Dhurtakhyan

SR No.: 001861
Original Sutra Author: Haribhadrasuri
Author: Jinvijay
Publisher: Saraswati Pustak Bhandar Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2002
Total Pages: 160
Language: Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Story, Literature, P000, & P030
File Size: 14 MB

Page 84

A CRITICAL STUDY
ttum-je I. 45 which deserves special attention. je is used as a proclitic here. Such forms are found in the Patimacariya also ghetturh-je 1. 14, hamtumn-je 53. 54, nauh-je 118. 62. According to Hemacandra (VIII. ii. 217) this je is merely an expletive for pada-purane."
At III. 58 and V. 111 jattena and loena are used in the sense of Loc., so also santhiehimh & rattehi either stand for Loc., or even Gen. Similar instances are found in the Acarañga as well. It is interesting to note that Apabh. has a common termination -him in the Instr. and Loc. pl. Loc. for Inst.: valaggate I. 24, 53 (cf. Paum. 8. 42, 94); Loc. for Abl.: pães II. 45, bāhāsu I. 37, ūrūsu I. 37 (but ürühim II. 46'). nama namena I. 7, IV. 7, is just a repetition". Parallels for it are found in the Mahabharata (Virata 2. 1), Ramayana and Paumacariya 2. 8, 21. In the Pauma. (41. 46) and Vasudeva-hindi (p. 12) nama is suffixed to the proper name, Aggikeu-nāmo, Jambu- namo; and these are later on again followed by namena. One feels from giri vva II. 34, limda vva V. 120 that perhaps vva is being used for vat. The dialect used by Haribhadra has much common with that of Patmacariya; and some of the traits have definite stamp of antiquity in the evolution of Prakrits. In view of its inheritance of certain Ardhamagadhi characteristics and its close affinity with the idiom of Palmacariya, we may call it Jaina Mäbärăştri, following the terminology of Jacobi and Pischel.
53
――
The style of Dhirtäkhyana, on the whole, is simple and fluent, and quite suited to the conversational tone in which the rogues are carrying on their learned wrangling. Haribhadra follows here the epic model, and is addressing an audience of mediocre education and not a learned gathering. No artificial attempt is made to embellish the language with poetic ornaments. The author's mastery over canonical language has unconsciously introduced expressions like sannihia-paḍihero, sannddha-baddha-kavayd etc. (II. 6, 10) which remind us of Ardhamagadhi phrases. In descriptions, however, the normal style has not been maintained: long compounds are easily introduced in describing the rainy season (I. 8 f.), Ganges (I. 25 f.), Tilottama (I. 62 f., II. 29 f.), etc. The description of the cemetary (V. 82f.), though quite dignified as a piece of composition, is not only out of place and proportion, but also conspicuously pedantic in its construction in this small work. The first four fantastic tales are remarkably racy in their style, and the handling of expression is quite in keeping with the presentation of events.
1 Some illustrations are already noted from the Paphāvāgaraṇaim; and Dr. Sen has observed thus: "The infinitive with je, which occurs twice (ginhium-je p. 122a, ginheum-je p. 113a), occurs in the canon not earlier than in some late gatha-prakirṇaka." A critionl Introduction to the Paphävägaranaimh, Würzburg 1936, p. 13. See also Das Mahanisihasutta by W. Schubring, Berlin 1918, p. 92.
2 Jacobi: Some Ancient Jaina Works, Modern Review, pp. 574-77, December 1914; also his Bhavisattakaha, p. 60 of the Intro. Ghatage: Instrumental and Locative in Ardha-Magadhi, Indian Historical Quarterly, vol. XIII, NO. 1, 1931.
3 See the paper 'Repetition in Prakrit Syntax', p. 50, noted above.