________________
INTRODUCTION
83
cases as compared with kş>ch, which is a M feature 50 This singular feature cannot decide the issue, and what is more curious to note is that the Pkt grammarians allow both ks > kh, > kkh and ks > ch, > cch in M. This can be verified even by the present grammar. The rules relating to this are as follows: कस्कक्षां खः
III, 37 , : fag
III, 40 क्ष्मस्य च स्यात्
III, 41 क्ष्मादेर्वा
III, 42 With the above rules may be compared the following rules of Vr: 677787 a
III, 29 37271g 3:
IJI, 30 ATTOO al III, 31 So Dr. Ghosh's scepticisin about the value of Dandin's testimony relating to the language of the Setubandha is questionable.
Whatever might have been the original position of Pkt5 this much is certain that, three distinct phases of it, namely M, S and Mg early rose to literary emi
50. See KM ed. by Dr. GrosII, p. LXXV. He remarks on the same page-".........for it is always the case that a dominating literary language or dialect takes loan-words from another language or dialect, does so very sparingly. Hence one must be very sceptical either about the value of Dandin's testimony about the language of the Setubanndha or the theory of dialectic division based on the development of ks.”
Again Dr. Ghosh's assumption that kş> ch>chh is exclusively an M feature. But Hc while treating of his Prākịta which corresponds to M thinks the reverse
T: D: 127 JA, JI. 3. 51. JACOBI with the help of the Pkt verses cited in N$ suggests the existence of a poetic Pkt other than M of the drama before the rise of M to repute, Bhavisattakaha, pp. 84ff.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
