सिद्धान्तदर्पण (महामहोपाध्याय सामन्त चन्द्रशेखर सिंह - नग्न-नेत्र खगोल वेध एवं गणित महाकोश)

xxxvi सिद्धान्त दर्पण
astronomy, and (3) the presence in Sanskrit of
certain astronomical treatises words admittedly of
foreign origin. This is not the place to discuss the
subject throughly. But as far as my knowledge goes,
these arguments, when weighed against others, are
not at all convincing.
The presence of Greek terms in Sanskrit is
certainly a strong presumption in favour of the
theory. But when the uses of the terms are taken
into consideration, it is found that with the possible
exception to the word "Kendra'¹ meaning
"anomaly", all the rest properly belong to astrology.
Of course, when once the terms had been
introduced into Sanskrit, our astronomers did not
hesitate to use them freely in astronomy, side by
side with pure Sanskrit terms. The passage where
Garga extolled the Yavanas does not occur in an
astronomical work, but in a Samhita which was
rather a work on astrology than astronomy. Nor
can we logically infer from the passage that the
Yavanas were proficient in astronomy rather than
in astrology, or that the Hindus borrowed the
knowledge from them. The name Yavanacharya
occurs only in connection with Samhita. Next the
presence of Romaka² and Paulisa Siddhantas among
others of purely Indian origin proves nothing
beyond the bare fact of their presence and I do not
see how it can be taken to imply that the Hindus
had not obtained the constants of their Siddhantas

---

1. See, however Bhaskara's derivation of the word in his
   Siromani.
2. The Romaka-Siddhanta of Varaha-mihita is in no way
   superior to his Saura-Siddhanta, as was remarked by
   himself.