The naming of plants is an extremely interesting topic with historical and cultural significance. Nomenclature and classification of a plant is very essential for proper identification and to distinguish a particular species from others. In Ayurveda, methodology of nomenclature is multinomial. Though the Sanskrit literature have provided accurate description, confusion in the identification of botanical sources of these drugs was probably brought about by poor understanding of the Sanskrit literature and misinterpretation by various commentators. This confusion has become confounded by the existence of several names for one drug and several drugs having one common name. Similarly, there is lot of confusion in the nomenclature of latakaranj and its synonyms i.e. interpreted as latakaranj and karanj separately and in common. In this present study, different nighantu and samhitas were thoroughly studied to analyze and compile the occurance of latakranj in various ganas and vargas (groups based on therapeutic effects, morphology etc.) described there. Such a compilation study regarding nomenclature, etymology and taxonomy of latakaranj from classics and contemporary literature will help researchers, teachers and students to understand this drug with more clarity.
Key words: Latakaranj, Nighantu, Samhita, Nomenclature, Taxonomy, classification, Caesalpinia crista
|
