help sought to indetify mandukavasanja

[veeranarayana Pandurangi]

yes. thanks. it seems that SL is mentioning the same.
my passage is मण्डूकवसाञ्जनदुष्टनयनजन्यभ्रमस्य अदुष्टनयनजप्रत्यक्षेणैव
निवृत्तिः। त्वगादिना काठिन्योपलम्भेपयुक्तदोषदुष्टनयनेन वंशोरगदर्शनादिति
भावः। गुरुचन्द्रिका on अद्वैतसिद्धि vol.1. p. 256. and this refers to some
Nyaya texts where it is discussed in detail.
This passage is more or less similar in other texts also.
but I am confused that it is unlikely that a person will aply मण्डूकवसा to
eyes. and this context is mentioning some casual defects in senses. Hence I
though that it maybe a kind of discease.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Dominic Goodall
<dominic.goodall at gmail.com>wrote:

> I haven't seen your passage and so can't judge, but how about simply taking
> the expression literally: `ointment prepared with the fat of a frog' ? Such
> an ointment might have the magical effect of confounding the senses.
>
> Such magical ointments involving frog's fat (of frog's marrow?) are
> prepared (though for rather different magical goals) in the
> Ma~nju"sriimuulakalpa (chapter 41 after verse 3), in the Artha"saastra
> (14.2), in the Tantrasadbhaavatantra (in a prose section between 23.276 and
> 277 in Mark Dyczkowski's e-text), in Garu.dapura.na<http://garu.dapura.na/>1.182.13, in K.semendra's Kalaavilaasa 9.12,
> and in chapter 3 of the Guhyasuutra of the Ni"svaasatattvasa.mhitaa (where
> frog's fat is to be combined with a chameleon that has been buried for a
> month and with sharp oil (i.e. mustard-seed oil?) and then rubbed on the
> legs to enable one to go great distances and return before sunset):
>
> tata.h karmma prakurviita g.rhiitvaa k.rkalaa"sakam|
> bhaa.n.dasthan nikhaned bhuumau mantre.naivaabhimantritam|| 3:48||
> maase puur.n.ne samaaddh.rtya ma.n.duukava"sayaa yutam|
> ka.tutailavi<<liptan tu>> "satadhaa caabhimantritam|| 3:49||
> paadapralepa.m k.rtvaa tu gacchate pa~nca pa~nca vaa|
> <<anastamitamaaditye>> punar aagacchate drutam|| 3:50||
>
>
> Perhaps the source of your passage is "Slokavaarttika, spho.tavaada 43 ?
>
> SPH41ab madhura.m tiktaruupe.na "sveta.m piitatayaa tathaa
> SPH41cd g.rh.nanti pittado.se.na vi.saya.m bhraantacetasa.h ||
> SPH42ab tathaa vegena dhaavanto naavyaaruu.dhaa"s ca gacchata.h
> SPH42cd parvataadiin vijaananti bhrame.na bhramata"s ca taan ||
> SPH43ab ma.n.duukavasayaaktaak.saa va.m"saanuragabuddhibhi.h
> SPH43cd vyaktyalpatvamahattvaabhyaa.m saamaanya.m ca tadaa"srtayam ||
> SPH44ab g.rh.nanti yadvadetaani nimittagraha.naad vinaa
> SPH44cd vya~njakasthamabudhvaiva vya"ngye bhraantir bhavi.syati ||
>
> Dominic Goodall
> Pondicherry Centre,
> Ecole française d'Extrême-Orient ("French School of Asian Studies"),
>
>
>
>
> On 29 Dec 2008, at 08:05, veeranarayana Pandurangi wrote:
>
> Dear Freinds
>> In adavaitasiddhi and other texts (Gadadharas प्रतिबध्यप्रतिबन्धकभव and
>> Dinakari) a certain मण्डूकवसाञ्जन (defect of senses) what exactly this
>> mean?
>> how does it work? I want some reference from ayurveda or othter texts.
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> --
>> Veeranarayana N.K. Pandurangi
>> Head, Dept of Darshanas,
>> Yoganandacharya Bhavan,
>> Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Rajasthan Samskrita University, Madau, post
>> Bhankrota, Jaipur, 302026.
>>
>


-- 
Veeranarayana N.K. Pandurangi
Head, Dept of Darshanas,
Yoganandacharya Bhavan,
Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Rajasthan Samskrita University, Madau, post
Bhankrota, Jaipur, 302026.