yacanam. tdyd ti attho. For such apparent changes of case see the note on 2.1 see no reason for assuming anything other than an ordinary possessive genitive or genitive absolute here. Por sikkhamdandya see the note on 2. For pubbe-nivasam see the note on 63. For tassdi me see the note on 24. 105. For animitta see the note on 20. Thi-a 97.4-9: anantara-vimokkhdsin ti anantara uppanna-vimokKha asim, honti. magganantaram anuppattd ti phala-vimokkhd pana samdpatti-kale pavattamand pi pathama-magganantaram eva samuppattito tam upadaya ‘anantara-vimokkho ndma. yatha magga-samadhi anantarika-samadht ti vuccati. For the eight vimokkhas see PED (s.v. vimokkha). ‘Thi-a 97,9-10: anupadaya nibbutd ti ripadisu kifici agahetva kilesa-pari- nibbanena nibbuta asim. See also EV I, p. 341 (ad Th 1274). Notes 99 106. For titthanti m.c. in pada b to avoid the opening*~~~ see §70(e) and the note on 74. For -Akit- sce §63(a). B¢ and C* read dhi tav’ atthu jare jamme (better jammi) in pda c, and it is clear that Dhammapala had this reading too since Thi-a 97,15-16 expla aniganai sithila-bhava-karanddind jare jamme lamake hine tava tuyham dhi athu dhi-karo hotu. As P states (p. 184), this pada seems quite out of place here. 107-11. The rubric states that Bhadda was formerly a Jain, and the cty recognises that the practices mentioned in 107 are appropriate to that sect (see the note on 107), The introductory story in the cty (Thi-a 99,17 foll.) tells how the events leading up to Bhadda’s conversion to Buddhism took place in ‘Savatthi, which, as Mrs Rhys Davids says (Sist., pp. xviii and 67 note 3) does ‘wel agree with the reference to Gijihakita in r08 (637). The Buddha ranked Bhaddi faramact nf thace