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

XVI PAÑCASIDDHĀNTIKĀ of words, omission of vowel signs, verses made to stop short in the middle or to run into another, numbering of verses in the wrong places and so on. In several cases some of these corruptions are common to all the manuscripts, confirming that these errors have to be traced back to a common archetype of both the recensions. The said five manuscripts have been designated A1, A2 and B1, B2, B3, according to the two recensions and relative reliability of the manuscripts. All the manuscripts are in paper, written in Devanagari script. A₁. Ms. No. 338/1879-80 of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, described in A Catalogue of Collections of Mss. deposited in the Deccan College by S.R. Bhandarkar (Bombay, 1888), p. 143. It has 22 folios with 11 lines per page. It is complete and has been copied at Stambhatīrtha (modern Cambay in Gujarat) in Sam. 1673, Śaka 1538 (AD. 1616), by Śaṅkara son of Govinda. This manuscript is the 'better of the two manuscripts' used in the TS. edition of the PS. The manuscript is far from perfect and exhibits numerous scribal errors and some transpositions, but it is definitely better than the B manuscripts. A₂. Ms. No. 49, currently preserved in the National Library, Calcutta, but it originally belonged to the erstwhile Imperial Library, Calcutta. It is in 24 folios with 9 lines a page. It is incomplete and extends to a portion of XVIII. 90 d. The writing is very readable but is very much error-ridden. The readings are closely associated to A₁. Pingree suspects that it "agrees almost entirely with A (our A₁) of which it is most probably a copy." (see his edition of PS, Introduction, p. 20). This cannot be a copy of A₁ for the reason that there occur differences between the two, for which see I. 3c, 7d, 10a, 12a and a number of other contexts. Pingree doubts also that A₂ is "perhaps the copy utilized by Thibaut and Dvivedin" (Introduc- tion, p.20). This goes against Thibaut's statement that his "edition of PS is founded on two Manus- cripts belonging to the Bombay Government" (T's Introduction, p. LX). It is also to be noted that while A₁ is complete, A₂ is incomplete. It is again to be noted that minor over-writings and correc- tions above the lines occur in A₂ at several places obviously having been added by a modern user of the manuscript. These latter, being modern, have not been noted as variants in the footnotes to the present edition. B₁. Ms. No. 37/1874-75 of the Bhandarkar Ori. Res. Inst., Pune, described in A Catalogue of Col- lections of Mss. deposited in the Deccan College (Bombay, 1888). Copied in modern "Universal foolscap" paper, with a title page in Devanagari reading "number 37-Satra 1872 [A.D.] Pañcasiddhāntikā, patrāṇi 49-15-1930", it is in 49 pages, with 15 to 17 lines a page. This is the second of the two man- uscripts used by TS, from which they have documented only some of the variants, as recorded in the footnotes of their edition. Pingree states (Intro., p.20), that in the edition he has documented only those variants recorded by TS in their footnotes. In the present edition, however, the manuscript has been fully collated and all the variants therein recorded. This manuscript carries, through its entire length, correc- tions, obviously made by Thibaut. B₂. Ms. No. 64 of the National Library, Calcutta. It contains 108 pages numbered 7 to 114, and is incomplete, commencing only from I.22, the previous verses having been written on the folios 1-6, now lost. The manuscript is shapely and the writing readable, but the matter contained is extremely