Astanga Hrudaya
ऋषिप्रणीते प्रीतिश्चेन्मुक्त्वा चरकसुश्रुतौ । भेडाद्याः किं न पठ्यन्ते तस्माद्ग्राह्यं सुभाषितम् ॥८८॥
If there is love for the works of sages only, then why don’t people read the works of Bheda etc. keeping away from the works of Charaka and Sushruta? So, any good word (text) should be accepted. Notes- Through the above verses, the author makes an appeal to the scholars of Ayurveda of his day, to accept his books as reliable texts of Ayurveda, suitable for study. Similar verses are found in Ashtanga sangraha, also. This appeal makes it imperative for us to assume that Vaghbata had not attained an authoritative status during his lifetime and that his works were not accepted as scriptures of Ayurveda. The reason for this was the strong view among the tradition-bound/orthodox Ayurveda scholars of that period “that the words of Rishi (sages) only are reliable, and Arsha granthas (works written by sages) only are to be studied”. Vagbhata was not Rshi (sage) but a common man, that too with greater leaning towards Buddhism- a non-vedic religion. Hence Vagbhata inspite of his great familial reputation was not accepted as an authority. This must have hurt the feelings of Vagbhata greatly. So, he admonishes those who blindly adhere to the habit of accepting only the works of sages though some such works are not worthy and of not accepting any work simply because it is written by the common man, ignoring its merits. Hence his appeal to cast –off prejudices, study his books and appreciate their utility. Vagbhata’s appeal brought the desired change, though after some time, for we find Vagbhata and his works being named and referred to by authors later than 8th century A.D.
english translation
RSipraNIte prItizcenmuktvA carakasuzrutau । bheDAdyAH kiM na paThyante tasmAdgrAhyaM subhASitam ॥88॥
hk transliteration by Sanscript