466. In Hindu mythology, solar eclipses are caused by Rahu’s attempts at swallowing the Sun.
467. Budha is Mercury, and Sukra is Venus.
468. Both the Bombay and the Bengal texts repeat Chamarais in the second line of 24th. This is certainly erroneous. The Burdwan Pundits read it tomarais. This is correct.
469. In the second line of 30th, the correct reading is Rathas (nom. plural) and not Rathan. So in the first line of 31st, the word is turangas (nom. plural) and not turangan.
470. Lit. “reached him with shafts etc.”
471. Both the Bengal and the Bombay printed texts are in fault regarding the word Pandupurvaja. The Bombay text makes it a nom. plural. The Bengal text makes it an accusative singular. There can be no doubt that the Burdwan Pundits are right in taking it as a vocative.
472. That you know me to be invincible is a fortunate circumstance, for if you had not known this, you would have fought on for days together and thus caused a tremendous destruction of creatures. By your coming to know, that destruction may be stopped.
473. The adjective Vahu in the first line of 32 qualifies rathinas in the second line. The last of the verse is a nom. sing. and not a vocative.
474. The Bengal texts read mahasuram in the second line of the verse. This seems to be vicious. A latter reading would be mahasuram (the great Asura). The Bombay text reads rane suram. I adopt the last.
475. i.e. Thou art still a woman though the sex hath been changed.
476. Literally, “will not get or obtain you.”
477. There can be no doubt that (in the second line of 19 corresponding with the first line of 19 of the Bombay text), Arjuni should be a nominative, and not an accusative. The Bombay reading, therefore, is vicious. The Burdwan Pundits also err in taking that word as occurring in the accusative form.
478. I think Yatavrata had better be read Yatavratam. It would then mean Bhishma.
479. Both the Bengal and the Bombay texts are confusing here. I follow the text as settled by the Burdwan Pundits. If the erudition of the Burdwan Pundits be rejected, 28 would read as, “Virata, at the head of his forces, encountered Jayadratha supported by his owl, troops, and also Vardhaskhemi’s heir, O Chastiser of foes.” This would be evidently wrong.
480. This Susarman was not the king of the Trigartas but another person who was on the Pandava side.
481. Both the Bengal and the Bombay texts have Rathanika. The correct reading as settled by the Burdwan Pundits, is Gajanika.
482. Both the Bengal and the Bombay texts read Arjunas in the second line of 21. The Burdwan Pundits are for correcting it as Arjunam. I do not think the correction happy.
483. In the second line of 35 for Satanika, the true reading, is Sahanikan.
484. After the 60th verse, three lines occur in the Bombay edition as follows,–“And many elephants, with standards on their backs, were seen to fly away in all directions. And many Kshatriyas, O monarch, armed with maces and darts and bows, were seen lying Prostrate on the field.”
485. The Bengal texts read Evam etc.; the Bombay reading is samam, I adopt the former reading. “Set their hearts upon the region of Brahma,” i.e., fought on, resolved to win the highest heaven by bravery or death in battle.
486. The Bengal reading of this verse is vicious. In the first line, lokasya is incorrect and unmeaning, the correct word being vakyasa. In the second line, again, for Prishtha-ascha samantatas, the correct reading is Prisharaischa samantatas.
487. Brahma-danda literally means a Brahmana’s rod–bamboo-stick. In consequence of the Brahmana’s ascetic power, this thin rod (symbolical of the Brahmana’s power of chastisement) is infinitely more powerful than even Indra’s bolt. The latter can strike only one, but the former can smite whole countries, and entire races from generation to generation. With only his Brahma-danda Vasishtha baffled all the mighty and celestial weapons of Viswamitra vide, Ramayana, section 56, Valakanda.
488. Instead of “the Salwas, the Sayas, and the Trigartas,” the Bombay text reads, “the Trigartas depending on (king) Salwa.” I have not, however, met with any Trigartas under Salwa’s rule, that race having, at this time, Susarman for their ruler.
489. Indra#ddhwaja was a pole, decked with banners, created in honour of Indra. The festival attracted considerable crowds.
490. The second line of 114 in the Bengal text is vicious. I adopt the Bombay reading, which is Kururajasya tarkitas. Literally rendered the second line is “the destruction of the Kuru king was inferred.”
491. By bravery on the field of battle, which, according to the Hindu scriptures, is always thus rewarded
