435 
1877.] explanation of the Jyotisha- Yeddnga. 
nomy of a later period effects the agreement between lunar and solar time 
in a similar way ; basing however on more exact datas regarding the revo¬ 
lutions of the sun and the moon it does of course not pass over every 
thirty-first lunation. 
To the question about the adhimasa another verse of the Jyotisha also 
seems to refer, viz. verse 12, of which Somakara gives a very peculiar ex¬ 
planation, founded on his view of the meaning of the word pada. 
The latter he supposes to signify the fourth part of the time which 
is required for the performance of the darsapurnamasa sacrifices and which, 
according to him, is itself called “ parvan” in different places of the Jyo¬ 
tisha ; the duration of this fourth part is thirty-one, viz. nadikas. The 
sense of the verse is therefore, according to him, as follows “ if the parvan 
(the lunar half month) is diminished, (the diminution) is in (i. e. does not 
exceed) a pada, i. e. the time of thirty-one nadikas.” By this diminution he 
seems to understand the difference of savana and lunar time. But, as 
Prof. Weber has already pointed out, a statement of this nature would be 
perfectly useless, since the difference between the two measures during a 
lunar half month amounts to |f- of a savana day only and therefore of 
course does not exceed 31 nadikas, being in fact less than half that amount. 
Prof. Weber would therefore prefer to take parvan as meaning the whole 
lunar month ; but even on this supposition the statement of the verse would 
be of a strange indefiniteness ; why say that the difference between lunar 
and savana time in the course of one lunar month amounts to less than f-i 
of a savana day when it actually amounts to f ^ and when it was very easy 
to calculate the latter exact amount from the fundamental data of the Jyo¬ 
tisha ? Besides, it appears to me that we have no right at all to supply the 
word nadika in this verse as well as in many other verses where Somakara 
makes use of it. It seems to me that the simplest explanation of the verse 
would he the following “ if a parvan is to be deducted (for the sake of estab¬ 
lishing harmony between lunar and solar time) it is to be done at a quarter 
{viz. of all parvans); and such a quarter comprises thirty-one {viz. par- 
vans, the whole yuga containing one hundred and twenty-four q>arvans).” 
So that the verse is only another statement of the fact that each sixty- 
second lunar month is to he left out i. e. not to be counted. I pass at once 
to v. 30, where the word pada again occurs (in the compound catushpadi). 
The verse states the number of the sub-divisions of the yuga according to 
the different measures of time. The first quarter of the verse is obscure 
in spite of Somakara offering an explanation. He combines the two first 
padas and interprets them as follows : 
2 i 
