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

manuscript gives no clue to the date or place of the
author. The subject deserves an in-depth study;
however, any attempt at fixing a date of an author is
bound to be at best a conjecture for want of definite
proof. King Bhimapala, mentioned in the colophon as
Surapala's patron, is known in traditional history as the
son of Trilocanapala. However, there were two kings of
that name belonging to the eleventh century, one who
ruled Lata (Central Gujarat, India) and the other Punjab
(in Pakistan).
The reference to "Siddhayoga" in an epithet describing
Surapala in the colophon is open to several
interpretations. An ayurvedic work "Siddhayoga" is
ascribed to "Vrnda" (for which reason the work is also
known as "Vrndamadhava"). If Surapala had gained
fame due to this work, it could be by helping its
propagation by writing a commentary on it. This is quite
probable in view of the fact that Surapala was a
prominent physician of his time. The above said
"Siddhayoga" belongs to the fourteenth century and
according to some scholars there is no difficulty in
placing Surapala in that century. The reference under
discussion uses plural for "Siddhayoga" which has to
be explained for promoting the theory. Alternately,
Surapala has to be credited with many texts on
"Siddhayoga" himself. All this, however, would only
be a guesswork.
Surapala's language, style, vocabulary, and expression
also do not help much in providing any clue to his time
or place. As for external evidence of Surapala's time, it
is reasonable to expect his name to be cited in the other
texts of Vrikshayurveda. In the absence of such texts,
however, we have only the other two works which deal
with the same topics. Between the two, Brhatsamhita is
too ancient and Upavanavinoda does not mention him.
Keith (1929) places him after 1300 AD. Sarngadhara's
work (Upavanavinoda) at the most can be contemporary
to it and it is difficult to expect Surapala to be cited in it.
Interestingly, it is in Subandhu's Vasavadatta—a
Sanskrit prose romance of the seventh century—that we
come across the name Surapala. In one of his punning
allusions (Subandhu claims special credit for his double
meaning expressions), while describing the Vindhya
forest, Subandhu uses an epithet "Surapalavrttimiva
darsitaganikarikam", meaning "the forest revealed (had
in plenty) the trees named ganikarika (arani or the fire-
producing tree of the Vedas, Premna serratifolia Linn.,
syn. P. integrifolia Linn.) just as (incidentally) Surapala's
vrtti (brief commentary) too revealed ganikarika". In this
superficial or verbal resemblance of Surapala with the
forest he is said to have revealed, i.e., identified the tree
ganikarika. This might be a reference to some Surapala
who through his writings or commentary could throw
light on the plant. At least, there is a reasonable ground
to accept such a proposition. An ancient work on plants
mentioning "ganikarika" may have existed on which
Surapala might have written a vrtti and might have
earned credit for identifying or throwing more light on
the plant. Even though it is a reasonable conjecture, the
reference must have been to some other Surapala of the
seventh century. Besides the word "Surapala" can also
be interpreted as "the ruler of the Gods—Indra" as has
been done by some scholars. Many scholars, however,
accept "Surapala" as a proper noun and translate the
text accordingly adding a note that the reference to
Surapala cannot be traced.
It is worthwhile to set aside the opinion which
places Surapala in the fourteenth century in order to
38