ng wave is very unfamiliar.

1325. Devas here evidently refer to the senses. The senses are, as it
were, cattle. Their true fold is the forest and not peopled cities and
towns. In the forest there are no temptations to try them as in the midst
of cities and towns.

1326. Jivitarthapanayenaih is connected with hinsati. To take it (as the
Burdwan translator does) as an adjective qualifying 'pranibhih' would be
incorrect.

1327. The Sacrifice of Peace is opposed to the Sacrifice of Slaughter.
The Sacrifice of Brahma is Yoga which leads to a knowledge of the Soul.
The Sacrifice of Speech is Vedic recitation or Japa. The Sacrifice of
Mind is contemplation, and that of Acts is baths, performance of other
acts of purity, waiting dutifully upon the preceptor, etc.

1328. To perform the Sacrifice of Self is to merge the Soul in the
Supreme Soul.

1329. The Bombay reading danda-vidhanam is a blunder for the Bengal
reading danda nidhanam. To interpret vidhanam as equivalent to
abandonment or giving up, by taking the prefix vi, in the sense of vigata
would be an act of violence to the word.

1330. The guha or cave referred to is the body.

1331. By Prakriti, as explained in previous Sections, is meant primal
nature consisting of the five great essences of earth, water, etc.

1332. Samupodeshu is explained as upasthiteshu api, i.e., even when such
objects are present and ready for enjoyment.

1333. Maitrayangatah, as explained by the commentator, is
Suryavat-pratyaha-vibhinna-margah, i.e., roving like the Sun every day in
a different path. The object of the speaker is to lay it down that one
solicitous of Emancipation should never confine oneself to one spot, but
rove or wander over the world without owning a fixed habitation or home.
K.P. Singha translates the word wrongly.

1334. In the first line, the Bengal reading madhya na chacharet is better
than madhya cha nacharet. Pradakshinam is ankulam, and savyam is
pratikulam. The grammar of the second line is not difficult. Besides, the
commentator explains it clearly. The Burdwan translator, leaving out the
words bhaikshacharyam and taking anapannah as equivalent to vipadapannah,
gives a thoroughly ridiculous version. K.P. Singha, also, is not correct.
The commentator explains that charyam means anekagrihatanam; anapannam is
akurvan. The second foot is unconnected with the first.

1335. Muni, here, is one who has restrained his senses, or who has
betaken himself to the p