$2 AO Account'or w Discovery OF 'K” 
is not improbable that the substance of them as NEN now exist is ft rom 
bis pen, and that they consisted originally, like ‘his works in Tamil of : 
iG 
detached treatises on various controversial points, and, hat some ‘other 
ar 
0 SiG 
hand has since arranged them in their present form, Ganed on then 
a false ttle, transcribed them into the Roman character ool gente 
them into French. ‘To. effect this would have ‘been easy and ocd have 
required comparatively but little knowledge of the 2 Sanserdt: the disserlations 
were probably divided by: their author, as ‘they now stand, ‘into a ‘slates 
ment of the points in controversy and a refutation’ of them’; ; all that was 
necessary, ‘therefore, was to prefix the: prosaic ‘introductions and to ‘add 
Hes aoe abstracts containing the title given them, and they: received at 
once the. form they now bear. Tl nis supposition appears sufficient to 
account, for every appearance which they exhibit 3 it explains why the 
1} Bei 
Ae wh 
Sa mscrit does not Bppeat in its appropriate character and orthography, 
ib which it is difficult to suppose ‘it ‘was not originally ‘written ‘by ‘the 
lotr 
author, and it also, explains (what I { shall proces ed to Aemonstrte), why 
sot) 
the wanslation i is not t always a faith fal version of the original. 
af ted ig eg t 17 riters iota ay of Pie 
a 
“he Sanserit ‘scholar will readily. mereeive, ‘that the’ whole of the Frendk 
upnslatos on 1 of the extr act * foun the: oe “Chain Ve i ig ‘Toose aind ogee 
aoe “Tn the Sth tine of the invocation-one-of-the- seaemiacth ti 
io, the ‘deity * co Obtor iin ¢ Acsharain). ie terior atten hence tet atsyUne 
ee ye area nom, na aniversion’ 1 for. which there. is, no foundation 
whatever 3 :  Aeshara it is tttte,” asa noun reg oti fiveriznalaasteitininangencr’> 
6} 
gignifies a: leitery but Acshiaraniaams: ag.a. noun of quality, an¢ (a ‘an epi ithet 
to] 
WSS edagonieat he 
applied to the deity means, ‘thé indestructible, the infinite)” The téstof the 
