Charaka-Samhita — trans. Kaviraj Avinash Chandra Kaviratna

Amongst these, they that are possessed of superior minds, are spoken of as having the mind for their essence (or predomina¬ ting element). They have been treated of (by us) while (we were) speaking of the essences (or predominating elements) of men.

Even if they happen to have small-sized bodies, they may be seen to be unmoved, in consequence of the superiority of their minds, under serious ailments either constitutional or acci¬ dental.136

* 'Satmya,’ as rendered on previous occasions, is assimilability or suitabi¬ lity. A certain article is said to be ‘ satmya ’ with regard to one, and ‘ asatmya ’ with regard to another. Continued or habitual use without injury is the basis of ‘satmyata.’ Thus, from habitual use, ghee, milk, flesh, &c., become ‘satmya’ to one, while from absence of use, these may be ' asatmya ’ to another. Habitual use may make even a virulent poison ‘ satmya ’ or agreeable to a person.

The last word. of the aphorism is 1 alpasadhanah.’ Gangadhara explains it as ‘ incapable of accomplishing much.’ Chakrapani explains it as equivalent to not ‘ requiring medicines of diverse kinds.’ It is difficult to settle what the precise sense of the term is. I incline to accept the first explanation. — T.

C HABAKA-SA MHITA

p. 607

They that are ot middling minds, thinking of others discovering fortitude under pain, succeed in quieting their own selves with the help of their own minds, or, with that of the minds of others.*187

They that are of inferior minds do not succeed in quieting (themselves), by mustering mental energy through their own exertions or through (encouragement offered by) others. It is seen that even if they happen to be of gigantic proportions (of body) they do not succeed in bearing pain that is even very slight. t

They are always accessible to fear, grief, cupidity, heedlessness, and vanity.

Hearing a discourse on anything that is awful, or terrible, or disagreeable, or abominable, or repulsive, or beholding any (wild or fierce) animal, or a person (in authority, such as a constable or other police officer), or flesh (in the form of limbs cut into pieces and strewn around), or blood, they become subject to melancholy, or paleness of complexion, or swoons, or extraordinary excite¬ ment (reaching to the point of madness), or delusions, or falls, or even death itself.138

Next, as to examination (of the patient) in respect of capacity for food. One’s capacity for food is to be ascertained from one’s capacity for eating as also capacity for digesting; since strength and period of life are both dependent upon food.lssJ

* The original is very terse. I have slightly expanded it, following the commentators. The sense is simple. What is said here is that they that are of middling minds succeed in quieting themselves under pain, |not in consequence of the innate strength of their own minds but at the sight of other people keep¬ ing themselves quiet under pain. It is the example of men of superior minds that acts on them. Then, again, when others encourage and assure them, such encouragement and assurance, succeed in quieting them. — T"

t In the original there are two ‘api’s ’ or even’s. I reproduce them in the English version. — T.

t ‘ Ahara-fakti ’ is capacity for food. It includes not simply capacity for eating, but also capacity for digesting. This capacity should be ascertained (in examining a patient) because the measure of the patient’s strength and the measure of his period of life, both depend upon his capacity for food. The particle ‘ hi ’ in the last part of the aphorism, is equivalent to ‘ yasmat ’ or ‘ since.’ It indicates the reason the Rishi assigns for such examination. — T.

6o8

CHA RA KA -SAM HI TA

Next, as to examination (of the patient) in respect of capacity for exertion : capacity for exertion should be ascertained from capacity for action (such as capacity for bearing weights, the length of time for which one can undergo physical labour, &c.,) ; since by capacity for action the strength, which is of three kinds, of a person is capable of being judged.*140

That condition of the body which is dependent on the measure of Time (for which the body has existed) is called Age.

This Age, according to difference of duration, is of three kinds, viz., Boyhood, Manhood, and Decrepitude.

Amongst these, Boyhood is (the period characterised by) imma¬ turity of the constituent elements (of the body), non-appearance of hirsute appendage, delicacy (of constitution both physical and mental), incapacity to bear fatigue (and the pain it brings about), non-development of strength, and predominance of phlegm.

This continues till the sixteenth year. The constituent ele¬ ments then begin to grow and, further, the mind remains restless, till the thirtieth year, as has been laid down.