^237:1 This is the doctrine of the Vedantins.

^237:2 If there were but one atman common to all men, the fruit of works done by one man might accrue to another. For the atman is the substratum of merit and demerit.

^237:3 Though there is no doubt about the meaning of this passage, still the construction is so elliptic that I may have failed to understand the connection of the parts of the sentence.

^237:4 This is the opinion expressed by Karaka and in the early law-books, see Professor Jolly's paper in the Transactions of the Ninth International Congress of Orientalists, vol. i, p. 456. Silanka ascribes it to the Sankhyas and Saivadhikarins.

^238:1 Niyatibhavam agaya. Niyati is explained by nityabhava.

^238:2 Viz. the Bauddhas. The five skandhas are explained in the commentary as follows: 1. rupaskandha, or substances and their qualities; 2. vedanaskandha, feelings, as pleasure and pain; 3. vignanaskandha, perceptions of the qualities of things; 4. samgnaskandha, perception and knowledge of things; 5. samskaraskandha, merit and demerit.

^238:3 Identical, i.e. a product of the elements as the Karvakas maintain.

^238:4 Ganaya, which is explained in the Dipika by gnanaka = panditammanya, denotes the Bauddhas. I think that the word may be derived from yana 'vehicle,' which the Buddhist used to designate the two sections of the church, viz. the Hinayana and Mahayana schools. The commentator quotes a various reading: avare for ganaya, and explains it as referring to another sect of Bauddhas than those spoken of in the preceding verse. Silanka comments on the reading avvare first, and then on ganaya.

^239:1 Kakravala.