________________
"Sūtra' as a brief indicatory statement, in which much that is left out has to be understood from other contexts. This is illustrated by two kārikās 16 and 15, where Avyakta is proved by Inference and only two avayavas of the syllogism are expressly mentioned; the important limb of Illustration, Drstānta, is not mentioned in the context but has to be understood. Now it is this Illustration that the gloss mentions in the word Tay: 'Mala' and 'Sakala' illustrate respectively HEFTİ ORHIT' and समन्वयात् । This can be checked up by the comments of Yuktidīpikā on Kārikā 15, pp. 75, 77 १. 'यत् परिमितं तस्य सत उत्पत्तिदृष्टा ।
de 195-376 -90-as etc.' २. यच्च यादृशीं बुद्धिमुत्पादयति, तत्तेनान्वितं,
1721-arGalath: TUMIGA: 1 See also p. 46 under Kārikā 6: ca 1963Hai Tera Trenifaqatala etc.
In the same line, after the above noted word, we read SEFAATHEAT 3otarierea Here 'atra antaram' makes no sense; we may read either 3T37 STOCTIT or 377 37TCHE The former would fit better. The comma at the end of this should be a full stop,
P. 3
Line I
P. 3
Lines 2, 3
The two 37997-s' refer to two other explanations of the name Sūtra ; the first is based on the same etymological explanation from Sūcana', but the form of Sūcana meant here is different ; it refers to the inwardly withdrawn nature of the recluse-teacher and hence the absolute brevity with which he just indicates his ideas. The next explanation is couched in a confusing expression; what is meant
