11 INTRODUCTION MS. D-Containing a commentary known as Prayoga-racana and also supplying the beginnings of the passages commented upon ; MS. E-Containing the commentary Karma- dipika of Parameśvara and also the beginnings of the passages commented upon. agree- MSS. A and B, which contain the text only, are in ment in so far as the extent of the two is concerned. In other respects also they are almost the same. Both of them contain 396 verses. Agreement between the two manuscripts seems to indicate that they are perhaps derived from the same source. There are other reasons also for this conjecture. Verse iii. 45, which has been misplaced in one of them, occupies the same wrong position in the other also. Moreover, six and a half verses, which have been commented upon by Govinda Svāmi (MS. C), Paramesvara (MS. E), and in the Prayoga-racanã (MS. D), and are included in the text of MS. C, are absent from both MSS. A and B. Its text has evident MS. C contains 394 and a half verses. gaps at some places, for a few verses, some of which have been actually commented upon in the commentary at their proper places, are missing from the text. These are amongst those verses which belong to MSS. A and B and have been explained in the Prayoga-racana (MS. D), and in the commentary of Paramesvara (MS. E). MSS. D and E contain commentaries of the Maha-Bhaska- riya. In these manuscripts only the beginnings of the passages commented have been given; the full text is not given. The following table will show at a glance how far the above manuscripts have differed from one another: ¹ viz, i. 12; v. 18, 26-27(i), 47-48(i); vi, 14(ii)-15(i), 58(ii
