Humoral Constitutions in the Carakasaṃhitā

Philipp A. Maas

Pre-print version of the article published in:

T. L. Knudsen et al. (eds.), Body and Cosmos: Studies in Early Indian Medical and Astral
Sciences in Honor of Kenneth G. Zysk. Leiden, Boston: Brill (Sir Henry Wellcome Asian
Series 20), p. 33–51. doi: 10.1163/9789004438224_005

For quoting this article, please refer to the print version.

The early-classical and classical Āyurvedic compendia of Caraka, Bhela, Suśruta, and
Vāgbhaṭa contain mutually related and supplementary classification systems concerning the
character or natural constitution of human beings that are respectively based on medical, psy-
chological, and physical conceptions.1 Of these, a specific medical classification system that
is intimately related to the central Āyurvedic doctrine of the three pathogenetic substances
wind (vāta), bile (pitta), and phlegm (śleṣman) (frequently called doṣa or humors) became
“highly developed” in classical and medieval Āyurveda “and forms one of the most prominent
parts of New Age ayurveda.”2 The present article deals with the earliest documented
Āyurvedic doctrines of humoral constitutions as they appear in the Carakasaṃhitā, a Sanskrit
work that can be roughly dated to the period of 100 BCE–200 CE for its older parts.3 More


Work on this research article was partly supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) in the context of
FWF projects P17300-G03 (“Philosophy and Medicine in Early Classical India I”) and P19866-G15
(“Philosophy and Medicine in Early Classical India II”). An earlier version of the present article was
presented at the 14th World Sanskrit Conference, Kyoto, in the panel “Physicians and Patients: Textual
Representations in Pre-Modern South Asia” on 1 September 2009.
1
See Siegfried Lienhard, “Konstitution und Charakter nach den Lehren der altindischen Medizin,” Centaurus
6 (1959): 82–93.
2
Dominik Wujastyk, The Roots of Ayurveda. (London, New York, etc.: Penguin Books, 2003), 8. On New
Age ayurveda, see Kenneth Gregory Zysk, “New Age Āyurveda or What Happens to Indian Medicine when
it Comes to America,” Traditional South Asian Medicine 6 (2001): 10–26.
3
See Gerrit Jan Meulenbeld, A History of Indian Medical Literature. Vol. 1A. (Groningen: Forsten, 1999),
114. On the complex redactorial history of the Carakasaṃhitā, see Philipp A. Maas, “On What Became of
the Carakasaṃhitā after Dṛḍhabala’s Revision,” eJournal of Indian Medicine 3 (2010): 1–22.
1
precisely, the article draws attention to the fact that four different humoral classification
systems are attested in the Caraksaṃhitā. These systems deviate from each other with regard
to the acknowledged number of humoral categories and concerning their respective
conceptions of the ideal state to be achieved (or re-established) by medical practice, i.e.,
health. In its final conclusion, the article argues that these deviations reflect different
strategies of harmonizing the doctrine of unchangeable humoral constitutions with the central
Āyurvedic conception of health as resulting from a suitable amount of all three humors within
the human body.

Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95 introduces a humoral classification system of seven

categories that is similar to the systems figuring in the Āyurvedic compendia of Suśruta,
Bhela and Vāgbhaṭa.4 Caraka’s classification system appears in the context of the physician’s
initial examination of the patient, in which the physician should take into consideration ten
factors (bhāva) in order to determine the patient’s specific strength. 5 The first, and probably
most important, factor is the patient’s “humoral constitution” (doṣaprakṛti).6 The following
section of Vimānasthāna 8.96–100 provides a comprehensive account of this specific
classification system. 7

The initial section describes how the natural constitution of human beings is established by
several factors that influence the origination of a body during conception: the sperm, the
menstrual fluid, the season of conception, the womb, food and lifestyle of the mother, and the
modification of the gross elements that make up the fetus’ body. These factors are related to
the production of one or two predominant humors in the fetal body, or they may lead to a
suitable amount of humors, in which case neither a single humor nor the combination of two
humors is predominant. Accordingly, each human being can be classified as possessing one
out of seven possible humoral constitutions (see table 1 below). Once the above-mentioned
factors have established the specific constitution during conception, this constitution remains
unchanged for the whole of the human’s life.

4
See Suśrutasaṃhitā Śārīrasthāna 4.62–79, Bhelasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 4.12–27 and Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā
Sūtrasthāna 1.10.
5
The remaining nine factors that are relevant for determining the patient’s strength are [2] disease (vikṛti), [3]
strong points of bodily elements (sāra), [4] compactness (saṃhanana), [5] measurement (pramāṇa), [6]
habituation (sātmya), [7] character (sattva), [8] digestive power (āhāraśakti), [9] athletic power
(vyāyāmaśakti), and [10] stage of life (vayas).
6
Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95.
7
For a critical edition and translation of Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 95–100, see Appendix 1 below. The
numbering of sections follows the numbering introduced by Jādvaji Trikamji in his 1941-edition of the
Carakasaṃhitā.
2
Single humor constitutions Double humor constitutions Triple humor constitution
1. phlegmatic (śleṣmala) 4. phlegmatic-bilious (saṃsṛṣṭa) 7. suitable amount (samadhātu)
2. bilious (pittala) 5. phlegmatic-windy (saṃsṛṣṭa)
3. windy (vātala) 6. bilious-windy (saṃsṛṣṭa)

Table 1. Seven humoral constitutions.

The immediately following passage, i.e., Vimānasthāna 96–98, comprehensively describes the
determination of a specific constitution by means of a tripartite conclusion by analogy. In its
first part, the characteristic qualities of the different humors are listed. Phlegm, for example, is
said to be unctuous, smooth, soft, sweet, solid, viscid, slow, rigid, heavy, cold, smeary, and
clear. Then every quality of each humor is related to a distinct bodily or mental feature of the
patient. Thus, for example, patients whose basic constitution is dominated by phlegm have
clear eyes because phlegm is clear (accha). Besides the bodily features or qualities (guṇa) that
are analogous to the qualities of the humors, each constitution dominated by a single humor is
indicated by further typical qualities that concern physical strength, wealth, life span,
education, and fertility. Phlegmatic persons are strong, rich, learned, energetic, and long-
living, whereas bilious persons are of middling power, have an average life span, and possess
general and practical knowledge, wealth and means of subsistence. Finally, windy persons are
generally weak. They do not live for long, produce little offspring, have little means and little
wealth. In this way, the three natural constitutions determined by a single humor classify
humans hierarchically regarding their specific strength, wealth, life expectancy, education,
and other factors (see table 2 below).

Characteristics Phlegmatic Constitution Bilious Constitution Windy Constitution

Power strong of middling strength mostly weak
Wealth rich wealthy with means of little wealth / means of
subsistence subsistence
Life expectancy long-lived of middling life span short-lived
Education learned having general and –
practical knowledge
Other energetic – having little offspring

Table 2. Humoral constitutions and their characteristics, according to Carakasaṃhitā

Vimānasthāna 8.96–89.

The correspondence between the three humors and the three degrees of strength, etc. is neat.
However, the classification system contains four additional basic constitutions, for which the
3
correspondence between the qualities of the humors and the qualities of the body is less clear,
namely the three double humor constitutions and the single triple humor constitution. These
four constitutions are characterized in Vimānasthāna 8.99–100:

99. Persons having mixed characteristics arise from a mixture [of humors]. 100. Persons
having a suitable amount [of humors] are endowed with all qualities, ...8

The description of persons with constitutions dominated by multiple humors is succinct. The
text just refers to “mixed characteristics” and to “all qualities” of the patients’ body. What
exactly are, however, these characteristics or qualities? Definitely neither strength of the
body, nor life expectancy, nor the degree of prosperity can be meant, because the existence of
one characteristic logically excludes the existence of its opposite. A mixture and an
accumulation of the qualities “having much strength” and “being weak” are, for instance,
impossible. The passage can therefore only refer to bodily features derived from the qualities
of humors as, for example, the clearness of eyes in the case of a phlegmatic constitution. A
mixture of features from different categories would then enable an inference to a mixed basic
constitution. This interpretation, however, is also problematic, since even the lists of these
bodily characteristics consist to a considerable degree in mutually exclusive pairs of
opposites, such as having a body which is pleasant to the eye, smooth, and bright
(dṛṣṭisukhasukumārāvadātaśarīra), which are characteristics of the phlegmatic constitution,
whereas the lists of characteristic of a bilious constitution contains the opposite qualities.
Moreover, the phlegmatic constitution is said not to start physical activities quickly, not to fall
into despair quickly, and not to be diseased quickly, whereas the windy one is characterized
by contrary qualities, etc.

A similar problem arises when a patient is characterised by a suitable amount of all three
humors. How can a single person be regarded as having “all qualities” (sarvaguṇa), which
would mean that this person possesses the above-mentioned, mutually exclusive features at
the same time? The eleventh-century commentator Cakrapāṇidatta tried to solve this problem
by taking the word guṇa not to mean just a general characteristic or quality but to refer
exclusively to “good qualities.”9 Accordingly, patients with a constitution derived from a
suitable amount of humors would be characterised by “all good qualities.” This interpretation,
however, is unsatisfactory for two reasons: First, all inferences of humoral constitutions from
the occurrence of bodily features are introduced with the word evaṃguṇayogāt “because
[these persons] possess such qualities.” Here the word guṇa clearly designates all listed

8
saṃsargāt saṃsṛṣṭalakṣaṇāḥ. sarvaguṇasamuditās tu samadhātavaḥ, …. (see Appendix).
9
“Endowed with all qualities” means “connected with all good qualities concerning natural constitutions.”
Ayurvedadīpikā ad Carakasaṃitā Vimānasthāna 8.10: sarvaguṇasamuditā iti sarvaprakṛtiṣūktapraśasta-
guṇayuktā (p. 278a, l. 3f.).
4
characteristics, and not just “good qualities.” Cakrapāṇidatta’s interpretation of the word guṇa
in the compound sarvaguṇa therefore implies that the author changed his terminology within
a single, uniform context without indicating that he did so. This is highly unlikely from a
pragmatic point of view. Secondly, several of the characteristics ascribed to the humors do not
have a clear relational value, which makes it difficult to determine whether a certain
characteristic is a good quality or not. For example, it may depend on socially determined
values or on circumstances whether having soft hair of the beard is preferable to having rough
hair.

In view of these difficulties, the references to combined humoral constitutions in

Vimānasthāna 8.95 and 99f. are problematic. The text neither provides satisfactory infor-
mation on how the existence of a combined constitution can be determined, nor does it inform
us about the influence of the different combined constitutions on the strength, life span, etc. of
patients. For which purpose do the three categories of mixed humoral constitutions and the
single one of suitable amounts of the humors exist at all?

As mentioned above, the passage Vimānasthāna 8.95–100 is not the only reference to
doctrines of humoral constitutions in the Carakasaṃhitā. Caraka’s compendium contains at
least three further doctrines. The first of those occurs in Sūtrasthāna 7.39–40:

From conception onward, some humans are seen to possess a suitable amount of bile,
wind, and phlegm; some [others are seen] to possess superabundant wind, bile, or
phlegm. Among these, those mentioned first are healthy, whereas those starting with
“possessing superabundant wind” are always diseased, since the natural constitution of
their body is taught to be based on a humor (doṣa).10

This passage states that there are humans with a humoral constitution based on a suitable
amount of all three humors, while the constitution of other humans is dominated by a single
one. Accordingly, in contradistinction to the initially discussed doctrine of a seven humoral
constitutions, the present doctrine acknowledges the existence of just four types of human
constitutions. Only humans with a constitution caused by a suitable amount of humors are
said to be truly healthy, while the other three types are regarded as always diseased
(sadātura).

10
samapittānilakaphāḥ kecid garbhādi mānavāḥ / dṛśyante vātalāḥ kecit pittalāḥ śleṣmalās tathā // teṣām
anāturāḥ pūrve vātalādyāḥ sadāturāḥ / doṣānuśayitā hy eṣāṃ dehaprakṛtir ucyate // (Carakasaṃhitā
Sūtrasthāna 7.39–40, p. 52a, l. 17–20). For a different translation of this passage, see Hartmut Scharfe, “The
Doctrine of the Three Humors in Traditional Indian Medicine and the Alleged Antiquity of Tamil Siddha
Medicine,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 119,4 (1999): 618b.
5
Two further doctrines concerning the natural constitution of humans are attested in Cara-
kasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 6.13. These are based on two partly contradictory concepts of health
and disease. They also differ from each other with regard to their perception of the natural
constitution of the body.

In this regard, some say that no living beings with a suitable [amount of] wind, bile, and
phlegm exist, because [all] men consume unsuitable food (i.e., food leading to an
unsuitable amount of humors in the bodily elements), and therefore some men have a
windy natural constitution, some have a bilious natural constitution, and some have a
phlegmatic natural constitution. This, however, is not correct. For which reason?
Because physicians consider (icchanti) a man with a suitable [amount of] wind, bile,
and phlegm healthy, and because the basic constitution [of man] is health, and because
health is the aim of the application of remedies (bheṣajapravṛtti) – this [application] is
essentially medical practice (ceṣṭārūpā).11

The just-quoted passage first refers to a doctrine of the humoral constitution according to
which the constitution of every human being is determined by the predominance of one of the
three humors. Accordingly, just three different natural constitutions exist, each one being
determined by one particular humor. This view is, however, rejected, because the existence of
natural constitutions dominated by a single humor contradicts the fundamental Āyurvedic
doctrine concerning the natural state of the human body as healthy on account of a suitable
amount of all three humors. Establishing a state in which a suitable amount of all three
humors occurs within the human body is, after all, the very aim of medical practice. The text
continues:

11
tatra kecid āhuḥ: “na samavātapittaśleṣmāṇo jantavaḥ santi, viṣamāhāropayogitvān manuṣyāṇām. tasmāc
ca vātaprakṛtayaḥ kecit, kecit pittaprakṛtayaḥ, kecit punaḥ śleṣmaprakṛtayo bhavanti” iti. tac cānupa-
pannam. kasmāt kāraṇāt? samavātapittaśleṣmāṇaṃ hy arogam icchanti bhiṣajaḥ, prakṛtiś* cārogyam,
ārogyārthā ca bheṣajapravṛttiḥ – sā ceṣṭārūpā**. (Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 6.13, p. 255a, l. 41–p.
255b, l. 5 critically edited on the basis of the ten genealogically decisive manuscripts Ad, Ap1d, B1d, B5d,
Ba1d, Chd, Jp1d, Kmd, P1ś, and P4d, and the printed edition Bo8E (see appendix below); selected variant
readings: * prakṛtiś ] Ad, Ap1d, B1d, B5d, Ba1d, Chd, Jp1d, Kmd, P1ś, P4d; yataḥ prakṛtiś Bo8E. ** ceṣṭārūpā ]
P1ś, B1d; ceṣṭarūpa Ad, Ap1d, B5d, Ba1d, Chd, Jp1d, Kmd, P4d, Bo8E. The reading ceṣṭārūpā suggests itself on
the basis of Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.77 which defines “activity” (pravṛtti) as the type of practice
(ceṣṭā) aiming at health and on the basis of Vimānasthāna 8.129 which defines pravṛtti as the application of
Āyurvedic remedies. For different translations of this passage based on the text as printed in Bo8E, see
Philipp A. Maas, “The Concepts of the Human Body and Disease in Classical Yoga and Āyurveda,” Wiener
Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 51 (2007/2008): 128 and Dominik Wujastyk “Post-Classical Indian
Traditions of Medical Debate and Argumentation: The Rogārogavāda of Vīreśvara,” eJournal of Indian
Medicine, 2 (2009): 72f.
6
 Therefore, men with a suitable amount of wind, bile, and phlegm exist, but those with a
windy natural constitution, those with a bilious natural constitution, or those with a
phlegmatic natural constitution do not exist. Men are said to have a specific humoral
constitution because of the superabundance of a specific humor. However, the state of
having a natural constitution cannot arise when the humors are modified. Therefore,
these are not natural constitutions. Windy, bilious, and phlegmatic men exist, but it
should be understood that they are not in their natural constitution. 12

Although this passage agrees in its conclusion with the passage from Sūtrasthāna 7.39–40
(quoted above) in that only persons with a suitable amount of humors are healthy, the
passages differ on the point of how the term prakṛti is to be correctly understood. Sūtrasthāna
7.39–40 acknowledges the existence of four different natural constitutions, whereas
Vimānasthāna 6.13 denies that different constitutions exist and affirms the existence of only
one prakṛti, viz. the natural healthy condition of a suitable amount of humors.

Vimānasthāna 6.13 indicates that the theory of the existence of three different humoral
constitutions was not readily accepted by the author (or by the redactors) of the
Carakasaṃhitā, because it is in conflict with the fundamental Āyurvedic conception of health
defined as a suitable amount of all three humors. Sūtrasthāna 7.39–40 and Vimānasthāna 6.13
show two different strategies to solve this conflict. In the first passage, the existence of three
constitutions caused by a single humor is admitted, but these constitutions are not accepted as
truly healthy states. The state of being healthy is reserved for the fourth constitution, i.e., the
one with a suitable amount of humors. The same holds good for Vimānasthāna 6, which, in
addition, denies the existence of basic constitutions resulting from single humors.

A different strategy to deal with the theory of three basic constitutions is reflected in
Vimānasthāna 8.95–100, where the assumption that three humoral constitutions exist appears
as part of the concept of seven basic constitutions. In this more comprehensive doctrine, the
constitutions dominated by a single humor retain their original relational values: a phlegmatic
constitution is the best among the single-humor constitutions, whereas a bilious constitution is
of a middle quality, and a windy constitution is of the lowest quality. However, even the
phlegmatic constitution is of a lower quality than the constitution caused by a suitable amount
of all three humors, which also surpasses any constitution determined by a mixture of two
humors, the quality of which remains unspecified. This theory appears slightly modified in the

12
tasmāt santi samavātapittaśleṣmāṇaḥ, na khalu santi vātaprakṛtayaḥ pittaprakṛtayaḥ śleṣmaprakṛtayo vā.
tasya tasya kila doṣasyādhikyāt sā sā doṣaprakṛtir ucyate manuṣyāṇām. na ca vikṛteṣu doṣeṣu prakṛti-
sthatvam upapadyate. tasmān naitāḥ prakṛtayaḥ santi. santi tu khalu vātalāḥ pittalāḥ śleṣmalāś ca, aprakṛ-
tisthās tu te jñeyāḥ (Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 6.13, p. 255b, l. 5–12).
7
Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā, where Vāgbhaṭa assigned the lowest position within a triple hierarchy
to constitutions established by a combination of two humors:

These [three humors determine] separately three basic constitutions, viz. the lower, the
medium, and the highest. The [constitution determined by a] suitable amount is the best
of all; those originating from two humors are the poorest.13

As far as I can see, the passage Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95–100 contains the only
reference to the theory of seven basic constitutions in the entire work. Therefore, and in view
of the fact that this reference is extremely brief and poorly integrated into its context, it is
possible that the doctrine of a sevenfold humoral constitution was introduced into the work in
the course of its complex transmission history. The relative simplicity of the style of writing
in the passage of Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95–124, which deals with the ten factors
that the physician has to consider in order to determine the physical strength of the patient,
may be taken as additional support of the hypothesis of the secondary nature of the sevenfold
humoral doctrine in the Carakasaṃhitā. If this hypothesis should match historical facts, the
insertion must have taken place at a very early stage in the transmission, because the pertinent
text passage appears with some variation in all known manuscripts.14 Possibly, it was the
famous redactor Dṛḍhabala who inserted the passage into the Carakasaṃhitā in the course of
his revision at some time during the period of 300–500 CE.15

Appendix: Caraksaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95–100

Critically edited text and translation

The critically edited text presented here is identical with the one in Karin Preisendanz, Philipp
A. Maas & Cristina Pecchia, A Critical Edition of Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna Chapter 8
(Vienna forthcoming). The present edition differs from the forthcoming one with regard to the
documentation of variant readings in the apparatus. Whereas the present edition reports
interesting variant readings only for a set of ten manuscripts and for the printed edition
published in 1941 by Jādavjī Trikamjī Ācārya, the critical apparatus of the forthcoming
edition documents interesting and acceptable readings from a set of 52 manuscripts and
several printed editions.

13
taiś ca tisraḥ prakṛtayo hīnamadhyottamāḥ pṛthak / samadhātuḥ samastāsu śreṣṭhā nindyā dvidoṣajāḥ //
(Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā Sūtrasthāna 1.10, p. 54).
14
For a critical edition of the passage of Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95–100, see Appendix 1 below.
15
For Dṛḍhabala’s date, see Meulenbeld, A History, 141.
8
The witnesses whose readings are presented here are the ten manuscripts that were identified
by Philipp A Maas as decisive for a reconstruction of a version of the text that resembles as
closely as possible the version of the allegedly final redaction of the Carakasaṃhitā by
Dṛḍhabala.16 More specifically, the testimony of these witnesses allows in many cases for the
reconstruction of the archetype A, or at least of the two hyparchetypes K and E (see the
stemma in figure 1 below).

Besides the readings of these manuscripts, readings of the Trikamji-edition are also recorded
in order to indicate the textual differences between the critically edited text and the text of this
quasi-standard edition.

Figure 1. A hypothetical stemma of Caraksaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8 for ten genealogically

decisive manuscripts.17

16
Philipp A. Maas, “Computer Aided Stemmatics. The Case of Fifty-Two Text Versions of Carakasaṃhitā
Vimānasthāna 8.67–157,” in Text Genealogy, Textual Criticism and Editorial Technique, ed. Jürgen
Hanneder & Philipp A. Maas = Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 52–53 (2009–2010), 33f. On a
further stage of redactorial intervention that must have occurred after Dṛḍhabala’s revision, see Philipp A.
Maas, “On What Became of the Carakasaṃhitā after Dṛḍhabala’s Revision,” eJournal of Indian Medicine 3
(2010): 1–22.
17
The stemma is identical with the rooted cladogram presented in Maas, Computer Aided Stemmatics, 95. On
the differentiation of text-genealogical useful and less-useful manuscripts of the Carakasaṃhitā, see
Cristina Pecchia, “Transmission-specific (In)utility, or Dealing with Contamination: Samples from the
Textual Tradition of the Carakasaṃhitā,” in Text Genealogy, Textual Criticism and Editorial Technique ed.
Jürgen Hanneder & Philipp A. Maas = Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 52–53 (2009–2010), p.
121–159.
9
The critical apparatus records variant readings in lemmata that quote the critically edited text.
These quotations, printed in bold and terminated by a closing square bracket, are preceded by
the number of the line from which the critically edited text is extracted into the lemma. Next,
all sigla of witnesses reading the critically edited text are listed. Following a semicolon, the
(first) variant to the lemma text appears, which again precedes the list of sigla of witnesses
that support this variant reading.

In the critical apparatus, the following abbreviations and symbols are used:

om. omits text missing from the respective witness(es)

(vl) varia lectio variant reading recorded in the printed edition Bo8E
xy wavy underline the reconstruction of the archetypal reading is uncertain

10
Critical Edition and Translation of Caraksaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.95–100

95. In this regard, these factors beginning with “natural constitution” are the following ones:
The body of the embryo depends upon the nature of sperm and menses, upon the nature of the
time [of conception], upon the nature of the womb, upon the nature of the food and lifestyle
of the mother,18 and upon the nature of the modifications of the gross elements. The fetus is
related to exactly the same superabundant humor – either individually or in combination [with
another one] – to which these [factors] are related. Accordingly, it is taught that humans have
various humoral constitutions from conception onward. Therefore, some constitutions are
windy, some are bilious, some are phlegmatic, some are mixed, and in some constitutions the

18
On the reading prakṛtiṃ mātur āhāra- which is preferable to its alternative prakṛtim āturāhāra, although the
latter was probably the reading of the archetype, see Philipp A. Maas, “On What to Do with a Stemma –
Towards a Critical Edition of Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8,” in Medical Texts and Manuscripts in Indian
Cultural History, ed. Dominik Wujastyk, Anthony Cerulli & Karin Preisendanz (New Delhi: Manohar
Publishers 2013) 45–49.
11
humors occur [in a] suitable [amount]. We shall indeed describe their characteristics.

96. Phlegm is known to be unctuous, smooth, soft, sweet, solid, viscid, slow, rigid, heavy,
cold, smeary, and clear. Because of its unctuousness, men with a phlegmatic constitution
possess unctuous limbs. Because of its smoothness, their limbs are smooth. Because of its
softness, their body is pleasant to behold, very tender and bright. Because of its sweetness,
they have a lot of sperm, frequently have intercourse, and produce many children. Because of
its solidness, their body is solid, compact, and steady. Because of its viscidness, their whole
body is well-nourished and full. Because if its slowness, their behavior, food intake, and
speech are slow. Because of its rigidness, they are not quick in their undertakings, are not
quickly agitated, and not quickly diseased. Because of its heaviness, their motion is firm,
regulated, and determined. Because of its coldness, they are not much affected by hunger and
thirst, heat and sweat. Because of its smeariness, they have very firm and solid tendons and
joint. And in the same way, because of its clearness, they have clear eyes and faces, and they
have a clear complexion and a clear voice. Men with a phlegmatic constitution, because they
12
are in this way endowed with qualities, are strong, rich, learned, energetic, and long-lived.

97. Bile is hot, sharp, liquid, stinking and sour and pungent. Because of its heat, men with a
bilious constitution cannot bear heat; their body is neither pleasant, nor very tender, nor
bright. They have many freckles, blemishes, and blisters, suffer from hunger and thirst, suffer
from the fault of getting early [in their life] wrinkles, grey hair, and a bald head. They have
mostly thin, little, or reddish hair of their beard, their body, and their head. Because of its
sharpness, they are sharp in their enterprises, possess sharp bodily fires, eat and drink a lot,
are unable to bear hardships, and they are mordacious. Because of its liquidity, they have
loose and soft tendons, joints and muscle flesh, and they discharge a lot of sweat, urine, and
feces. Because of its bad smell, they diffuse widely a stinking body smell from their breast,
armpits, mouth, and head. Because it is sour and pungent, they have little sperm, rarely have
intercourse, and have few children. Men with a bilious constitution, because they are in this
way endowed with qualities, are of middling power and of a middling life span. They possess
general and practical knowledge, wealth and means of subsistence.

13
98. Wind, however, is dry, light, movable, manifold, quick, cold, rough, and transparent.
Because of its dryness, men with a windy constitution have dry, thin, and short bodies; their
voice is always dry, thin, interrupted, obstructed, and infirm, and they are wakeful. Because of
its lightness, they walk, behave, eat, and speak unsteadily. Because of its moveability, their
joints, bones, eyebrows, jaws, lips, tongue, head, shoulders, hands, and feet are unsteady.
Because of its manifoldness, their chattering, their sinews, and the ramifications of their tubes
are manifold. Because of its quickness, their undertakings, agitations, and diseases come
quickly and fiercely. They quickly become frightened, attached, and detached. They
understand what they hear and memorize little. Because of its coldness, they cannot bear the
cold. They always feel cold, tremble, and are stiff. Because of its roughness, they have rough
hair of the head, hair of the beard, nails, teeth, faces, hands, feet and limbs. Because of its
14
clearness, the parts of their limbs are split, and they always produce sound with their joints
when they move. These men with a windy constitution, because they are in this way endowed
with qualities, are mostly weak, they do not live long, produce little offspring, and have little
means and little wealth.

99. Men with mixed characteristics arise from a mixture [of humors].

100. Men with a suitable amount [of humors] are endowed with all qualities. In this way he
should examine [the patient] according to his natural constitution.

References

Sigla of witnesses for the Carakasaṃhitā

d
Superscripts Devanāgarī; ś Śāradā; E Printed Edition
Ad Alwar, Rajasthan Oriental Research Institute 2498
d
Ap1 Alipur, Bhogilal Leherchand Institute of Indology 5283
B1d Bikaner, Rajasthan Oriental Research Institute 1566
B5d Bikaner, Anup Sanskrit Library 3996
Ba1d Baroda, Oriental Institute 12489
Bo8E Text of the Carakasaṃhitā as printed in Trikamji 1941
Chd Chandigarh, Lal Chand Research Library 2315
Jp1d Jaipur, Maharaja Sawai Man Singh II Museum 2068
Kmd Kathmandu, Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project E-40553
P1ś Pune, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 555 of 1875-76
P4d Pune, Anandashram 1546
15
Printed Sources

Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā. See Vogel 1965.

Bhelasaṃhitā. … Text with English Translation, Commentary and Critical Notes. Ed. by
Priya Vrat Sharma. Haridas Ayurveda Series 8. Varanasi: Chaukhama Visvabharati,
2000.

Carakasaṃhitā. For Vimānasthāna 8, see Preisendanz, Maas and Pecchia forthcoming; for
other parts of the work, see Trikamji 1941.

Suśrutasaṃhitā. … with the Nibandhasaṅgraha Commentary of Dalhanāchārya and the

Nyāyacandrikā Pañjikā of Gayadāsāchārya on Nidānasthāna. (Reprint of the ed.
Bombay 1933). Ed. by Jādavji Trikamji Āchārya from the Beginning to the 9th Adhyāya
of Cikitsāsthāna and the Rest by Nārāyaṇ Rām Āchārya. Chaukhamba Ayurvijnan
Granthamala 42. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashan, 2003.

Lienhard, Siegfried. “Konstitution und Charakter nach den Lehren der altindischen Medizin.”
Centaurus 6 (1959): 82–93.

Maas, Philipp A. “The Concepts of the Human Body and Disease in Classical Yoga and
Āyurveda.” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 51 (2007/2008): 125–162.

Maas, Philipp A. “On What Became of the Carakasaṃhitā after Dṛḍhabala’s Revision.”
eJournal of Indian Medicine 3 (2010): 1–22.

Maas, Philipp A. “Computer Aided Stemmatics. The Case of Fifty-Two Text Versions of
Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.67–157.” In Text Genealogy, Textual Criticism and
Editorial Technique, edited by Jürgen Hanneder and Philipp A. Maas = Wiener
Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 52–53 (2009–2010): 63–119.

Maas, Philipp A. “On What to Do with a Stemma – Towards a Critical Edition of

Carakasaṃhitā Vimānasthāna 8.” In Medical Texts and Manuscripts in Indian Cultural
History, edited by Dominik Wujastyk, Anthony Cerulli and Karin Preisendanz, 29–61.
New Delhi: Manohar Publishers, 2013.

Meulenbeld, Gerrit Jan. A History of Indian Medical Literature. Vol. 1A. Groningen Oriental
Studies 15. Groningen: Forsten, 1999.
16
Pecchia, Cristina. “Transmission-specific (In)utility or Dealing with Contamination: Samples
from the Textual Tradition of the Carakasaṃhitā.” In Text Genealogy, Textual Criticism
and Editorial Technique, edited by Jürgen Hanneder and Philipp A. Maas = Wiener
Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 52–53 (2009–2010): 121–159.

Preisendanz, Karin, Maas, Philipp. A. and Pecchia, Cristina. A Critical Edition of Caraka-
saṃhitā Vimānasthāna Chapter 8. Vienna forthcoming.

Scharfe, Hartmut. “The Doctrine of the Three Humors in Traditional Indian Medicine and the
Alledged Antiquity of Tamil Siddha Medicine.” Journal of the American Oriental Society
119,4 (1999): 609–629.

Trikamji, J. (1941). Caraka Saṃhitā by Agniveśa. Revised by Caraka and Dḍhabala. With the
Āyurveda-Dīpikā Commentary of Cakrapāṇidatta. Ed. by Jādavjī Trikamjī Ācārya.
Krishnadas Ayurveda Series 66. Varanasi: Krishnadas Academy, 2000 (repr. of the ed.
Bombay 1941).

Vogel, Claus. Vāgbhaṭa’s Aṣṭāṅgahṛdayasaṃhitā. The First Seven Chapters of its Tibetan
Version. Ed. and Rendered into English …. Abhandlungen für die Kunde des
Morgenlandes 38,2. Mainz: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft – Wiesbaden:
Steiner (in Kommission), 1965.

Wujastyk, Dominik. The Roots of Ayurveda. Selections from Sanskrit Medical Writings.
Translated with an Introduction and Notes. 3. ed. London, New York, etc.: Penguin
Books, 2003

Wujastyk, Dominik. “Post-Classical Indian Traditions of Medical Debate and Argumentation:

The Rogārogavāda of Vīreśvara.” eJournal of Indian Medicine, 2 (2009): 67–81.

Zysk, Kenneth Gregory. “New Age Āyurveda or What Happens to Indian Medicine when it
Comes to America.” Traditional South Asian Medicine 6 (2001): 10–26.

17