Indian Journal of History of Science, 47.

4 (2012) 545-559

ACCOUNTS OF PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS

IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA

P. RAM MANOHAR*

(Received 22 October 2012)

The codified texts of Ayurveda were composed in the few

centuries preceding and succeeding the common era. This period marked
the emergence of a rational system of medicine in India from the moorings
of religious medicine practiced in the Vedic period. Ayurveda made several
advancements in theory and practice of medicine that have not yet been
recognised as milestones in the history of medical ideas. This paper is an
attempt to review the knowledge of pathogenic organisms and their role
in diseases based on textual evidences in the early writings on Ayurveda.
A careful study of the early writings on Ayurveda reveals that these
ancient physicians were aware of not only pathogenic organisms but also
non-pathogenic organisms that naturally inhabited the human body.
Pathogenic organisms mentioned in Ayurveda include parasite, worms
and perhaps microbes also. These texts provide insights on early notions
and ideas about the nature of pathogenic organisms, some of which are
microscopic and their role in diseases. There are also interesting
observations on communicable diseases, epidemics and infection. Many
plants and formulations mentioned in the classical Ayurvedic texts have
been found to be effective against pathogenic organisms including
microbes.

Key words: Ayurveda, Infections, Microbes, Parasites, Pathogens,

Sepsis, Vector, Worms

INTRODUCTION
The contribution of Ayurveda to the history of medical ideas has not
been adequately studied and acknowledged. Timelines of the history of
development of medicine blissfully ignore significant milestones achieved

* Director and CSO, AVP Research Foundation, 136-137, Trichy Road, Ramanathapuram P.O.,
Coimbatore - 641045, Tamil Nadu, India; email: [email protected]
546 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

by the tradition of Ayurveda in the advancement of medical science. On the

other hand, we must brush aside over enthusiastic and exaggerated claims
too.
A careful study of classical Ayurvedic literature reveals that Ayurveda
had developed very interesting ideas and notions about various aspects of
the human body in health and disease. The classical Ayurvedic texts have
documented fascinating observations about pathogenic organisms that have
not been adequately studied and evaluated from the point of view of the
historical evolution of medical science in the world.

CLASSIFICATION OF PATHOGENS IN AYURVEDA

A very interesting discussion is found on pathogenic organisms in
–
one of the chapters of the Caraka Sam . hita , an authoritative text book on
general medicine in Ayurveda. The text classifies organisms into normal
(sahaja) and the pathogenic or invaders (a–gantu)1. The pathogenic parasites
are further classified into those that grow on the external surface or internal
environment of the body. The external parasites are lice, ants and the like.
The internal parasites grow on fecal matter, mucus and blood2.
It is interesting to note that Ayurveda recognised the existence of
non-pathogenic organisms that naturally inhabit the human body. However,
the specific functions of these non-pathogenic organisms have not been
elaborately discussed.
Fig. 1 gives an overview of the classification and nomenclature of
pathogens in the early classical Ayurvedic texts.

NOMENCLATURE OF PATHOGENS IN AYURVEDA

The nomenclature of the pathogens documented in Ayurvedic texts
provides interesting material for discussion and research. It is an intriguing
thought to imagine that the ancient observers would have physically seen
and described these tiny creatures.

External Parasites
The external pathogens are young and mature lice as well as ants. It
is quite easy to identify and characterize these organisms.
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 547

Fig. 1. The classification and nomenclature of pathogenic organisms (kr. mis) described in the
works of Caraka (C), Susƒruta (S) and Va– gbhat. a (V)

Internal Pathogens growing in the Blood

The nomenclature of these microbes has also been enlisted and these
describe either the shape or the pathogenic action of the organisms.
548 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

The names of three of the pathogens of the blood are related to the
hair. There are the eaters of the hair of the head (kesƒa–da) and the small hairs
of the body (loma–da). The meaning of the name lomadv īpa is not clear -
loma means body hair and dv īpa means island. Saurasa is derived from the
word surasa– meaning rich in water or sap. It is a synonym of a few medicinal
plants as well as the name of a serpent demon. Saurasa means originating
from surasa– and in this context may refer to the serpent demon to indicate
the virulent nature of the organism.
Audumbara means similar in appearance to the fruit of udumbara
and it may indicate the shape or color of the fruit. Jantuma–tara means
mother of pathogenic organisms. This name may indicate the ability of the
organism to multiply profusely inside the body. Nakha–da means that which
eats away the nails and danta–da is that which eats away the teeth. The exact
meaning of the word kikkisƒa is not clear. Kus. .t haja means the organisms that
are born out of skin diseases and par īsarpa means that which spreads all
over very fast3.

Internal Pathogens growing on Mucus Secretions

Some of the pathogens growing on mucus secretions are also described
to be very minute and their names are also descriptive like the intestine
chewers (antra–dahò) and the like. Udara–da means eater of the stomach. A
variant name udara–ves. ma means that which envelops the stomach. It is not
clear what the name kuru means. Darbhapus. pa indicates resemblance to the
flower of darbha grass. Saugandhika or sugandha means pleasant aroma but
the significance of this word, as the name of a pathogen is not clear. Maha–
guda means possessing a large anus. Maha–pus. pa means large flower.
Pralu–na means that which appears to be cut off or mutilated. Cipit. a means
flattened or blunted. Pip īlika– indicates ant like appearance and da–run. a refers
to virulence of the pathogen4.

Internal Pathogens growing on Fecal Matter

Pathogens that thrive on fecal matter are known by names like
kakeruka and makeruka, the meaning and implications of which are not very
clear. Leliha could mean that which is constantly licking. Sasƒu–laka means
that which causes pain. Sausura–da means that which eats the sausura and
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 549

the implication of this word is not clear. Ajava– and vijava– could indicate the
slow movement of the pathogen. The meanings and implications of the
names kipya and cipya are not clear. Gan. d. u–pada indicates earthworm like
appearance and dvimukha means having two heads5.

The Innumerability of Pathogens

In his commentary on the Susƒruta Sam –
. hita , Dalhan. a mentions that
the pathogens are innumerable and the twenty types mentioned are categories
that can include the rest6. Cakrapa– n. idatta, the commentator of Caraka
–
Sam. hita , mentions that the nomenclature of the pathogens mentioned are
those that are well accepted in his tradition as well as those that are in vogue
in other places7. This is an indication that different schools of thought in
Ayurveda developed different classification systems and nomenclature for
–
pathogens. Indeed, the Bhela Sam . hita gives a different nomenclature for the
pathogens8. The Ha r īta Sam
– –
. hita also gives a nomenclature for pathogens
that is different from the other texts and lists only thirteen names instead of
twenty9. It is difficult to determine whether different names have been given
to the same pathogens in different texts or whether they indicate different
pathogens altogether. As pointed out by Meulenbeld, at least in some cases, the
different names used by different authorities may refer to the same pathogen10.

DESCRIPTIONS OF PATHOGENS IN AYURVEDA

The external pathogens are minute, like sesame grains and having
many feet11.
The descriptions of the parasites that grow in blood are extremely
thought provoking. These are minute (an. u), circular (vr. tta) and without any
feet (apa–da–sƒca). Because of their extremely minute size, some are not visible
to the eye (kecit sauks. mya–t adarsƒana–h. )12. This description is certainly
reminiscent of microbes and could very well be one of the earliest speculations
about the existence of microscopic life. In the light of modern knowledge,
blood as a medium for the growth of microbes seems to be a purely
speculative idea of the ancient Ayurvedic physicians. Blood is considered to
be sterile and presence of microbes in blood leads to a life-threatening
situation known as bacteremia. However, the symptoms caused by the
pathogens of blood as described in Ayurvedic texts do not correlate with
550 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

bacteremia. Curiously enough, the description of the pathogens of the blood

with its circular shape and coppery red color seems to resemble the red
blood cells rather than microbes. Again, it is difficult to determine whether
the ancient physicians had any tools to visualize the red blood cells in the
first place to mistake them as pathogens.
The pathogens found in mucus secretions are whitish, minute,
elongated, thread like, cylindrical like earthworm and broad13.
The pathogens found in the fecal matter are whitish, minute,
cylindrical, long like silk threads, thick, cylindrical, blackish, bluish or
greenish14.

Symptoms caused by the Pathogens

The external pathogens cause itching and eruptions on the skin15.
The pathogens of the blood cause destruction of hairs of the head,
body, eyelashes and the nails as well. They also cause horripilation, itching,
pain and spreading of wounds. When they proliferate, they eat away the
skin, vessels, ligaments, muscles and cartilage16.
The pathogens in the mucus secretions cause salivation, drooling,
loss of appetite, indigestion, fever, fainting, yawning, sneezing, distension of
abdomen, body ache, vomiting, weight loss and roughness17.
The pathogens found in fecal matter cause loose stools, weight loss,
roughness and horripilation. They also cause biting pain and itching around
the anus and they come out of the anus again and again18.

Diseases caused by Pathogenic Organisms

The role of pathogenic organisms in causation of diseases has been
well recognized by Ayurveda. However not many diseases have been listed
in this category. Skin diseases known as kus. .t ha are specifically considered
to be associated with kr. mis or pathogenic organisms. Infestation with
pathogenic organisms is a specific stage in the progress of skin diseases.
One of the types of diseases that affect the head and the heart are said to
be caused by pathogenic organisms i.e., kr. mija sƒiroroga and kr. mija hr. droga19.
The role of pathogens have not been described in classical Ayurvedic texts
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 551

in the case of many diseases that we know today to be caused by pathogens.

Examples are amebiasis, tuberculosis and malaria. These diseases are well
described clinically without implicating pathogens in the disease process.

Did ancient Ayurvedic Physicians know about Microbes?

The pathogens have not been properly classified in the Ayurvedic
texts, it seems. The term kr. mi includes parasites, bugs, worms and probably
micro-organisms also. Meulenbeld prefers to consider the kr. mis as worms,
though he admits difficulties in interpreting the term kr. mi. He points out that
ancient Indians did not clearly distinguish between the phyla of invertebrates
or their developmental stages. Following Chakravarthy, he attempts to identify
many of the intestinal worms expressing difference of opinion on many
occasions. However, Meulebeld does not consider the possibility of the
existence of microorganisms having been known to the ancient Ayurvedic
physicians20. He suggests that round worm, tape worm and thread worm
may have been known to Ayurveda but maintains that none of the descriptions
could be applicable to microbes, which are invisible and could not have
been seen by the ancient Ayurvedic physicians.
While the pathogens growing in mucus secretions and the fecal matter
can be considered as intestinal worms, the pathogens in the blood deserve
to be studied more closely. These are said to reside inside the blood vessels
and as already mentioned, may also be invisible due to their minute size. It
is interesting to note that they are described to have a circular shape and are
without feet. Moreover they have a coppery hue. It is difficult to identify
these pathogens with reference to organisms that we know today because
the descriptions are not sufficiently detailed and because blood is considered
to be sterile.
Moreover, it is debatable whether invisibility means not visible to
the naked eye or a small size that is not easily noticed. There is no evidence
available to suggest that the ancient Ayurvedic physicians had access to
magnifying glass, not to speak of microscopes. In these circumstances, it is
difficult to judge whether invisible kr. mis in the blood are microbes. In his
.
commentary on the As. .t a–n ga Hr. daya, Arun. adatta clarifies that the pathogens
of the blood are indeed totally invisible to the human eye and are therefore
microscopic. He adds that their existence can be only inferred21. This is a
552 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

very clear statement of the existence of microscopic life and a strong evidence
to suppose that ancient Ayurvedic physicians were aware of microscopic life
albeit they could not study it in sufficient detail.
On the other hand, the pathogens of the blood don’t appear to be
worms either. We can say that they are an indication of the fact that the
ancient Ayurvedic physicians came very close to discovering microscopic
life but could not carry these studies further for want of appropriate
instruments and tools.

ROLE OF PATHOGENS IN DISEASE CAUSATION

Ayurveda was aware of the role of pathogenic organisms in some
diseases. Diseases affecting the skin were especially thought to involve
pathogenic organisms at a particular stage of development. But it is not
considered to be the primary cause of the disease. Pathogens come into the
picture after the disease has progressed to some extent. Suœruta refers to
this stage as ja–takr. mi, which means literally the stage of the disease that
gives birth to pathogens22. Va– gbhat.a points out that when kleda or secretions
are accumulated, skin diseases attract pathogenic organisms which eat away
the skin, muscle and lymph. It is interesting to note that Va– gbhat.a uses the
term a–va–hana to describe the process of infestation of skin diseases with
–
pathogenic organisms23. Ava–hana means to invoke or invite. The idea is that
the body attracts pathogens after the pathological derangement has taken
place. The notion of pathogens attacking a healthy body and thereby becoming
the direct cause of disease is not found in the classical texts of Ayurveda.

The role of Pathogens in Transmission of Disease

It is fascinating to find that the Susƒruta Sam –
. hita mentions about
communicable diseases and how it spreads from one person to the other by
contact. He lists the modes of transmission of disease quite comprehensively,
(1) Frequent interaction with the diseased person, (2) Physical contact of the
body, (3) Through breath, (4) By eating together, (5) By sitting together, (6)
By sleeping together and (7) By wearing the same garlands and ornaments24.
–
The Caraka Sam . hita talks about epidemic diseases and how such diseases
spread and kill large number of people at the same time. However, it is not
clear whether the role of pathogens in transmission of disease was adequately
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 553

understood. While the classical texts themselves are silent, one commentator
opines that a disease is transmitted on close contact between people because
–
the sin is transferred from one person to the other25. The Caraka Sam . hita
says that the same disease affects many people because common factors like
the land, water and air get polluted and the seasons get deranged26. There is
no evidence to suggest that Ayurveda recognized the role of pathogens in
transmission of infectious diseases as well as epidemics.

Vectors or flies depositing Larvae?

The Susƒruta Sam –
. hita observes that flies deposit pathogens in wounds
causing them to suppurate and aggravate27. Could this be a very early reference
to the role of flies as vectors in carrying pathogens? It is not clear whether
the text refers to worms, microbes or parasites in this context. Susƒruta could
have very well been talking about the condition known as myiasis, in which
flies deposit larvae on wounds, which looks like worms. On the other hand,
the role of mosquitoes in the transmission of the malarial parasite has not
been understood or described in Ayurveda. For that matter, even the role of
parasites in causation of malarial fever has not been recognized though the
clinical features of the disease has been well described. Filariasis is another
disease that has been well described without an understanding of the role of
mosquitoes in its transmission.

Antiseptic Procedures in Surgery and Wound Management

The Susƒruta Sam –
. hita points out that a wounded person is to be
protected from demons. It is interesting to note that Ayurvedic surgeons
observed that people who are wounded either due to surgery or physical
trauma are susceptible to suppuration of their wounds. It seems that they
sensed that the injured people are being attacked by some invisible beings
that are referred to as ra–ks. asas or demons. In order to prevent this attack,
fumigation with certain herbs and plant resins have been advised. Interestingly,
these fumigants have now been shown to have microbicidal activity. Susƒruta
also mentions that the patient who is recovering from a wound should follow
certain physical and mental discipline (yama and niyama)28. This means that
the ancient Ayurvedic surgeons seem to have also observed that hygiene
helps to prevent wounds from suppurating and becoming difficult to treat.
554 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

This is an intriguing example of a case where the ancient surgeons

seem to have encountered the phenomenon of infection that leads to sepsis
of wounds, but did not fully understand the process and mechanism, but
nevertheless developed interventions that were fairly effective in managing
the situation.
It is simply stunning to think that ancient Ayurvedic surgeons sensed
the invasion of the bodies of wounded people by invisible beings. However,
they were not able to identify microbes and speculated that demons were
attacking the patients.
This theory of demonic attack on the wounded patient and the
consequent implementation of procedures like fumigation and cleanliness to
protect the patient enabled the Ayurvedic surgeons to prevent sepsis of
wounds.
Another interesting practice that has an implication in aseptic surgery
is the special treatment of surgical instruments in alkaline solution, water
and oil. This procedure is known as pa–yana–. Each surgical instrument is
heated till it becomes red hot and then dipped in alkaline solution, water or
oil29. The primary purpose of this process seems to have been to temper the
surgical instrument. However, this also helped to sterilize the instruments
used in surgery and thus helped to prevent sepsis of surgical wounds.

Treatment of Diseases involving Pathogenic Organisms

–
The Caraka Sam . hita puts forth a threefold strategy for management
of pathogenic organisms. These are (1) Apakars. an. a - extraction or removal
of the pathogenic organisms, (2) Prakr. tivigha–ta - creating unfavourable
environment for the pathogenic organisms and (3) Nida–naparivarjana -
avoiding the causative factors30.
The method of apakars. an. a may include methods to kill the pathogenic
organisms before removing them. The texts mention herbs and medications
that are kr. mighna, which means to literally kill the pathogens31.

Medicinal Plants from Ayurveda with Microbicidal Properties

Ayurveda may have sensed the existence of microbial life and to
some extent their role in diseases. Treatment procedures for management of
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 555

pathogens have been described and herbs and formulations have been listed
for use in diseases involving pathogenic organisms. A very interesting topic
that emerges from the discussion of pathogenic organisms in Ayurveda is the
microbicidal properties of medicinal plants described in the classical
Ayurvedic texts.
Although the pathogenic organisms described in Ayurvedic texts
include parasites and worms and perhaps not microbes, the medicinal plants
that have been ascribed with kr. mighna property (the ability to kill kr. mis or
pathogenic organisms), have been shown to have microbicidal activities as
well as has been revealed by modern scientific research on medicinal plants.
.
Tulas ī, Haridra–, Vidan ga, Vaca– and Guggulu are examples.

CONCLUSIONS
The classical texts of Ayurveda that were composed and edited in the
time period spanning a few centuries before and after the Common Era have
documented the Ayurvedic understanding of the role of pathogenic organisms
in development and progress of diseases. However, rather than being the
primary cause of a disease, they get involved in a particular stage of the
disease. One of the most fascinating aspects of these accounts is the
classification of organisms into the natural and the pathogenic. Although
there is no further description about the natural and harmless organisms that
live in the human body, the very reference to such organisms raises the
question as to whether the ancient Ayurvedic physicians were aware of
microbes. Such a supposition gains strength when we consider the reference
to invisible pathogenic organisms residing in the blood vessels that are
circular in appearance and without feet. However, in the absence of evidence
of the use of any microscopic instruments, it is difficult to judge whether
these invisible organisms are microbes, though textual statements confirm
that some of these pathogens cannot be seen by the human eye and that
Ayurvedic physicians were aware of microscopic life. Kr. mi is a broad term
and may be aptly translated as pathogenic organisms instead of worms as it
includes parasites, worms and perhaps microbes also. Ayurvedic texts make
mention of communicable diseases and epidemics. Yet, they did not recognize
the role of pathogenic organisms in transmission of disease. The description
of flies depositing pathogenic organisms on wounds may be an early reference
556 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

to their role as vectors or it could be the depositing of larvae on wounds,

a condition known as myiasis. Ancient Ayurvedic surgeons observed that
wounds were prone to suppuration and speculated that this happened due to
attack of the wounded person by invisible demons. This could be a very
early reference to infection of wounds and consequent sepsis. Treatment
procedures and formulations have been prescribed for management of diseases
involving pathogenic organisms and modern scientific research has shown
that many medicinal plants used in Ayurveda have microbicidal properties.
The contributions of Ayurveda in understanding of pathogenic and non-
pathogenic organisms form the point of view of the history of medical ideas
need to be recognised. Medicinal plants and formulations mentioned in the
classical texts of Ayurveda can offer valuable leads in discovery of
medications against pathogenic organisms including microbes.

ABBREVIATIONS
.
As. .t a–n ga Hr. daya - AH Bhela Sam –
. hita - BH
–
Caraka Sam . hita - CS Cikitsa– Stha–na - Ci
Nida–nastha–na - Ni Ha–r īta Sam –
. hita - HS
Tr. t īya Stha–na - Tr Susƒruta Sam –
. hita - SS
Su–tra Stha–na - Su– Uttara Stha–na - Utta
Vima–na Stha–na - Vi

NOTES & REFERENCES

1. See CS, Vi, 7.9 - The natural organisms inhabiting the body which are different from
the 20 pathogenic organisms have been mentioned. In the commentary by Cakrapa– n. i,
it is clarified that the organisms that are seen naturally in the body do not cause
diseases – sƒar īrasahaja–stvavaika–rika–h. . It is pertinent to point out that only the CS
makes mention of the natural non-pathogenic organisms.
2. See CS, Vi, 7.9 – The pathogenic organisms have been classified into four types based
on the substratum of growth i.e. feces, mucus, blood and waste products. However,
only the external pathogens are described under the category of organisms growing
on waste products. The text classifies waste products into external and internal, describes
the pathogens growing on external surface of the body. There is no direct mention of
pathogens growing on internal waste, but obviously this is included in types that grow
on feces, mucus and blood. However AH, Ni, 14.42 explicitly classify pathogenic
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 557

organisms into the external and internal. Susƒruta classifies them into three types that
grow on feces, mucus and blood.
3. See CS, Vi, 7.11, SS, Utta, 54.15 and AH, Ni, 14.51 for descriptions of the pathogens
that grow in the blood.
4. See CS, Vi, 7.12, SS, Utta, 54.12 and AH, Ni, 14.47-50 for descriptions of the pathogens
that grow in mucus secretions.
5. See CS, Vi, 7.13, SS, Utta, 54.8 and AH, Ni, 14.46 for descriptions of the pathogens
that grow in the feces.
6. See Dalhan. a’s commentary on SS, Utta, 54.7 pointing to the innumerability of the
. kr. m ī n. a m
pathogens - ja–tigrahan. am . sƒatya
– – – – – –
. a nantyakhya pana rtham, tacca nantyam vim
–
meva varuddham .
–
7. See Cakrapan. idatta’s commentary on CS, Vi, 7.10 about the different names for
pathogens in different geographical regions - krim ī n. a–m . jña svasƒa stravyavaha
– – –
. sam
rasiddha desƒa ntaraprasiddha ca boddhavya
– – – –

8. See BS, Su–, 26.31-33 for an enumeration of pathogens. Elaborate descriptions are not
available in this text. The names of the pathogens are 1. mr. jja–, 2. jara–yuja,
3. leva–, 4. ru–paka, 5. bahuru–paka, 6. par ī sarpa, 7. visarpa, 8. gotraja, 9. netraja, 10.
roma–da, 11. rohita, 12. kas. .t a, 13. da–run. aka, 14. sƒiroja, 15. dantaja, 16. sƒles. maja, 17.
sƒakr. da–sƒraya, 18. lohita, 19. ka–laka, 20. sƒatama–tr. ka. Meulenbeld derives these names
differently and reads majja–ja instead of mr. jja–, combines leva– and ru–paka into lamba–
ru–paka and splits rohita into antra–da and ahita.
9. See HS, Tr, 5 for descriptions of pathogens. This text classifies pathogens into external
and internal and lists six and seven names in each category making it a total of
thirteen. The six external parasites are 1. kr. s. n. ayu–ka, 2. sƒvetayu–ka, 3. carmayu–kika–, 4.
binduk ī , 5. matkun. a, 6. mastakayu–ka– and 7. yas. mika– . The seven internal parasites
are 1. pr. thumun. d. a–, 2. kam – – –
. cukasannibha, 3. dha nya n. kura, 4. suks. ma, 5. an. u and 6.
suc ī mukha
–

10. See Meulenbeld’s (p.624) obserervations on the aptness of the term udara–ves. .t a of
Va– gbhat.a to describe the round worm. He points out that this could be the gan. d. u–pada
of Susƒruta and the kim –
. cukasannibha of Har ta.
11. The descriptions of the external pathogens can be seen in CS, Vi,, 7.10 and AH, Ni,
14. 44.
12. The works of Caraka (Vi, 7.11), Susƒruta (Utta, 54.19-20) and Va– gbhat.a (Ni, 14.51)
unanimously state that the pathogens growing in the blood are invisible. While Caraka
and Va– gbhat.a mention that some of them are invisible, Susƒruta categorically states
that all pathogens growing in the blood are invisible.
13. See CS, Vi, 7.12 for description of shapes of pathogens growing in the mucus.
14. See CS, Vi, 7.13 for description of shapes of pathogens growing in the feces.
558 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE

15. See CS, Vi, 7.10 for symptoms caused by the external pathogens.
16. See CS, Vi, 7.11 for symptoms caused by parasites of the blood.
17. See CS, Vi, 7.12 for symptoms caused by parasites of the mucus.
18. See CS, Vi, 7.13 for symptoms caused by parasites of the feces.
19. See AH, Utta, 23.12-15 for description of kr. mija sƒiroroga and Ni, 5. 43-44 for
description of kr. mija hr. droga
20. See Meulenbeld pp. 622-627, for discussion on the chapter dealing with kr. mis in his
translation of the Ma– dhava Nida– na
21. See commentary of Arun. adatta on AH, Ci, 14.51, where he explains that the pathogens
of blood cannot be seen with naked eye and can only be inferred by signs-
kecidadarsƒana–h. pratyaks. aprama–n. a–samadhigamya–h. ka–ryen. aiva–num ī yante.
22. See SS, Ni, 5.6, 8, 25, 26 where the involvement of pathogenic organisms in specific
stages of the disease is explained.
23. See AH, Ni, 14. 4-5 where the disease is said to attract kr. mis as it progresses.
24. See SS, Ni, 5.33-34 for a description of the modes of transmission of diseases. It is
interesting to note that this topic is taken up in the chapter on skin diseases, which
is explicitly stated to involve pathogenic organisms and are communicable. In AH, Ni,
14. 41, the same topic is discussed followed by a description of kr. mis. It almost looks
like the ancient physicians sensed the connection between pathogenic organisms and
communicability of diseases. But in fact, they did not discover this important link.
Gayada– sa addresses this issue in his commentary on the above verse in Susƒruta
–
Sam . hita , by raising the question - “How does disease get transmitted from one person
to the other?” and he answers, “By transfer of sin, just by contact with a person, the
sin is transmitted from one to another”.
25. See Gayada– sa’s commentary on SS, Ni, 5.33-34
26. See CS, Vi, 3.6 for a description of epidemics. The role of pathogenic organisms in
the spread of epidemics has not been recognized.
27. See SS, Ci, 1.119-122 where it is mentioned that flies can deposit pathogenic organisms
on wounds and cause severe swelling.
28. See SS, Ci, 1.133 for instructions to protect a wounded person from being attacked
by demons called as nisƒa–caras here.
29. See SS, Su–, 9.12 for a description of the methods of tempering the surgical instruments
in water, oil and alkaline solutions before use.
30. See CS, Vi, 7.14 for methods of treatment of pathogenic infestations.
31. See CS, Sû, 4. 11 for list of drugs that have kr. mighna action.
 PATHOGENIC ORGANISMS IN THE EARLY TEXTS OF AYURVEDA 559

BIBLIOGRAPHY
–
Girijadayalu, S., (ed.) Bhela Sam . hita , Chaukhambha Bharati Academy, Varanasi, 1999
.
Harisastri, P. V., (ed.) As. .t a–n ga Hr. dayam, Chaukhambha Orientalia, Varanasi, 2002
Meulenbeld, G. J., The Ma–dhava Nidana and its chief commentary, E.J. Brill, Lieden, 1974
–
Ramavalamba, S., (ed.) Harita Sam . hita , Prachya Prakashan, Varanasi, 1985
Yadavji, T. A., (ed.) Susƒruta Sam –
. hita , Chaukhambha Orientalia, Varanasi, 1980
–
Yadavji, T. A., (ed.) Caraka Sam
. hita , Munshilal Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd, Delhi,
1992