पञ्चसिद्धान्तिका (आचार्य वराहमिहिर - सूर्य, रोमक, पौलिश, वासिष्ठ एवं पितामह सिद्धान्त)

INTRODUCTION XVII
corrupt. The numbering of the verses is also erratic. Several verses are broken in their middle and
verse numbers are interposed. At times the last line of a verse is continued with the beginning let-
ters of the next verse, entailing at times, the beginnings and ends being half-words. (see III. 1 and
2). The manuscript seems to be the handiwork of a good-handed scribe from a highly corrupt orig-
inal. Corrections by a modern hand in lighter ink is seen at places.
Pingree suspects that "this manuscript seems to be a copy of B – perhaps that used by Thibaut
and Dvivedin." (Introduction, p.20).
B₃. Ms. No. 7165 of the Oriental Institute, Baroda. This manuscript in 33 folios contains the
complete work. A post-colophonic statement says that it was copied in Saṁ,. 1928/śaka 1793 (A.D.
1872) by Uttamarāma Durlabharāma, a resident of Amadāvāda (Ahmedabad). The writing is read-
able but corrupt readings persist. Verse numbers are written for the first chapter, but not for the
later chapters. Numbers expressed in the verses are written also in digits in many places.
A few more manuscripts of Pañcasiddhāntikā are known to exist (or to have existed) but could not
be used for the present edition. They are :

1. Ms. No. 288 of the Bombay University. This is at present missing in the Library. Pingree has
   used this manuscript. In 32 folios it contains the full text of PS. It was copied in Saṁ. 1928, corres-
   ponding to AD. 1871, by Nāthurāma Pārika.
2. Ms. No. 6288 of the India Office, London, (Buhler 268) described in the A Catalogue of Skt. and
   Pkt. Mss. in the India Office Library, vol. II by A.B. Keith. This is a copy of our Ms. A₁, copied in Saṁ
   1936, Śaka 1802 (A.D. 1879). We have not used it nor has Pingree.
   About still other manuscripts, Pingree states : "Besides these seven manuscripts, there existed in
   1890 the manuscript belonging to J.B. Modak of Thāṇā which was copied from B (our B₁), and we
   know of a manuscript (no. 6674) of the Pañcasiddhāntikā in the Ānandāśrama in Poona. The man-
   uscripts, recorded as the property of Sjt. Pushpachandra Sarma Daloi of Helach in Assam and of
   the Arsha Library in Vijayanagara (no. 506), probably contain the Bhāsvatī of Śatānanda, which is
   sometimes confused with our text." (Introduction, p. 21).
   C. The emended text of Thibaut-Sudhakara Dvivedi, as printed in the right hand columns of
   their edition. On this Thibaut says (Introduction, pp. lx-lxi):
   "The present edition of the Pañcasiddhāntikā is founded on two manuscripts belonging to
   the Bombay Government. The text of the better one of these two Manuscripts is reproduced
   in the left hand columns of our edition, while the foot notes give all the more important diffe-
   rent readings from the other Manuscript... the emended one as given in the right hand col-
   umns of the edition.
   "What, in the attempt to reconstruct the text of an astronomical or mathematical work, has
   chiefly to be kept in view, is of course, to arrive at rules which are capable of being proved
   mathematically. This consideration has, in more than one place, led us to introduce changes
   even where such appeared hardly to be required by the external form of the traditional text."
   Notwithstanding the wild emendations which Thibaut-Sudhakar Dvivedi have made, at times,
   their emended readings have been recorded as C in the footnotes of the present edition.
   D. The edition, Translation and Notes of TS by O. Neugebauer and D. Pingree, (2 vols.,
   Kopenhagen, 1970). Pingree edits and translates the PS, while Neugebauer offers the Notes. All