( 26 ) • But Chandrasekhara has not been a blind follower of his mas ter. The elements of the planets, given by Bhaskara, have not been accepted by his disciple, and for the simple reason, that they are not correct for the present day, Bhaskara's elements are not accurate, though there is no roason for doubting the ac- curacy of his observations. The fact is, he had to depend upon his predecessors,probably Brahmagupta was his main guide for the positions of the planets and was thus led to erroneous results. Chandralekhara had the advantage of Bháskara's observa tions. The latter has, of course, nowhere recorded his observa- tions. But given his date and his elements, it is easy to find the positions of the planets as he must have observed then. For, the elements, if employed to calculate the positions of the planets after a long interval, may lead us to wrong results; but, if employed for places nearer his time, will be in accordance with his observations. Thus, furnished with one set of positions at a given date, Chandrasekhara himself supplied the other set re- quired, and the result obtained in what Chandrasekhars has given us in the present work. Fer saay reference, the sidereal periods as he ascertained them, are given below side by side with those of European astronomy, the Súrya-Siddhanta and the Siddhanta-Siromaņi. It is not my object to criticise how far the constante employed in these two Siddántas were true when they were observed, though it will be clear from the comparison that they are certainly erroneous for the present time. It is easy to follow whon some one has led the way; but it needed the art of a rural Panạit, guiltless of western "fire" to prove their incorrect- ness and to pave the way for further progress in this department. . Digitized by Google
