.VI

INTRODUCTION.

Vārtikas of (1) Kātyāyana (4th Century B.C.) and we have no hesitation in saying that the original Samhitā was written at least two centuries before the birth of Buddha. We are equally ready to admit, on the other hand, that the final recension of the Samhitā by Nāgārjuna—at least the form in which we have it—was made about the 2nd Century B.C.

Two Nāgārjunas:—Several scholars, on the authority of Dallana (the celebrated commentator of the Sushruta Samhitā), endeavor to establish the identity of Nāgārjuna (the redactor of this Samhitā) with his namesake, the celebrated alchemist of the 10th century (2). But their contentions fall to the ground when we know that many verses of the Sushruta Samhitā occur in the works of Vāgbhata (Ashtāngahridayam) and Mādhava (Nidānam), which are two of the works that were translated by order of the Caliph (3) in the 8th century. The internal evidence of the book does not supply us with any authentic material to compose anything like a biography of this father of Hindu surgery.

Internal Evidence:—The line in the Samhitā which has formed a veritable bone of contention among scholars of all shades of opinion, as it sheds light upon the probable date of its composition, occurs in the Shārira-Sthānam in connection with the development of the fetal body. It reads: "Subhūti Gautama said that it is the trunk that first developed."

Conflicting testimonies and the uncertain indication
of materials at our disposal:—It is a matter of historic

(1) सुश्रुतेन प्रोक्तं सौश्रुतं

(2) नागार्जुनो मुनीन्द्रः शशास यल्लोहशास्त्रमतिगहनं । तस्यार्थस्य स्फुटयव-
मेतद्विशदाक्षरैर्विषमैः ।

(3) P. C. Roy—Hindu Chemistry p. XVIII. (1902).