ict.

796. The verb used is nyavedayat, literally, 'represented,' i.e.,
'started' for discourse, or enquired into. The Burdwan translator renders
it 'exposed' or 'promulgated,' which, I think, is incorrect.

797. The Burdwan translator makes a ridiculous blunder by supposing that
Asuri obtained this knowledge in consequence of the questions of his
disciple. The fact is, samprishtah, as correctly explained the
commentator, means samyak prishta prasno yasya. K.P. Singha avoids the
error.

798. Kutumvini means a matron or the wife of a house-holder.

799. Either Markandeya or Sanatkumara, according to the commentator.

800. I slightly expand Sarvanirvedam according to the explanation given
by Nilakantha. The Sankhya doctrine proceeds upon the hypothesis that all
states of life imply sorrow. To find a remedy for this, i.e., to
permanently escape all sorrow, is the end of that philosophy.

801. These are the characteristics of that Delusion under which man takes
birth in this world and goes on living till he can permanently conquer
all sorrow.

802. The construction of the first foot is Atmano mrityuh Anatma, meaning
the Soul's death (or that which is called death) is the Soul's
extinction. Verse 24 recites the opinion of the Sceptics, not that of the
speaker. K.P. Singha mistranslates the verse. The Burdwan translator
renders it correctly.

803. This and all the following verses are statements of the sceptic's
arguments.

804. Verse 29 is highly terse. The words are grammatically unconnected
with one another. Only a few substantives have been used. These represent
the heads of the different arguments urged by sceptics for showing the
non-existence of anything besides the body which is seen and felt. I
have, of course, followed the commentator in his elaboration of the sense
of the verse. There can be no doubt that the commentator is right.

805. Some idea may be formed by the English reader of the extreme
terseness of these verses by attending to the elaborations contained
within the parentheses above. The exigencies of English grammar as also
of perspicuity have obliged me to use, even in the portions unenclosed,
more words than what occur in the original Sanskrit. All these verses are
cruces intended to stagger Ganesa.

806. Both the vernacular translators have rendered this verse wrongly.
This fact is, without clearly understanding either the text or the gloss,
they have used bits of the gloss without being