1877.] 
423 
explanation of the Jyotisha-Yedanga. 
'gfrrT^T^irr^T ww *J«raprfa ^ m;sw I 
vj 
II * II 
x.f^ fqWT^fw^i ^T^rs^r^: IIoil 
Although the above passage is so utterly corrupt that it hardly con¬ 
tains one sound word, any body familiar with the text of the Jyotisha 
Vedanga will not fail to observe that the astronomical book quoted by 
Varaha Mihira as Pitamaha Siddhanta must have been either the Jyotisha 
itself or a work very much like it. The first of the above verses teaches 
that five years compose a luni-solar cycle and that to thirty months one 
intercalary month has to be added. In the second verse it is mentioned 
that the dyugana of the yuga begins with the light half of the month 
Magha. In the third verse Dhanishtha seems to be named as the first of 
the nakshatras and the “ saptabhir unam” possibly refers to the passage of 
the Jyotisha which has been treated above “ sasaptakam bhayuk somah.” 
The first pada of the fourth verse may have to be read : shjiit xrt 
and thus we should gain a parallel passage to the second pada of 
v. 17 of the Jyotisha : although the sense of both passages 
is obscure to me. On the other hand there is no doubt that the last verse 
contains the very same rule for calculating the length of a given day, which 
we have found in the Jyotisha. The posterior part of the first word we 
probably have to alter into (or g T^r^TKWT), correspond¬ 
ing to the %•rifT of the Jyotisha and to connect with JTcT® while 
has to be changed into ; in the second half-verse we have of 
course to read We may then translate—abstracting from 
an emendation of the second part of Jnr^rffr which seems to contain some 
word expressing : day — : what has passed of the northern ayana, taken 
as positive (or additive ; ) and in the same way what has passed of the 
southern ayana, being taken as negative (or subtractive ; is to 
be multiplied by two and divided by sixty-one ; the result is the measure 
of the day less twelve ( i . e., twelve muhurtas have to be added to the result 
in order to get the measure of the given day). 
Regarding the disputed point whether the rule fixing the length of 
the shortest and longest days of the year has been borrowed by the Indians 
from some foreign source, for instance from Babylon, or sprung up independ¬ 
ently on Indian soil, I am entirely of the opinion of Prof. Whitney who sees no 
sufficient reason for supposing the rule to be an imported one. It is true 
that the rule agrees with the facts only for the extreme north-west corner 
of India ; but it is approximately true for a much greater part of India, and 
that an ancient rule—which the rule in question doubtless is—agrees best 
with the actual circumstances existing in the North West of India is after 
all just what we should expect. 
