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

XIV PAÑCASIDDHĀNTIKĀ “There is some reason to fear that the feeling of any one who may examine in detail this edi- tion and translation of Varāha Mihira’s astronomical work will, in the first place, be wonder at the boldness of the editors. I am fully conscious that on the imperfect materials at our dis- posal an edition in the strict sense of the word cannot be based, and that what we are able to offer at present deserves no other name but that of a first attempt to give a general idea of the contents of the Pañcasiddhāntikā. It would, in these circumstances, possibly have been wiser to delay an edition of the work until more correct Manuscripts have been discovered. Two considerations, however, in the end, influenced us no longer to keep back the results, how- ever imperfect, of our long continued endeavours to restore and elucidate the text of the Pañcasiddhāntikā. In the first place, we were encouraged by the consideration that texts of purely mathematical or astronomical contents may, without great disadvantages, be submit- ted to a much rougher and bolder treatment than texts of other kinds. What interests us in these works is almost exclusively their matter, not either their general style or the particular words employed, and the peculiar nature of the subject often enables us to restore with nearly absolute certainty the general meaning of passages the single words of which are past trustworthy emendation. And, in the second place, we feel convinced that even from that part of the Pañcasiddhāntikā which we are able to explain more is to be learned about the early his- tory of Sanskrit Astronomy than from any other work which has come down to our time.” (p.v.).

About the manuscript material available to him and the editorial criteria adopted by him Thibaut says in his Introduction to the edition:

“The present edition of the Pañcasiddhāntikā is founded on two Manuscripts, belonging to the Bombay Government. The text of the better one of those two Manuscripts is reproduced in the left hand columns of our edition, while the foot notes give all the more important different readings from the other Manuscript. A comparison of the traditional text with the emended one, as given in the right hand columns of the edition, will show that the former had, in many cases, to be treated with great liberty. Not unfrequently, the emended text is merely meant as an equivalent in sense of what we suppose Varāha Mihira to have aimed at expressing, while we attach no importance to the words actually employed in the emendation.” (p.lx).

The Pañcasiddhāntikā has again been edited recently by O. Naugebauer and D. Pingree, (NP)². And Pingree too observes, on the state of the manuscript material: “The present edition of the Pañcasiddhāntikā does not solve all the remaining problems connected with this text. We suspect that much will never be understood unless better manuscripts material becomes available.” (Vol. I, Intro., p. 19)

It, however, so happens that during the hundred years that have passed by since the publication of its first edition in 1889 no ‘really’ new manuscript of the work has come to light. A few manus- cripts that have become available,³ all go back to the two manuscripts used in the first edition, as shown by the commonality in them of omissions and corruptions which occur in the newly available manuscripts.

---

2. The Pañcasiddhāntikā of Varāhamihira. Pt. I. Text and Translation by D. Pingree; Pt. II. Notes by O. Neugebauer, Cobenhavn, Munksgaard, 1970.
3. For details, See below under ‘Manuscript material’.