all, the ten introductory verses (ilôka), describing the contents of the treatise, which are clearly the author's own composition. But there occur also scattered instances of verses in the body of the work which are clearly additions made by the author to formulae which he quotes from other sources. To this class belongs, for example, verse 119a (p. 32) which is a klóka appended to a formula consisting of eleven âryâ verses, and in which that formula is ascribed to Atrêya. If this ascription had formed a part of the original formula, it would no doubt have been in the same aryâ measure. The fact that it is in the different alôka measure, seems to indicate that it was added by the author of the Navanitaka for the purpose of explaining the source of his information, namely, the floating medical tradition of his time. There is a similar instance in verse 147 (p. 34) which is an arya, appended to a formula consisting of three slôka verses. We have another in the two trishtubh verses 199 and 200 (p. 36), appended to a formula consisting of eleven slóka verses (188-198). And again another instance is the trishtubh verse 324 (p. 42), which is added to a formula of five slöka verses, to explain its ascription to Vâdvali as well as some more of its benefits. A slightly different instance is the sloka verse 345 (p. 43) which is inserted within a formula, otherwise consisting of four and a half áryâ verses (344 and 346-50). There are soine other examples, equally suggestive of authorship, in which, however, no change occurs in the metre. Thus we find a half slôka (v. 3120, p. 42) appended to a long formula consisting of twenty-five other slokas (vv. 287-311), which adds a futile amplification to a formula fully ending with verse 311. An exactly similar case is the half slöka verse 781a (P. 61), which is appended to a formula consisting of other seven and a half slókas (vv. 7736-7801). It is not only added to a formula which obviously ends with the klóka 780b. but it corrects the ascription of the formula which was given in the first slóka (v, 7736-774a) of the original formula. In that flóka it was ascribed to the Asvins, while in the added half-slóka, it is attributed to Visvamitra. Another striking case of this kind is the prefixion of one álóka and a half (vv. 418 and 4190, p. 47) to a formula consisting of other six slókas and a half (vv. 4196- 425). The prefixed alókas not only repeat the ascription of the formula to the Asrins, though that ascription was already stated in the original concluding slóka (r. 425), but they are found omitted in other medical works which quote the formula 117 Another instance. probably of the same kind, is the half-lôka verse 366a (p. 44), which is added to a long formula of fifteen klókas (vv. 351-365). An instance of again a different kind, though no less suggestive of authorship, is the slôka verse 783 (p. 61), which follows a verse in the complicated suvadanâ measure (v. 782). It indicates a useful modification of the formula given in the preceding verse, and suggests itself as due to the author of the Náranitaka
11T See for details in my paper in the Journal, Royal 1siatic Society, 1909, pp. 462-4.
