Parmatmaprakasha and Yogsara

SR No.: 001876
Original Sutra Author: Yogindudev
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Paramshrut Prabhavak Mandal
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 550
Language: Sanskrit, Hindi, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 13 MB

Page 100

Introduction
language is fossilised in literary form elther in traditional memory or in books. So there is no sufficient justification for the assumption that the Apabhramia treated by Hemacandra is the same as the current language of his times. It is more reasonable to say that the Apabhramia stage represented by his grammar was altogether fossilised in literary form, and it must have been at least the next previous, or even earlier, stage of the language current in his times. Grammars cannot be based on merely spoken languages: at the most we can appeal to this or that usage in the current language with such phrases as loka". This means that Joindu can be put earlier than Hemacandra at least by a couple of centuries.
v) Hemacandra, it has been shown by Prof. Hiralal quotes some verses from Dahapahuda of Ramasimha who in turn has enriched his work by drawing bodily many dohas from P.-prakasa and Yagasara of Joindu. So Joindu is not merely earlier than Hemacandra, but the periods of these two are intervened by that of Ramasimha.
vi) I have shown above how some verses of Tattvasara have close similarities with the dohas of P.-prakasa. It is not improbable that both might have drawn from some common source. But as the verses stand, in view of the reasons stated by me above? I think, it is Devasena that follows Yogindu. Devasena has often utilised material from earlier works in his compositions. We know Devasena's date definitely. He finished his Dartanasara in Samvat 990, i.e., A.D. 933.
vil) The following two verses deserve comparison :
1. Yogasära, 65:
2. Kattigiyanuppikkha, 279
विरला जाणहि तत्तु बहु विरला णिसुणहिं तत्तु । विरला झावहिं तत्तु जिय विरला धारहि तत्तु ॥
75
farcar foregone out forcer aroffer arouch awa' i विरला भावहि तच्वं विरताणं धारणा होदि ॥
Kattigiyanuppakka of Kumara is not written in the Apabh. dialect; so the Present tense 3rd p. pl. forms, misuṇahi and bhavahi (preferably -hi) are intruders there, but the same are justified in Yogasara. The contents of both the verses are identical. The fact that the doha is converted into a gatha does not admit the possibility that some later copyist might have taken it over from Yogasära. In all probability it is Kumara that is following the above verse of Joindu consciously or unconsciously. The personality of Kumara is much obscured by certain mythical associations, and his age is
1 Intro. to. Dahapahuda p. 22.
2 On p. 28
Published with Jayacandra's Hindi Commentary. Bombay 1904.