* Mahāsamaṇa – see Glossary under mahā and samaṇa.

* This is regarded as the inevitable result of committing a great crime against a Buddha or an Arahat (cf. the stories for vv. 69, 128, 176, 363): the Buddha or the Arahat has not caused it to happen.

* It is noteworthy that her exploit is viewed in these terms, and never as the killing of a husband. Presumably it was felt that, because of his actions, the bandit had forfeited this status; however, this suggests a different view of marriage from that of many Hindu texts, where a woman is encouraged to be devoted to her husband, however badly he treats her.

* Burlingame (1921: II, 268–71) translates devatā, ‘deity’, as ‘goddess’; but, though the word is grammatically feminine, it is used of any deity when the sex is not particularly important. Contrast the being in the previous story, who is specifically a devadhītā (literally, ‘daughter of the gods’) because her sex is relevant to the story.

* sapattivāsā. Burlingame (1921: II, 300) interprets their reply as ‘from the power of our husbands’, from the variant reading sapati, ‘one’s own husband’, in place of sapatti, ‘co-wife’.

*‘How does one become a yoga-kkhemin [a possessor of yoga-kkhema: see the note on vv. 21–3]?’

† ‘One becomes a yoga-kkhemin.’