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

V. 10 · V. PAULIŚA MOON'S CUSPS 151 Now for the readings: In verse ten if the meaning is taken as it is, then we shall be getting the time of sunset after moonrise, which serves no purpose and cannot be the intention of the author to get, and it is incompatible with the time of the meridian Moon sought to be found in the fourth foot. This is the middle of the Moon's day-time and for this, moonset has to be found. (TS and NP too inter- pret this verse as giving moonset). Therefore we have corrected vyarkam candram viśodhyā cakrārdhāt into vyarkāt candrāt viśodhya cakrārdham, by interchanging the case endings, and thus got the time of moonset, required for meridian Moon. The reading meṣodayakāla for śeṣodayakāla has been dis- carded as being unconnected with the problem. TS and NP have given the impossible correction, niśi divase'stam śaśī yāti for śaśidivasārdhe śaśīmadhya found in the manuscripts. Their aim, viz. to get the time of moonset, is all right, but their interpretation of the stanza to get this is wrong, and also self-contradictory. See the Sanskrit com- mentary for the said interpretation: 'Deduct the Moon minus Sun from 6 rāśis; the time of the rising of this is the time of moonset, reckoned from sunrise. Here, if the Moon sets in the day-time then Moon-minus-Sun must be deducted from 6 rāśis. If in the night, the Moon itself is to be deducted from 6 rāśis. This order of procedure should be understood.' If their instruction in the first sen- tence is followed, the time of sunset after moonrise will be got, as we have already said, but not the time of moonset. It is to avoid this that we interchanged the case endings. As for the instruction in the second sentence, the first part of it disagrees with the second part. We shall illustrate these defects found in their interpretation, by applying them to two examples. (a) The Sun is rā. 0-15, Moon is rā. 2-0, the Moon's latitude is zero, i.e. there is no corrections. In this case, the moonset according to TS is to be found thus: Moon − Sun = rā. 2-0 − rā. 0-15 = rā. 1-15. Deducting this from 6 rāśis, the remainder is rā. 4-15. They say, the time taken for rā. 4-15 to rise, after sunrise, is the time of moonset after sunrise. The absurdity of this can be seen by find- ing the time of moonrise, which is the time taken by the Moon-Sun to rise, i.e. for rā. 1-15 to rise; i.e. the interval between moonrise and moonset is the rising time of 3 rāśis. Or, by the instruction in the second sentence, as the Moon does not set in the day, it sets in the night, and therefore deducting the Moon itself from 6 rāśis, we get rā. 4-0, and they say by the time of rise of rā. 4-0 from sunrise the Moon sets. Does it occur in the night at all? Perhaps they meant sunset. Then, let us take another case. (b) The Sun is rā. 0-15, the Moon is rā. 8-0, and Moon's latitude is 0, again. Then, Moon − Sun = rā. 7-15. The moonset is in the day-time, clearly. Therefore deducting this from 6 rāśis, we have rā. 6-0 − rā. 7-15 = rā. 10-15. According to them the Moon sets by the rise of this segment after sun- rise. Clearly according to this the moonset will fall in the night, and not in the day-time as required. Assuming sunrise is a mistake for sunset, reckoned from sunset also it will be wrong, for then the moonset will be rā. 4-15 from sunrise, which is wrong, for it is correctly the time of rising of rā. 1-15 from sunrise. This demonstration shows their interpretation to be wrong, and at the same time justifies our interchanging the case-endings, by which alone the time of moonset can be got correctly. [इति पञ्चसिद्धान्तिकायां वराहमिहिरविरचितायां शशिदर्शनम् नाम पञ्चमोऽध्यायः ] ¹ Thus ends Chapter Five entitled Pauliśa-Siddhānta: Moon's Cusps in the Pañcasiddhāntikā composed by Varāhamihira

1. Col.: A. शशिदर्शनं | B.C.D. इति शशिदर्शनम् ।