98 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [March, 1908. 
the panditas. If he composed them he might have made them 
longer and hence easier to understand. This interpretation will 
be substantiated by adducing a positive proof that there are some 
lines in the Bhasapariccheda which actually occur in earlier books, 
e.g, the Daksinamiurtistotra- vartika. 
the Supreme Being, in the form of our guru (teacher). Such 
prayers or praise-hymns written with a philosophical intent are 
common in India. The celebrated Mahimnahstava and the 
Vitardgastuti are other examples to the point. This Daksinamirtt- 
strotra has been commented upon by the a Suregvara, the 
neve Sp S ar pupil of Garkara. This commentary, as might 
be expected, is in verse and is called the m@inasollaea or the Daksina- 
mirtistrotra-vartika, Thus the age of this manasollasa cannot 
a later bor the 8th century A.D., though I would place it much 
arlier. the se of the 6th century A.D. (vide Bhandarkar’s 
pares ‘1882-83, 15). 
Now in this Balicatindirideteotra-otriika, apie called the 
Mana sollasa, there are eleven slokas containing a summary of 
the Vaipesia Philosophy (II. 20-30). The first, cloka runs as 
follow 
: aaj Quearay aH afateng | 
aaags FRM: Farah FS Tae Hi 
The first line of this ¢loka is identical with the sites se attire 
gloka in the Bh asapariccheda. This is not due to mere chance, 
for the construction in efawewq is so peculiar that it chinghtdks 
precludes such a supposition, though it may be urged, on the 
other side, that given the siz or seven categories as also the order in 
which they are on be arranged [for the order is the order of the 
sitras and ko pada Bhasya], the number of ways in which 
they may be put into verse (annetap) is limited, and hence the 
identity of the glokas may after all be due to mere chance. But 
the line “ gravy feted sri Toerate @” occurs in both the 
io i egg and the Mé@nasollasa, and is this also due to mere 
chance 
the Manasollasa is a Vedantic work, and the account of the 
other systems is given only rab su —— refutation. It is not 
on Naitine Thought. 
The custom of quoting from previous authors without ac- 
vidwledgment was very common in those days. In fact, it is not 
