More than any other, this section of the work might provide us with an insight into what was at stake for Nilakantha in writing the MKKh. Before discussing Nilakantha's contribution, it will be useful to review the intellectual context in which he wrote about these two doctrines.
It is clear, first of all, that in writing the MKKh, something perhaps unprecedented took place for Nilakantha.
I must admit that as far as I can see, one does not find in the MKKh any clear reference to the life of the city in which Nilakantha was living that is conditioned by an awareness of its contemporary vicissitudes.
Below is a list of the verses in the MKKh in the order in which they appear in the text.
(34.) MKKh 20 (RV 1.122.1) = MR 145; MKKh 21 (RV 1.122.14) = MR 146; MKKh 24 (RV 5.52.17) = MBhg 96; and MKKh 30 (RV 1.164.16) = MBhg 66.
(35.) RV 5.52.17 is introduced as MKKh 24 by reference to the Mantrabhagavata: tatha kevalayamunaya bhagavaddarsanahetutvam varnyate mantrabhagavate \ sapta me iti \ (N 11v 1.1).
(45.) MKKh 14, 15, and 16 are RV 8.78.10; 7.104.8; and 3.30.5 resp.
(47.) MKKh 18 is RV 5.34.1, where ajatasatru is to all appearances not a proper name but rather a bahuvrihi used as an epithet.
NC was perhaps especially proud of this discovery and hence reused it; or perhaps this discovery was the inspiration for the MKKh.