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

I.3 I. INTRODUCTION OF THE WORK 5
the Paitāmaha, there are several works now extant claiming Pitāmaha or Brahmā for their author.
One is the Brahma Siddhānta given by Brahmā to Nārada, which follows the ‘Modern’ Sūrya Siddhānta
in its constants. Another is the Pitāmaha Siddhānta, forming a part of Viṣṇudharmottara, which has
been taken by Brahmagupta as the basis of his Brāhma-Sphuṭa Siddhānta. A third one, now lost, is
the basis of the Āryabhaṭīya. But the Paitāmaha of our author is different from all these.
As for the Lāṭadeva mentioned here, he is the Lāṭācārya referred to in XV.18 of this work, for,
there, the author says that this Ācārya has taken sunset at Yavanapura as the beginning of the day
and from I.8. we understand that the Paulīśa and Romaka do the same and here it is mentioned that
Lāṭadeva is the commentator of these two Siddhāntas.
पौलिशतिथिः स्फुटोऽसौ तस्यासन्नस्तु रोमकप्रोक्तः ।
स्पष्टतरः सावित्रः परिशेषौ दूरविभ्रष्टौ ॥ ४ ॥
4. The tithi resulting from the Paulīśa is tolerably accurate and that of the
Romaka approximate to that. The tithi of the Saura is very accurate. But that
of the remaining two (viz. the Vāsiṣṭha and the Paitāmaha) have slipped far
away (from the real).
The five Siddhāntas are compared here with reference to their tithi alone because that is the chief
of the five aṅgas, viz. tithi, vāra, nakṣatra, yoga and karaṇa, that is most useful not only for religious
but also civil purposes, that is independent of the origin of reference in the ecliptic and can be
examined for correctness by observation of eclipses and heliacal rising and that is used in finding
the days from Epoch, the sine qua non of all astronomical computation. This being the case, the
change of ‘tithi’ into ‘kṛta’ by the late Dr. G. Thibaut and M.M. Sudhakara Dvivedi (TS for short),
especially when the manuscripts read only tithi or tithaḥ, is unwarranted, to say the least. Doing this,
they have condemned the Vāsiṣṭha Siddhānta beyond the author's intention and become blind to its
merits and peculiarities, which otherwise they could easily have seen. Equally off the mark is the
emendation of tithi into stvatha by Neugebauer and Pingree (NP, for short). See below, explanatory
Notes, for the real reason for this ‘slipping far away from the real’.
[प्रतिपाद्यवस्तु]
यत्तत्परं रहस्यं भ्रमति मतिर्यत्र तंत्रकाराणाम् ।
तदहमपहाय मत्सरमस्मिन् वक्ष्ये ग्रहं भानोः ॥ ५ ॥
दिक्स्थितिविमर्दकर्णप्रमाणवेला ग्रहाग्रहाविन्दोः ।
ताराग्रहसंयोगं देशान्तरसाधनं चास्मिन् ॥ ६ ॥
4. Quoted in the Jyotirmīmāṁsā (Jy) P.7. b. A1. ०सन्नस्तु
a. A1.2. पौलिशतिथि स्फु०; B1.2. पौलिशतिथः; A1.2. रोमकः; Jy. रोमशः
C. पौलिश [कृत]; c. B1.2. ०तरस्सावित्रः; D. ०तरः सवित्रः
D. पौलिश [स्त्वथ]; Jy. पौलिश इति d. A1. दूरं
A.2. स्फुटोद्यौ A1.2. ०विभ्रष्टौ