331. The Burdwan Pundits make a mess of the last two verses. In 31, there is an incorrect reading in the Bengal texts. It is Pradhanaccha for pradanaccha. The Burdwan version repeats the error. K.P. Singha, of course, avoids it, but his version is rather incomplete.
332. Literally, "One should not follow that course of duty which they do not indicate. That again is duty which they command. This is settled."
333. Pratyasannah is explained by Nilakantha in a different way. I think, his interpretation is far-fetched.
334. i.e., who knows when truth becomes as harmful as untruth, and untruth becomes as righteous as truth.
335. Vide ante, Karna Parva.
336. Alludes to ante, Karna Parva. The Rishi, by pointing out the place where certain innocent persons had concealed themselves while flying from a company of robbers, incurred the sin of murder.
337. The allusion is to the story of an owl going to heaven for having, with his beaks, broken a thousand eggs laid by a she-serpent of deadly poison. The Burdwan Pundits have made nonsense of the first line of verse 8. There is no connection between the first and the second lines of this verse. K.P. Singha has rendered it correctly.
338. This refers to the well-known definition of Dharma ascribed to Vasishtha, viz., "That which is laid down in the Srutis and Smritis is Dharma." The defect of this definition is that the Srutis and the Smritis do not include every duty. Hence Vasishtha was obliged to add that where these are silent, the examples and practices of the good ought to be the guides of men, etc.
339. The Burdwan translator has made a mess of verse 21. K.P. Singha quietly leaves it out. The act is, Swakaryastu is Swakariastu, meaning 'let the appropriator be.'
340. The construction is elliptical. Yah samayam chikrashet tat kurvit.