वृक्षायुर्वेद (सुरपाल - प्राचीन भारतीय पादप-विज्ञान, कृषि एवं वृक्ष-चिकित्सा सटीक)

Introduction
Vrikshayurveda of Surapala, an ancient Sanskrit text on
the science of plant life was a mere name until few years
ago. The names of both the text and the author were
preserved by tradition. The actual text, however, was
unavailable.
Brhatsamhita of Varahamihira of the sixth century deals
with widely ranging subjects such as astronomy,
physics, geology, horticulture, archaeology, etc. It
contains a chapter titled Vrikshayurveda. It also contains
chapters on allied subjects such as divining
groundwater, productivity and non-productivity of land
as indicated by natural vegetation, etc. However,
beyond establishing the antiquity of the sastra, it cannot
give any definite clues to any full-fledged, independent
texts on Vrikshayurveda. In the opening verse itself
Varahamihira states, "After studying various sastras of
the ancient sages and after being convinced about their
authenticity, I propose to explain the same in a clear
manner in this composition which is neither too brief
nor too exhaustive" (Brhatsamhita Chapter 1, verse 2).
This proves beyond doubt that the science of
Vrikshayurveda was well developed even prior to the
sixth century. Unfortunately, not a single text of that
antiquity has been preserved.
An anthological compilation of Sarngadharapaddhati
(written by Sarngadhara), belonging to the thirteenth
century, is yet another ancient text which in its chapter
"Upavanavinoda" deals with an allied subject, viz.,
"arbori-horticulture". The chapter brings under its fold
such topics as planting, soil, nourishment of plants, plant
diseases and remedies, groundwater resources, etc. Thus
it shares with Vrikshayurveda of Surapala almost all the
topics. Many verses are identical and several others,
although worded differently have an identical content.
The writer concludes the chapter with a note: "These
are from different sciences about Vrikshayurveda." Thus
like Varahamihira, he too, admits that his work is a
compilation in which information from various texts on
Vrikshayurveda is culled together. In spite of the striking
resemblance between Upavanavinoda and
Vrikshayurveda of Surapala, the former cannot be
considered as a complete and independent text on
Vrikshayurveda.
The hopes of tracing any independent text of
Vrikshayurveda were given up by scholars. Thus
Majumdar (1935) who has edited and translated
Upavanavinoda says in his introduction, "The science
of plant life, Vrikshayurveda, was a distinctly
comprehensive science, a branch of which dealing with
the construction and maintenance of gardens, is only
referred to here. It is pertinent to enquire, where is this
science—the Vrikshayurveda? It must have been there
at one time, but it is, like the Dhanurveda or the science
of archery and many other sciences, practically lost. A
reconstruction at the present stage of our knowledge is
out of the question...."
In their history of Sanskrit literature, Dasgupta and De
(1947) refer to a Surapala while discussing the date of
Subandhu, the author of Vasavadatta, a Sanskrit prose
romance of the seventh century, but conclude that the
reference is not sufficiently recognized and traced. Gray
(1962), in his edition of Vasavadatta, refers to Surapala
35