ʻ ARYABHATIYA The works contained in this astronomical codex are : A. Mahabhāskarīya of Bhāskara II ; B. Mahābhāskarīya-yyakhya (Prayogaracana); C, Aryabhatiya with the com. of Suryadeva Yajvan, Gitikapada ; D. Āryabhaṭīya, Ganita, Kalakriyā and Gola pādas ; E. Laghumanasakarana of Muijala, with an anon. com. Vivarana; F. Pāțīganitasāra (Triśatī) of Sridhara ; G. Suryasiddhanta, ch. II and a portion of ch. III, com. by an anonymous author, son of Bhava and pupil of Yogindra ; cf. the colophon : इति योगीन्द्रशिष्येण भवपुत्रेण धीमता । व्याकृतः सूर्यसिद्धान्ते द्वितीयश्च स्फुटाभिधः ॥ H. Suryasiddhanta, in 13 chs. ; I. Ramayana-gadyam, anon. Three more manuscripts of the commentary of Suryadeva Yajvan on the Aryabhatiya, preserved in the Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, Madras, being Mss. Nos. 13390, 13392 and 13393, the last with the supplement of Yallaya to Suryadeva's commentary, were examined for possible use in the present critical edition. It was however found that each of these manuscripts was replete with all types of scribal and intrinsic errors, including omissions, gaps, wrong transcriptions, textual corruptions etc., and, so, was utterly unreliable. These manuscripts could not, therefore, be used in the present edition. 2. Reliability of the Manuscripts In consonance with ms. A having, originally, been prepared for the scholarly royal family of Edappalli, it has been transcribed by an apparently reliable scribe and the text preserved herein is generally correct. Scribal errors and confused writing, exclusive to A, are rare, though not absent. However, there are a good number of haplographical omissions, some of which are exclusive to A, and the others which it shares with mss. B and C. In view of the otherwise reliability of the manuscript, these exclusive omissions have to be attributed to the original manuscript from which A has been copied. Ms. B too presents a generally reliable text. While scribal errors are comparatively few, it contains a large number of minor and major omissions of different types, haplographical, indicated and unindicated, most of which, if not all, have to be traced to its original. These omissions, indeed, detract, to some extent, from the value of the manuscript,
