A Transliteration and Study of The Saroj Sangha, Saroj Songkroh and Sarot Kamklon Manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives: The Dhatuwivorn scripture, a fundamental manuscript required for the study of Thai traditional medicine practitioners, references the Saroj manuscript. While Vajirayan Wiset: Paet Mo, authored by Prince Srisaowabhang, identified the Saroj manuscript as one of the introductory texts that should be studied by TTM practitioners. These historical references reflected the significance of the Saroj manuscript within the traditional medical knowledge system. It was found that the National Library of Thailand had preserved this manuscript, including Saroj Sangha (Volumes 1 – 2), Saroj Songkroh (Volume 1), and Sarot Kamklon (Volume 1). Therefore, this study aimed to examine, transliterate, and comparatively analyze these manuscripts in order to expand the body of knowledge on Thai Traditional medical literature and to provide reliable reference materials for teaching, curriculum development, academic research, and future clinical applications.

Methods: This study employed documentary research. Four ancient manuscripts related to the Saroj manuscript were identified and collected from the Manuscripts and Inscriptions group of the National Library, Fine Arts Department. Facsimile copies of the original manuscripts were prepared, and the texts were transliterated into contemporary Thai. The transliterated manuscripts were subsequently analyzed using content analysis. Their medical knowledge, textual structure, similarities and differences among the manuscripts, and variations in recorded passages were systematically compared. The major findings were then interpreted through comparative textual analysis and discussed in relation to other Thai traditional medical manuscripts.

Results: It was found that Saroj Sangha (Volume 1 – 2) and Saroj Songkroh (Volume 1) were recorded in both Thai and Khmer–Thai scripts, using the Thai and Pali languages, whereas Sarot Kamklon, Volume 1, was written entirely in Thai script and the Thai language. The Saroj manuscript were found to comprise ten principal categories: (1) causes of disease (2) Samutthan of disease, (3) medicinal tastes, (4) characteristics of the body, (5) harmful factors that weakened the body's digestive fire, (6) Asurinthanyan Dhat, (7) Various types of fevers, (8) the four categories of blood, (9) Pikat Ya (herbal classification systems) and the Benjamatra (five measures), and (10) the tastes of the earth (Pathawi) and water (Apo) elements as manifested in medicinal plants. Several sections contained medical knowledge that had not previously been documented in other extant Thai Traditional manuscripts. In addition, two previously unreported Pikat Ya, namely Trisukhonthashat and Jatukhanthashat, were identified.

Discussion: The term Saroj literally meant "lotus" and symbolically represented the flourishing and dissemination of medical knowledge. The manuscript emphasized five fundamental principles—season, time, disease, medicinal taste, and age. Without this knowledge, one cannot properly prepare medicine for royal service. The textual evidence and intertextual references suggested that Saroj Sangha had been compiled earlier than Dhatuwivorn, and that Dhatuwivorn had incorporated or adapted portions of its contents from Saroj Sangha. The findings also demonstrated that the Saroj manuscripts shared substantial conceptual relationships with other Thai Traditional medical manuscripts. One notable example involved the description of harmful factors affecting the body's elemental balance and weakening the digestive fire. The disorder known as Ama Achin, which was attributed to the consumption of raw food, was described as causing constipation, urinary retention, chest pain, and excessive salivation. The Saroj manuscript recommended emetic therapy using boiled Acorus calamus (Wan Nam) with salt, which corresponded closely with descriptions recorded in Dhatu Banjop, where putrid fish–smelling stools were associated with disturbances of the water element (Apo Samutthan). Although several sections of the Saroj manuscripts resembled those found in Dhatuwivorn, important differences were identified in medicinal formulations and the prescribed duration of fever diseases. Saroj Sangha, Volume 2, agreed with Samutthan Winitchai by assigning disease durations of seven days for Pitta, ten days for Vata, and twelve days for Semha. In contrast, Sarot Kamklon and Dhatuwivorn assigned ten days for Pitta, seven days for Vata, and twelve days for Semha. Furthermore, twenty–eight medicinal formulations differed among the manuscripts. These variations appeared to have resulted from the addition or omission of herbal ingredients or from scribal transmission errors. For example, Dhatuwivorn recorded the phrase "Triphala Mak Pha Ao," whereas Sarot Kamklon recorded "Triphala Maka Ao." Such textual variations altered the composition of the medicinal formula and might have influenced its therapeutic effectiveness.

Conclusion and Recommendation The study and transliteration of the Saroj manuscripts revealed previously undocumented medical knowledge that contributed substantially to Thai Traditional Medicine education, manuscript studies, and clinical practice. Further investigations are warranted for the medicinal formulations that exhibited textual variations. Future studies should examine their formulation structure, therapeutic potential, and the rationale underlying their formulation. In addition, scientific investigations of these formulations, together with the newly identified Pikat Ya, should be undertaken to evaluate their therapeutic efficacy and to strengthen the evidence base supporting the clinical application of Thai Traditional medicinal formulations.