471 ([return])
[ Both the Bengal and the Bombay printed texts are in fault regarding the word Pandupurvaja. The Bombay text makes it a nom. plural. The Bengal text makes it an accusative singular. There can be no doubt that the Burdwan Pundits are right in taking it as a vocative.]
472 ([return])
[ That you know me to be invincible is a fortunate circumstance, for if you had not known this, you would have fought on for days together and thus caused a tremendous destruction of creatures. By your coming to know, that destruction may be stopped.]
473 ([return])
[ The adjective Vahu in the first line of 32 qualifies rathinas in the second line. The last of the verse is a nom. sing. and not a vocative.]
474 ([return])
[ The Bengal texts read mahasuram in the second line of the verse. This seems to be vicious. A latter reading would be mahasuram (the great Asura). The Bombay text reads rane suram. I adopt the last.]
475 ([return])
[ i.e. Thou art still a woman though the sex hath been changed.]