________________
MĀNASĀRA
CHAPTER II
1. I. J. Fercetat This is due to the confusion between farfa and farqa, the latter being the correot form.
2. B. D. CATATTETUTTIASTOT 4. A. F. J. ATATTI
6. I. U for ad; the additional stroke which turns into as is apparently due to negligence of the copyist.
6. The ungrammatical form FTA (acc. sing.) should be noticed ; it is left unemended to illustrate the barbarous Sanskrit of the Vastu-sastra.
The lines 5-10 are missing in J. The line 10 is missing also in I. But it has been preserved in all other Mss. The sease, however, inay be deduced even without this line. It is practically impossible, in such cases, to say whether the most original text was with or without a line like this one.
11. B. D. gaare I
12. The genitive use of gate in the sense of looative should be noticed.
One Manu is stated in the Ramayana (1.5.6) to have been the architect who built the oity of Ayodhya: TT ATA AT TATATE . विश्रुता । मनुना मानवेन्द्रण या पुरी निर्मिता स्वयम् ॥
13. B. D. GIRTI 16. (1) B. D. ATTRI (2) J. geta: 1 17. I. grafa: 1
19. I.29-#d, cf. I. 4, 39. ostatia (II. 19, 23, 25, 33) and asfasfesa inost of the Mss. read the word as afe: and a few as afeti
22. A. F. omit u and add en after afa 23. I. नाम; J. गुरोनाम । For वर्धकीति see note under line 19. 24. B. D. ET, A. F. FROSTI 25. For aset see note under line 19,
