When pūrvaraiga is performed the organisers of song should use the śuddhā (jātis)³ in āsārita,⁴⁷ pāņikā ⁴⁸ and the like and after that the formation (alteration) of anisas of jātis (should be taken up). Along with the order of <math>\bar{a}s\bar{a}ritas^{49}</math> and because of that of the <math>angah\bar{a}ras^{50}</math> the formation or variation of amsas in their svaras i.e. in svaras of jatis should be done in the text of vardhamāna⁴⁵¹ The sixty-three amsas that have thus been spoken of, out of them each one is accorded the position of ainsa (at a given time) (and accordingly) the ṣāḍava and auḍava formation that is obtained (on account of rule or prescription) is sometimes given up.⁵ The sixty-three amsas that have been spoken of, out of them each one has to be arranged as anisa (in a given melodic set-up). (In specific situations created by the arrangement of different anisas) sometimes the formation of ṣāḍavita and auḍuvita that is obtained in the context of a given jāti, is given up.¹ He (the author) clarifies this itself. Şādja-madhyamā does not become ṣāḍava on niṣāda being amsaand also on <math>gandhara</math> (being amsa), because <math>^{52}</math> the omission of a samvadi of the amsa is not accepted. This means that on niṣāda being the amśa, the jāti ṣadjamadhyā does not become ṣāḍava. Why? In ṣaḍja-grāma, in the prescription about ṣāḍava the omission of gandhara is not there.⁶ On gandhara being amśa, it should be known to be non-ṣāḍava by omission of niṣāda because of the negation of the omission of the sanivādī of the aniśa. Kaiśikī, raktagāndhārī (and) gāndhāri, (these three jātis do not become ṣāḍava) when pañcama is amśa, (by the omission of ṛṣabha on account of the negation of the omission of the samvādī of the amśa). Similarly, ṣāḍjī does not become ṣāḍava through (the omission of niṣāda) on gāndhāra being the amśa and şadjodicyavā should be known not to be şādava (through the omission of ṛṣabha ) on dhaivata being the aṁśa.