The Charaka Samhita is not a fundamental text. It is written by Charaka himself. ‘Agniveshkrite Granth Charaka per Sanskrit.
Charaka Samhita and Charaka Principles
Therefore, it is the changed and enhanced version of the ancient 'Agnivesh Samhita'. Charaka himself has written that the counterinsurgent can summarize the detailed reference to an ancient text and the narrower one as per his requirements. In this way, making the old one new is an act of resentment. On the ancient structure, Charaka has done his decoration in such a way that he has started seeing his own thing. In the old 'Agnivesh Samhita', Charaka has made some changes for which Charaka himself is responsible, not Agnivesh. For example, in the era of Agnivesh, the water from the Himalayan rivers of the Himalayas was thought to be pathogenic, but Charaka has written their waters as per their age. Since the original Agnivetantra is no longer available, it is not possible to make a detailed comparison of Charak and Agnivesh's articles. Nevertheless, the description of Charaka's work is sufficient to illustrate that Charaka has made such changes and additions to his repertoire. There are also some changes in nature which were some during the time of Agnivesh, and something else happened during Charaka. As the waters of the rivers above changed. Some circumstances which were not there during the time of Agnivesh were formed during the time of Charaka. Like Agnivesh originated in the Mantra period, after the Charak Sutra period. Therefore, Charaka has mentioned the blessings of the sutrakaras. 'In the era of Agnivesh, there were monarchies in rule, but there were republics as well. 2 Therefore, Charaka did not name the book' Agnivesh Samhita 'after the era of renunciation, but all changes. And taking the responsibility of addition, he named the book 'Charak Samhita'. This honesty of Charak is exemplary for every writer. Also see the second greatness of Charaka's heart. Answering the corruption of the scripture - taking responsibility on himself, he did not relent in giving the qualities of the book to Agnivesh very generously, and finished it by writing 'Agnivekrishta Tantre Charaka Pratcanskrite' at the end of each chapter. Sit reading the chapter of Charaka Samhita from the beginning, it is known how unique creation of Charaka is. At the end of the chapter, Charaka says - "It is not mine, but the work of Agnivesh." Something for the singularity of the book
If you want to give credit, don't give it to Agnivesh. What a great sense of heart! And how limitless self-control !! The poet has rightly said-
Charaka Samhita and Charaka Principles
People mistakenly used to say that Vagbhat is the first in the practice of collection books of Ayurveda. But the reality is that Charaka is the first place. 'In the light of light, Acharya Bhavamishra has written that six disciples of Maharishi Atreya, Agnivesh, etc., wrote the tantras separately in their own names. Chosen from all their systems
Charaka collected the material in refined form, and named the same collection as Charaka Samhita. The author has also explained the same sentiment by adding the word Samhita with the name Charak. Nevertheless, it is clear that the basic basis of Charaka's book was Agnivesh Charak Tantra. In ancient times, the original treatise was made famous by giving the name Tantra or other independent, 'Agni-Vesh Tantra' or 'Navnitak' were such texts. But the texts which were not completely original and were compiled from the articles or thoughts of others, were called 'Samhita'. From the codes of the Vedas to the collections thereafter, there are collection books or collection texts, which do not have the same basic ideas of the same person, but the collection of ideas of different scholars is done by one scholar in his own style. The collector's or code writer's familiarity with him is how much success he achieved in editing the content, and in coordination with it. The word Samhita itself means to store the scattered material.
Ancient compositions like 'Susruta Samhita', 'Atreya Samhita', 'Kashyapa Samhita' etc., reveal that even before Maharishi Atreya, high-quality literature of Ayurveda existed in India. These were the codes that became the collection of them, then the era of Charaka was the renunciation era of the ancient codes. By then Ayurveda science had developed over a wide area. In the time of Panini itself, the science of disease, medicine, medicine, Tridosha, Ritucharya etc. was very developed. Charaka was after Panini, hence the era of Charaka was the advanced age of Ayurveda. Charaka's object-rendering style, reasoning, and election of experiments are unique. Today, in the 'Charaka Samhita' itself, we accuse 'Atreya Samhita' and 'Agnivesh Tantra', basically there is neither 'Atreya Samhita' nor 'Agnivesh Tantra' available. A large fund of our Ayurveda literature disappeared. The medical science of Charaka is still the best in any medical system. On this basis, we can estimate the glory of missing codes. Till the time of interpreters like Chakrapani, Vijayarakshit, Srikanth and Shivdas, 'Agnivesh Samhita', many original texts would have been received, because in the interpretations of those scholars, there are quotations of those texts which are not in 'Charak Samhita' today. This is often from the 10th to 12th centuries CE. Islamic invaders did not harm us as much by plundering India's property as by destroying and corrupting India's culture and literature and destroying the development of human beings. Who does not know the fact of history that India.
