^{page 785 note 1} This is the prevalent spelling in the block-print, which however here reads Svorasvo.

^{page 785 note 2} Sic for yid: see the Lexica.

^{page 786 note 1} This line lacks 4 syllables!

^{page 786 note 2} Two syllables wanting!

^{page 787 note 1} Two syllables wanting.

^{page 787 note 2} Two syllables wanting.

^{page 787 note 3} Sic for zum?

^{page 787 note 4} Two syllables wanting.

^{page 787 note 5} Sic for stsol?

^{page 788 note 1} We here render rab. tu, as rab. dul = praśama seems inappropriate.

^{page 788 note 2} In this and the preceding verse the Tib. padmo (fem. !), which might be thought to represent Sk. Padmā, seems to be no more than padma or padminī.

^{page 788 note 3} To the Hindus, of course, the ocean with its regular tides, is a symbol of greatness which does not transgress its limits, a sublime conception perhaps suggested by their contrasted experience of rivers.

^{page 788 note 4} Phye . ma . leb = ‘butterfly,” corrupt?

^{page 789 note 1} Sbon is apparently a misprint for sboṅ: or should we read spoṅ and translate “to him who from the tīrtha renders homage to thee with loud cries” (mgrin . spoṅ = muktakaṇṭhaṃ)? Or have we mgrin. sṅon = Nīlakaṇṭha?

^{page 789 note 2} For the saṃskāras in speech compare Kumārasambhava vii, v. 90; lag = limb anga? But it would be possible to translate “since through the excellence of the saṃskāras of thy body arise the sweet sounds of the word of Brahmä.”

^{page 789 note 3} Subhāṣita?

^{page 789 note 4} See note on v. 5.

^{page 789 note 5} Perhaps this and the preceding line should be transposed: have we in this passage a reference to the author's own name (kāla = black)?

^{page 789 note 6} Is there a play on the double sense of jaḍa = (1) ‘chill,’ (2) ‘stupid’?

^{page 790 note 1} rkyen =‘circumstance,’ συμφςά?