Studies in Jainology Prakrit Literature and Languages

SR No.: 001597
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: B K Khadabadi
Publisher: Prakrit Bharti Academy
Publication Year: 1997
Total Pages: 460
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, & Language
File Size: 22 MB

Page 444

Studies in Jainology, Prakrit
429
Prakrit than to the corresponding ones of Sanskrit; and a number of Prakritisms are surprisingly found in the Vedic literature itself. Jules Bloch rightly holds that the oldest language, which was considered sacred, gave a model, but not birth to the latter viz., Classical Sanskrit. Similarly Sanskrit cannot be the basis for Prakrit as it stated by some grammarians and scholars. Hence Prakrit can be interpreted as the natural language of the masses and Sanskrit as the refined or cultivated language of the sistas the elite, who used it for literary purpose in the early days. Leaving aside the elaborate discussions advanced on this topic by eminent scholars in India and abroad, I may just quote here Dr.P.L.Vaidya's view, presented about two decades ago, in simple but lucid words:
"Prakrit is the oldest and natural language of Indian people, spoken by all from their childhood, out of which Sanskrit, the polished language of the cultured classes has developed. Some of you may feel that this is a startling statement made to magnify the importance of the Prakrit language. Far from it, there are evidences available to prove my statement; and they are culled from the oldest and most reliable works in Sanskrit itself. If you take the Mahabhāṣya of Patanjali (2nd century B.C.), you find the words like gona and goni, which mean a cow, are mentioned by Patanjali, the great grammarian and champion of Sanskrit, who asks his listeners not to make use of these words, as they are Apabhramsa, degraded, and as such unfit to be used by cultural classes at least on sacred occasions like the performance of a sacrifice. But words like goni, gona, gona were so popular and current among the people, that completely banning their use became impossible, and so they made it a rule, recorded by Patanjali himself or by his immediate predecessors, that one must not use such words at least on sacred occasions; yajña-karmani napabhramsatavai. Later classicists like Bhartrhari went a bit further and enunciated a theory that Prakrit words, so numerous and current among the vast population, are incapable of carrying any meaning by themselves, but they do have a meaning through the