SESSION I DISCUSSION (1) SANSKRIT LITERATURE KONWN TO AL-BIRUNI by Ajay Mitra SHASTRY Dr. (Mrs) Bina Chatterjee contended that Bhattotpala should be assigned to the 10th century 4. on the basis of the date given in the Saka era in the colophon of his work. In reply, the author referred to an article of Prof. P. V. Kane in the Journal of the Bombay University on the subject and stated that Bhattotpala’s date was prior to the 10th century a. Further Dr. Shastri pointed out that there was epigraphical evidence where Saka or Saka is used in two meanings (i) the Saka era, and (ii) in a generalised way as any era. The word, Saka has found in some inscriptions also means the Vikrama era. So Bhattotpala’s Saka has to be taken as the Vikrama era and the colophon of his work has to be worked out as 831 av. Dr. Shastri further added that he had dealt with the whole question in one of his articles published in the Indian Historical Quarterly. Prof. $. Maqbul Ahmad enquired whether, according to al-Birdni's concept. the universe was regarded as finite or infinite as suggested by Birini in his preface to the Al-Qaniin. Dr. S. R. Sarma pointed out the significance of word-numerals afid alphabetic notations which anticipated decimal place-value. He was of the view that all the methods of notations co-existed according to the metre employed. Further he thought that Kalpa was a hypothetical point arrived at by back calculation. Mr. M. A. Alvi thought that the question whether the universe is finite, had been answered partially by al-Birani, in his remarks on Aristotle, and that al-Biriini inclined to believe that the universe was infinite 2 VARAHAMIHIRA, THE BEST SANSKRIT SOURCE OF AL-BIRONI ON INDIAN JYOTISA by SHayasuppIn Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri stressed that some of the observations of al-Biriint needed to be substantially modified or rejected outright, Citing an example, he said that al-Biriint had referred to a work on architecture by Varahamihira, but it is nowhere referred to by Varahamihira in his works. In the Brhatsamhita there are three chapters on temple and residential architecture, which are sometimes found as independent manuscripts. It seems that al-Biriini mistook such an independent ms, as a separate work of Varahamihira, which raises doubts about the character of al-Biriini’s acquaintance with Varahamihira, Dr. Shastri further clarified that al-Birdnt’s attribution of the Satabafcasikd to Varahamihira is incorrect and that it was composed by Prthuyasas. VOL, 10, No. 2160 (3) DISCUSSION Dr. A. K. Bag said that the Pulifa-siddhanta used by al-Birdni is different from the known version, as already pointed out by Thibaut. Dr. Shastri elaborated that al-Biriini’s work is a recast of recast. Dr. Lokesh Chandra enquired about date of the death of al-Birdni which is usually placed at 1048 a.p., but which Prof. Boilot considers as being after 1050 a.v., on the basis of al-Biriini’s last work, the Kitab al-Saydala fi ‘l-Tibb on medicinal drugs, which is still unpublished. Dr. Ghayasuddin admitted the difference of opinion, but felt that the traditional date might be retained until further evidence was forthcoming. SOURCES OF AL-BIRONI ON INDIAN METRICS by B. K. Nayar Prof. Grover pointed out that before problems of details were taken up, it was essential to understand the socio-political conditions of the time of al-Biriini and the places which al-Biriini visited and the scholars with whom he discussed should be determined. He thought that al-Birini based his information on secondary sources and unless the original sources men- tioned by al-Birdint in his works were correlated and evaluated, his works would not be reliable as historical material. In the absence of such an effort, Prof. Grover thought that al-Biriini’s work had a limited application. Dr. B. K. Nayar pointed out that al-Biriini's treatment was selective with an accent on mathematics and astronomy which were his primary interest. Dr. (Mrs) Pratipal Bhatia referred to Halayuddha and said that he existed in the last part of 10th century a. and possibly he was a contemporary of al-Birdni. Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri commented that some of the equations and the names of writers on prosody as given by the author, though interesting, went a bit far from the spellings of the concerned words as given by al-Biriini. In his concluding remarks, Prof, A. H. Habibi said as follows: “While Persian and Arabic Sources of al-Birani are known to us in Afghanistan, we have little information about the Sanskrit sources. We are grateful for the papers and we have greatly benefitted by these discussions. We would like to publish them in Afghanistan.” Dr. R. S. Tripathi, the Co-Chairman, emphasised that it was necessary to collate all the original manuscripts and prepare a critical edition before arriving at conclusions regarding the identification of names as attempted in the 8rd paper. He indicated that the identifications of Hariudd of al-Birini with Halayudha was farfetched, and that it could well be Haribhadra, the great scholar. Prof. Maqbul Ahmad, the Co-Chairman, referring to the stresses and strains under which al-Birani studied in India and his insatiable thirst for knowledge, pointed out that, apart from the secondary sources, al-Birini also studied during his stay in India some original Sanskrit works.