V. 2. Alolatwam () should have been interpreted, indifference to objects of sense, rather than alienus a lascivia animus.

V. 6. Sarga (Я) is rendered natura but it is properly creation or class of creatures.

V. 7. Pravrittim cha nivrittim cha janá na vidurasura ( प्रवृत्तिच निवृत्त्रिं च जना न विदुरासुराः) neque agendi nec cessandi rationem norunt homines dæmoniaci ; but what is the ratio of acting or desisting-in giving the literal meaning of the terms, the translator has here as in many places lost sight of the conventional sense they bear-praviritti means, the discharge of active duties, nivritti their abandonment at the proper season: the first implies the discharge of the obligations of caste and station, the performance of rites and observance of ceremonies, whilst the second expresses addiction to contemplative meditation alone: the man of the demoniac creation, it is said, regards neither the one nor the other of these duties, or in other words, is neither a follower of the Vedas nor a worshipper of Vishnu. · It is clear from the subsequent passage that the Bauddhas are especially intended as the beings of the demoniacal order. Sankara states them to be the members of the Lokáyatika sect, a sect which was a division of the Bauddhas.

Section 17 is upon the three kinds of faith, or faith as influenced by the prevalence of the three Gunas severally, and all acts, whether of the ceremonial or abstractive class performed without faith, are declared to be Asat (7) non existent and null.

The question put by Arjuna which leads to this exposition is, what is the condition or classification of those who worship in faith without regard to the rules of the Sastras. Nishthá (f) rendered Statio by Schlegel and guide by Wilkins, is rather Avastha, () or Asraya, (:) manner or place of being, and the Legis scriptæ præceptis neglectis, conveys

perhaps more than is intended by the text, as it is the inattention to forms or ceremonial rites, rather than to legal or moral precept, that is alluded to.

In V. 10. We think the term Yátayama (IA) is imperfectly rendered by vapidum : it is literally that of which the time is past, but is described as signifying food, ill dressed, or that which has been suffered to get half cold before it is eaten. Paryushitam (f) stale is omitted altogether, and it is similarly left out, or at least misplaced, in the English translation.

V. 19. Múrhágrahena (H) is the person, not the thing; it is he who assents to a foolish doctrine and not ex inepto commento, only.

V. 20. furnishes an example of an unusual and unsuccessful attempt at amplified translation, in which it is evidently intended to give the comment as well as the text. That gift is of the Satwa Guna or pure kind, observes Krishna, which is given to one who can be of no assistance; that is, the commentators say, to one who can make no return. Wilkins gives the sense well enough, that which is given by the disinterested," although that which is disinterestedly given,' would have been preferable: either however is better than the Largitio ei, qui haud gratiosus est apud potentes :' a sense that Anupakárine (37) cannot by any means be made to represent.

In V. 26. We are disposed to question the translation of the explanation given of the term Sat, () which is there said to signify the properties of what is real and righteous and all excellent acts. It is not therefore merely said or used, de veritate ac honestate, but it actually imports the abstract properties of being, and excellence, and the term Essentia, which has been rather exceptionably applied to the Satwa Guna, would have been very correctly substituted in this place for veritas: whilst in lieu of honestas, præstantia would have been more apposite: again, prasaste kar

mani,() should be in' not ' de' laudabili opere, for in the marriage ceremony and other rites, the formula, Om tat sat' is repeated, and it is the repetition of Sat on such occasions that is here especially alluded to, conformably to the tenor of the two preceding stanzas. In the following stanza, the Karma tadarthoyam, () is of disputable translation: the word tat, that, being applicable either to what has gone before, sacrifice, &c. or to Brahme or supreme spirit. Schlegel follows the first, Wilkins the second interpretation: we are rather disposed to prefer the latter.

The eighteenth, and concluding section, is a sum-. mary of the doctrines of the Gita, and explains particularly what is intended by the abandonment of works. This is, as before, resolved into relinquishment of consequences, and it is declared, that acts of worship, mortification, and charity are not to be forsaken, neither are the duties of cast, and condition to be neglected: it is only indispensible, that all hope of benefit from the discharge of these obligations shall be utterly discarded, and this, with trust in Krishna, as the supreme, secures emancipation from corporal existence.

In V. 6. Krishna tells Arjuna those acts (that is, those to which he has just referred or sacrifice penance and charity,) are to be performed. The translator however has not attended to the relation of etáni (PA) those, as he has explained the acts, in a parenthesis to be 'bellum militi gerendum et sp: the duty of discharging religous, however, not social, obligations, is the subject of Krishna's descant, and the explanation is therefore an error. The latter are subsequently treated of.

V. 23, The word Kritánta, () has not been understood by the translator. He has rendered Sánkhyé Kritante Proktani (सांख्ये कृतान्ते प्रेोक्तानि) by rationali demonstrationi demonstrata, but Kritante is not an epithet of Sankhyé: it is the denomination

of a different school of philosophy, or as Wilkins accurately translates the passage, declared in the Sankhya, and Vedanta Sastras', Kritánta, meaning literally the end of works, or the Philosophy which crowns the previous observances enjoined by the Veda.

In the following stanza again adhishthanam (f) has been misunderstood: it does not mean regimen, but site, receptacle, or in other words the body as the seat of the elements and faculties: five instrumental causes being necessary, it is said, to the accomplishment of all acts, or place, agent, instrument, active effort, and the will of God, not as Schlegel writes, fatum.

In the specification of the different kinds of knowledge in verse 21 and 22, the translation is far from distinct or correct; knowledge is affected by the three gunas: in conjunction with the satwa guna it recog nise the universality and identity of spirit in all states; this is the doctrine of the Vedanta and of the Gita : when influenced by the Raja guna, it contemplates spirit as individualised by external impressions; and when associated with the tama guna it limits spirit by its connexion with matter, and gives it only local and temporary existence: the stanzas conveying these notions relatively to the two last qualities run thus. That knowledge which by the individuality of bodies conceives distinct properties and forms (of spirit) in all being, that is knowledge influenced by passion. But that knowledge which attaches itself to a single object as to the whole, which springs from no cause, which possesses not the truth, and is contemptible, that is consi dered as the knowledge that is affected by darkness." The passage is thus rendered in the latin translation Singulatim* autem quæ cognitio varios existendi mo

*

पृथक्केन तुयज्ज्ञानं नानाभावान् पृथग्विधान् । बेति सर्व्वषु भूतेषु तज्ज्ञानं विद्धि राजसं ॥ यत् तु कृत्स्नवदेकस्मिन् कार्य्ये सक्तम gai (3afaldaęc a AR, A1AEZZIEŃ ||

dos peculiares novit in omnibus quae existunt, hane cognitionem scias esse impetuosam. Quæ vero ad singulum negotium applicata est, quasi sit universitas rerum, principiis carens, veri summae haud consentanea atque angusta, ea cognitio caliginosa nuncupatur.

We imagine the translator had Lucretius or Tasso in his recollection in the following passage, Quidquid circa marginem veneni instar, in fundo nectaris est simile; for although the idea of the Poets is not unfamiliar to the Hindus, the exact notion is not here expressed. Wilkins is much more correct, that which in the beginning is as poison, and in the end as the water of life:' there is no allusion to margo or fundum.

In proposing in V. 45, as an emendation of the text to separate Swakarmanirata, (far:) and read Swakermani-rata, (f :) our translator, has for a moment forgotten his grammar: in the form he proposes, the dental letter (7) is inadmissible, the first word should be (f) and as none of the MSS. read the word so, it is clear that the proposed emendation is founded upon a mistake: we observe indeed that he has corrected himself in an additional note.

Another emendation is actually made in the last stanza of the poem, and Schlegel reads the second line Tatra Sri Vijayobhuti Dhruváníti Matirmama, (♬ fàmùi yfa gauìfâ afaà) Hic Faustitas, victoria, principatus; cuncta ea stabilia, Sic stat sententia. The last phrase would at any rate be so far incorrect that it omits mea,' Sanjaya the speaker, giving it only as his conviction that all the blessings enumerated result from Krishna's presence. Instead of Dhruvániti, (af) Stabilia, however, the common and no doubt correct reading is Dhruvá () Fortitudo, and Niti (f) Consilium; Niti being detached by all the commentators, and explained by its cognate synonime, Naya, (4) royal leading, state policy or the wisdom

G