________________
INTRODUCTION
133
as such when used in dramas but not Mk. Mk rather endorses the view of Hariscandra on the point of use of A pabhramśa in dramas as is evident from the verse referred to above. If Hariscandra's view is authentic, there is no point in considering Kālidāsa's Ap. verses in \Vikramorvasiyam IV to be spurious.
The name of Bhagirathavardhamāna occurs twice in Mk's work. While dealing with Cāņdāli and Nāgara Ap., Mk quotes the view of Bhagirathavardhamāna who enjoins o-ending in nomsing of a stems but not in vocatives ( XIV. 3). The other instance of quoting his view is at XVII. 13. Here too in case of Nāgara Apa. the same authority enjoins 0-ending of a stenis in nom. sing. Bhagirathavardhamāna like Aniruddhitbhatta as an authority on Pkt is niet with only in the work of Mk, and including Hariscandra all the three will remain a mystery to us so long as their works are not discovered.
In one place Mk quotes the authority of Paingalas ( followers of Pingala ) in connection with the optional use of o-ending of a stems in M. The line runs thus:
Higgralcafeefa arate a şt: 1 V. 34 I have not met with such example in the famous Prākrtapaingala. But such kind of use has been enjoined by He and his followers (Cf. Hc. III. 38 ). Then should we take Paingalāḥ of Mk as referring to Pingala or the followers of the Western School ? Mk quotes lines from Prākrti-pingala in five places of his grammar. In one of these places he shows his great respect to Pingala (see V. 106 comm.).
67. What is most curious to note is that Mk quotes a couple of words as occurring in Brhatkathā
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
