सिद्धान्तशिरोमणि: गणिताध्याय (भास्कराचार्य - ग्रहगणित, मध्यमाधिकार व स्पष्टाधिकार सटीक)

538
In the course of the commentary under these verses
Bhāskara solves two problems and points out that when
there is a pāta according to his exposition, the statements
made by Lalla, Brahmagupta Śrīpati and Mādhava all
indicate that there would not occur a pāta.
But we feel that Bhāskara read too much into those
statements on account of the following. Lalla states
सूर्योपमादोजपदोद्गवाच्चेद्युग्मादिजः चन्द्रमसो लघीयान्,
अपक्रमःस्यान्न तदास्तिपातः तदन्यथात्वेऽपमयोः समत्वम् ।
Brahmagupta states
त्रिनवगृहेन्दुकान्तिः मेषतुलादौ दिवाकरक्रान्तेः ।
ऊना यावदभावः तावत् भावोऽन्यथा चेति ॥
and Śrīpati says
त्रिनवभवनजाता क्रान्तिरिन्दोर्यदाऽल्पा
दिनकृदपमतः स्यान्मेषजूकादिजातात् ।
न हि भवति तदा च क्रान्तिसाम्यं रवीन्द्रोः
नियतमितरथात्वे जायते सम्भवोऽस्य ॥
In fact all these three statements mean one and the
same and are intended to be approximate statements, in
the first instance, having ignored the latitude of the Moon.
They are just statements like that of Bhāskara himself
when he says that there will be a pāta when the sum of
the longitudes will be 180° or 360°. The statements pur-
port to say that if the declination of the Moon when it is
on the decrease happens to be less than that of the Sun
which is on the increase, there could be no pāta. These
statements so far as they go, ignoring the latitude of the
Moon are perfectly in order. Bhāskara brings in a detailed
analysis of two critical examples, to prove that there is a
pāta, but which is negated by the rough statements of the