Prakritsarvaswam

SR No.: 001369
Original Sutra Author: Markandey
Author: Krushnachandra Acharya
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1968
Total Pages: 424
Language: Prakrit, Sanskrut, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Grammar
File Size: 20 MB

Page 18

PREFACE
11
ble mistakes. It will be best to quote Prof. KEITH whose observations with regard to I are more or less applicable to each of them :“The scribe who was clearly unfamiliar with Oriya, as the confusion of mh and mbh, ? and ru, na and pa, ka and u shows, evidently knew no Prakrit, and his work is full of errors". As a matter of fact unless one is acquainted with particular type of mistake committed for a particular letter or word, it is very hard to know what the word or the passage means. To number a few, śa or śā in some places is written for ţă such as in case of Sākki for the correct word Ţākki. This corrupt reading led PISCHEL to conclude that Mk described a Vibhāsā called Säkki (Grammatik, 3). The word kaňho has been written as kanvo in IO. Here the confusion of the scribe with regard to the Oriya conjunct nha is obvious which has been wrongly taken for nva. Similarly the word nadālam is read as aļālam in Io, Here it is to be noted that ancient way of writing the letter a in Oriya was exactly like the latter na with an oblique or horizontal stroke inside it which was likely to be confused with actual na. This accounts for the confusion between naạālam and adālam in IO.
Likewise confusion between tu and u, da and u, tta and u, bha and u, ma and na, ha and da, kta and ja, na and tā, dda and dya, nna and nda, dha and tha, tta and bha, pa and na are remarkable. In order to ascertain these misreadings one has to be acquainted with the mode of writing in Oriya both ancient and modern. Apart from the above mistakes the scribes do not also very often distinguish between short i and long i, short u and long ù, e and o, and the three sibilants, especially between palatal ś and dental s. They also very often omit visarga from the words concerned and occasionally anusvāra too. Judged from these aspects, U among the four Mss. is tolerably good and G sometimes more correct than any of the other three.
In constituting the critical text the following broad principles have been generally observed. The reading agreed upon by all the Mss. including B is the best. Preference is always given to B and wherever doubt arises with regard to a particular reading as discussed above, the comparison of readings of Mss. is resorted