[Footnote 74:  Yamasya sadana.  III. 11. 66.  He now has hells, and he it is who will destroy the world.  He is called ‘the beautiful’ (III. 41. 9), so that he must, if one take this Rudrian epithet with the citation above, be loosely (popularly) identified with Civa, as god of death.  See the second note below.]

     [Footnote 75:  The old story of a mortal’s visit to Yama to
     learn about life hereafter (Cat.  Br. xi. 6.1; Katha Up.,
     of N[=a]ciketas) is repeated in xiii. 71.]

[Footnote 76:  v. 42. 6:  Civa[h.] civ[=a]n[=a]m acivo ’civ[=a]n[=a]m (compare xii 187. 27:  ’only fools say that the man is dead’).  Dharma (Justice) seems at times to be the same with Yama.  M[=a]ndavya goes to Dharma’s sadana, home (compare Yama’s sadana), just as one goes to Yama’s, and interviews him on the justice of his judgments.  As result of the angry interview the god is reborn on earth as a man of low caste, and the law is established that a child is not morally responsible for his acts till the twelfth year of his age (i.108. 8 ff.).  When Kuru agrees to give half his life in order to the restoration of Pramadvar[=a], his wife, they go not to Yama but to Dharma to see if the exchange may be made, and he agrees (i. 9. 11 ff., a masculine S[=a]vitr[=i]i).]

     [Footnote 77:  The hells are described in xii. 322. 29 ff. 
     The sight of ‘golden trees’ presages death (ib. 44).]

     [Footnote 78:  The ordinary rule is that “no sin is greater
     than untruth,” xii. 162. 24, modified by “save in love and
     danger of life” (Laws, passim).]

[Footnote 79:  The same scenes occur in Buddhistic writings, where Yakkhas ask conundrums.  For example, in the Hemavatasutta and [=A]tavakasutta the Yakkha asks what is the best possession, what brings bliss, and what is swettest, to which the answer is:  faith, law, and truth, respectively.]

     [Footnote 80:  Karm[=a]ntaram up[=a]santas, i.e.,
     vir[=a]mak[=a]lam upagacchantas.]

     [Footnote 81:  II. 36. 3 ff.  The phraseology of vs. 5 is
     exactly that of [Greek:  ton etto ldgon kreitto poithnsi],
     but the Pundit’s arguments are ‘based on the law.’]

[Footnote 82:  See above.  In a later period (see below) the question arises in regard to the part played by Creator and individual in the workings of grace, some claiming that man was passive; some, that he had to strive for grace.]

     [Footnote 83:  Perhaps ironical.  In V. 175. 32, a woman cries
     out:  “Fie on the Creator for this bad luck,” conservative in
     belief, and outspoken in word.]

     [Footnote 84:  III. 30. 17.  The gosava is a
     ‘cow-sacrifice.’  The pu[n.][d.]ar[=i]ka is not explained
     (perhaps ’elephant-sacrifice’).]