Page 704 - Lokmanya Tilak Samagra (khand 2)

56 SAMAGRA TILAK - 2 • VEDANGA JYOTI!JHA

word ordinarily denotes the remainder only. He has further com-
plicated the problem by making it too general. He thinks that
the Vedclnga here gives us a rule for finding the elapsed time not
at the end of a parvan or tithi but generally at any time during
any tithi day. His interpretation of ROl<t~IG:~Iif is, however,
at once simple and reasonable. S proceeds differently. He rightly
understands ~ to mean the remainder and not the whole
result as B does. But, supplying a lot of his own words, he inter-
prets the ver e to mean :-'Divide the olar am has by 9. double
( the whole including the remainder ), the difference ( ~~If )
( after subtrating the latter, in amshas from the former a days)
i the time in day elapsed. Here we have not only to supply
all the word bracketed, in somewhat artificial manner, but, if
the verse be so interpreted, the econd half of the line become
perfectly redudant a the interpretation gives us, at once, the
whole formula, viz., n/9 days minus 2n/9 am ha . S tries to get
over this djfficulty by altering the reading of the econd half and
showing that thi part of the ver e refers us to orne other rule
for finding out the time previous to the Sun's entry into the
NaktJhatra under consideration. This, in my opinion, cannot be
regarded as satisfactory. We naturally expect to find ~~
etc., made a part and parcel of the rule for ascertaining the
time of the Sun' entry into the given ak!Jhatra;and this expecta-
tion i defeated if the fir t half of the verse is made to yield the
whole formula as S has done. The course adopted by B is certainly
more preferable to this. But, as hown above, B' explanation is
not also free from defects. Under these circum tance I would
suggest the following modification thereof. I would first restrict
the scope of the rule. The Vedanga calculates the Sun's amshas
only in two particular ca e :- ( 1 at the end of a parvan
( R. 10, Y. 165 ) and ( 2) at the end of a tithi ( Y. 25 ). There
is therefore, no rea on to oppose that the word ~~lWTI<f.. in
pre cnt ver e refer not to either of these two case , but to a still
more general one. The next step is to ascertain the meaning
of the word ~Rti in the second line, or its synonym ~fui~
in the third. In my opinion ~ does not here mean
' the total time elapsed ' as S interprets it, nor do I under-
stand how B translates it as ' the total of the Sun's motion ( in
the equinoctial circle) per lunar day. ' (Perhaps, he means ' the
total motion calculated at so much per lunar day ' ). The word