2023-09-29 16:46:25 by Akshatha
This page has been fully proofread once and needs a second look.
8,16,39). Suśruta also reads them together separately.
(see U. 40.69). but later on nighaṇṭus confused the
issue by making them synonymous. Similar is the
case of 'amṛtā' which originally denoted guḍūcī but
gradually was extended to harītakī and āmalakī also
by Dhanvantarinighaṇṭu and Rajanighaṇṭu respec-
tively. 'Amṛtādvaya' of suśrutasaṃhitā is interpreted
as guḍūci and harītaki by Ḍalhaṇa. Similar is the
case of 'vijayā' which initially meant harītakī but later
on bhaṅgā and many other plants. In such cases, the
correct identity-could be decided only by the con-
text and the physician's wisdom. Thus irrational
coining of inaccurate synonyms confused the issue
of identification rather than solving it which further
resulted in creating a group of so-called controver-
sial plants.
In this situation, two-pronged strategy has to be
adopted--
1. In modern times, when plant is described in
detail botanically, dependance on synonyms is almost
over. Thus in order to restore accuracy and to estab-
lish global uniformity only the basonyms should be
used parallel to the Latin names scraping all syno-
nyms which became superfluous as they are not re-
quired for identification of plants now.
2. One has to be selective and cautious and
choose only those synonyms which are meaningful
and significant for identification.
(see U. 40.69). but later on nighaṇṭus confused the
issue by making them synonymous. Similar is the
case of 'amṛtā' which originally denoted guḍūcī but
gradually was extended to harītakī and āmalakī also
by Dhanvantarinighaṇṭu and Rajanighaṇṭu respec-
tively. 'Amṛtādvaya' of suśrutasaṃhitā is interpreted
as guḍūci and harītaki by Ḍalhaṇa. Similar is the
case of 'vijayā' which initially meant harītakī but later
on bhaṅgā and many other plants. In such cases, the
correct identity-could be decided only by the con-
text and the physician's wisdom. Thus irrational
coining of inaccurate synonyms confused the issue
of identification rather than solving it which further
resulted in creating a group of so-called controver-
sial plants.
In this situation, two-pronged strategy has to be
adopted--
1. In modern times, when plant is described in
detail botanically, dependance on synonyms is almost
over. Thus in order to restore accuracy and to estab-
lish global uniformity only the basonyms should be
used parallel to the Latin names scraping all syno-
nyms which became superfluous as they are not re-
quired for identification of plants now.
2. One has to be selective and cautious and
choose only those synonyms which are meaningful
and significant for identification.