Flora (3): Parts of the Plants

Describing the various parts of the plants, Amarakośa gives a general statement on their gender thus–

dvihīnaṃ prasave sarvaṃ harītakyādayaḥ striyām |

Kṣīrasvāmin expands this in his commentary. While a shrub, creeper or tree can fall into any gender, their flowers, fruits or roots should be employed only in nueter gender–

vakṣyamāṇaṃ badaryaśvatthādi vṛkṣalatauṣadhijātīyaṃ strīpuṃsādiliṅgamapi prasūyamāne puṣpe phale mūle ca vartamānaṃ dvābhyāṃ hīnaṃ napuṃsakaliṅgaṃ jñeyamityarthaḥ |

Various parts of a tree are described in Amarakośa, like–śākhā–branch, mūla–root, sāra–pith, Udbid–sprout, mukula–bud, and so on. Those terms with the remarks of Kṣīrasvāmin are presented here:

(a) Udbhid (II. 4. 4; p. 80)–

[Sprout:]

Anything that sprouts or germinates is called udbhid according to Amarakośa Kṣīrasvāmin adds another term praroha to the same–

udbhidyate udbhit praroho'pi |

(b) Śiphā (II. 4. 11; p. 82)–

[Arial roots:]

The roots hanging down from the branches are called śiphā. Kṣīrasvāmin defines the same in the words of Upādhyāya thus–

“The arial roots, one of the striking feature of the ficus family are termed śiphās”–

ādho rohanti śākhāḥ śiphāḥ śiphākhyā śākhāvaroho'śvatthādirityupādhyāyaḥ |

(c) Kisalayam (II. 4. 14; p. 83)–

[Tender shoot:]

Kṣīrasvāmin adds navapatram and pravāla to denote a shoot—

navapatraṃ pravālākhyaṃ |

(d) Stabaka (II. 4. 16; p. 83)–

[Bunch of flower:]

Guluñca is the other term given by Kṣīrasvāmin for stabaka—

guluñcho'pi |

(e) Kalikā (II. 4. 16; p. 83)–

[Unblown flower:]

Kṣīrasvāmin explains it as the gradual blossoming of the bud (the bud which is slightly opening)—

sūkṣmā kaliḥ kalikā kalyate śabdyate kalikā, īṣadvikasitā kalikā |

(f) Mukula (II. 4. 16; p. 83)–

[An opening bud:]

Kṣīrasvāmin explains it as the next stage to kalikā–

muñcati kalikātvam mukulaḥ |

In this context Kṣīrasvāmin observes that some like Durga and other lexicographers do not differentiate the different stages in blossoming of a bud and consider mukula, kalikā, kuḍmala and jālaka as synonyms–

durgādyāstvavāntarabhedaṃ na manyante—mukulākhyā tu kalikā kuḍmalaṃ jālakaṃ tathā |

After discussing taxonomy and external morphology, Amarakośa begins his descriptions about the various families of trees, creepers, shrubs tubers, roots and herbs, greens, reeds and grasses. This sequential order is not adhered to strictly. Modern Botany has a lot of similarity with these descriptions. Yet certain classifications like Vāri varga which includes all the hydrophytes and acquatic fauna seem to be apt since, their dependency with water is obvious.

Amarasiṃha seems to have registered every species of plant kingdom with cogency. Kṣīrasvāmin's commentary aptly supports his views and also adds a new impetus to the different aspects of Botany.

The other synonyms of every tree in Amarakośa are added by Kṣīrasvāmin from Dhanvantari Nighaṇṭu quoting them appropriately. Kṣīrasvāmin remarks that the words like Keśavāvāsa, maṅgalya and others found in Dhanvantari Nighaṇṭu as synonyms of Aśvattha are not mentioned in Amarakośa as they are seldom used–

keśavāvāsamaṅgalyādayo'trālpaprayogatvānnoktāḥ evamuttaratra |

The list of trees and their other synonyms from Dhanvantari Nighaṇṭu is worth observing as these synonyms are actually the morphology of the tree or mythological aspect as is seen in the synonyms of Aśvattha dealt with below. This section provides only the highlighting features mentioned by Kṣīrasvāmin The additional names of trees from Dhanvantari Nighaṇṭu^[1] can be taken up individually for a special study.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

See, Appendix -III