The Crest-Jewel of Siddhantas

Thus, the meaning is that because it lacks logical arguments, it is suitable. Even if it has good statements, because it lacks the sweetness of words, it is not suitable for reading; as for the second reading, saying it is a semblance, he says: "rich in elegant diction" original: "ललितोक्तियुक्तमिति". Elegant means beautiful, statements and logical arguments, conjoined with that. Because of the second reading, "conjoined with beautiful words," there is no repetition. Thus, because it does not lack the sweetness of words, it is suitable; this is the meaning. If one objects that it will be a "good statement" like the scripture of Aryabhata, he says: "pure" original: "अमलमिति". Meaning it is devoid of that which is not established by the truth that is, it is flawless. Because it is done with deliberation. If one asks if it will be very difficult to understand like the Siddhanta spoken by Brahmagupta, he says: "for the understanding of the young" original: "लीलावबोधमिति". The young, with some instruction, can attain knowledge of this; this is the meaning. But if one objects that even if it is easy for them, how will the learned understand it, since they will not study it because it is new? To this, he says: "clearly" original: "स्फुटमिति", meaning with clear meaning. By "making the Siddhanta Shiromani," the relationship defined as the 'proposer and the proposed' is established. As for the more serious ones: even if the subject is known, they might not proceed because of the suspicion that it is something modern and imagined, not coming down through tradition, or due to the illusion that this scripture is newly imagined. For that purpose, stating the traditional relationship is necessary. And that is done by "making the Siddhanta Shiromani." For instance, it is said that the Siddhanta, by the logic to be stated, is Jyotisha astronomy, and then by the method to be stated, it is a Vedanga limb of the Vedas, and as a Vedanga, it has come down through tradition from Brahma through Vashishtha and others. This is stated by Narada: "The relationship of this scripture is held to be as a Vedanga." The purpose is the knowledge of the truth of the objects. He will also state the tradition later. The one who knows this is the qualified person, that twice-born Brahmin, he will say later. And one should not say: "Why proceed here when the subject matter exists in the previous Siddhantas, as there is no difference?" Because, by the adjectives like "good statements," etc., the existence of a difference from previous books is indicated. Thus: "good statements" distinguishes it from Aryabhata's scripture; "rich in elegant diction" from Varahamihira's scripture; "pure" from Lalla's scripture; "easy for the young to understand" from Brahmagupta's scripture; "clearly" from Pitamaha's scripture. This is how the partial view is indicated. 3.