^{page 11 note 1} A full account of the contents will be found in Eggeling's Catalogue of the Sanskrit MSS. in the Library of the India Office (Nos. 2407–14).

^{page 11 note 2} Compare the Christian arguments as to the meaning of kenōsis.

^{page 11 note 3} Pāṇini Office, Allahabad, 1913.

^{page 14 note 1} See JBAS., 1921, p. 422.Google Scholar

^{page 16 note 1} This part of the story is not in the Vālmīki or in the Adhyātma Rāmâyana. The Bhāgavata Purāna, IX, iv, has a story of how Ambarīsa was protected from Durvāsas; by Visnu's discus. But the saint's wrath was caused by a quite different reason. In Mbh., VII, lxv, we are told how Nārada and Parvata quarrelled over Srñjaya's daughter, and cursed each other. The story is repeated in X, xxx. There we learn that the two saint cursed each other “ like a couple of infuriated elephants ”. Parvata curse, Nārada to have the face of an ape, and Narada retorted by cursing Parvata to the effect that he should never succeed in getting to heaven. In after years they became reconciled and mutually revoked the curses. Parvata was Nārada's sister's son. In Tulasī-dāsa's Rāma-carita-Mānasa (Nāgarī Pracārinī Sabhā's Centenary Ed., I, clvii ff.) we find a story much nearer our text. Narada becomes intoxicated with pride. To bring him to his senses, Viṡṇu sends forth his Māyā, or spirit of delusion, to create a phantom city. Narada falls in love with ViśvamohanI, the daughter of its king, Śila-nidhi. A svayaiṀvara is held, but the princess sees Narada with an ape's face, and refuses to marry him. As in the text, Viṡṇu carries her off himself. Narada then curses Viṡṇu, as in the text, but there is no mention of the discus episode. The Bhakta-māla (JEAS., 1910, 281 ff.) connects the discus episode with Durvāsas, not with Nārada.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 1} As in Tulasī-dāsa's version, the ape-like faces are visible only to the girl. To the other spectators, Narada and Parvata preserve their ordinary appearance, and no one knows that there is anything wrong with them.

^{page 21 note 1} I have not met this particular story about Gṛtsamada either in the Mahābhārata or in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa.

^{page 22 note 1} Mbh., iii, 8685 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 1} According to the Adhyātmā Rāmāyana (III, vii, 2 ff.) it was only an illusive form of Sitā, not Sitā herself, that was carried off.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 2} It is hardly necessary to point out that the Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa contains no reference to these two Rāvaṇas. Similarly the Adhyātma Ramāyana. According to them, Kaikasī's children by Viśravas were the Ten-headed Rāvaṇa, Kumbhakarṇa, Sārpaṇakhā, and Vibhiṡaṇa.