Kuvalayamala Part 2

SR No.: 002778
Original Sutra Author: Udyotansuri
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1970
Total Pages: 368
Language: Sanskrit, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 12 MB

Page 120

INTRODUCTION
81
without making any distinctions; any way it can safely be said that the Apabhraíía used by Uddyotana is duly covered by the rules given by Hemacandra; and this is but natural, because both of them hail from nearly the same linguistic area and belong to the same tradition of learning.
Uddyotanasūri has illustrated another bhāsā, namely, Pesāyā, i. e., Paisācī, as we have it elsewhere: and the passages are included in $ 139. They have already attracted the attention of earlier scholars like L. B. GANDHI, A MASTER and F. B. J. KUIPER. The last two have attempted not only a critical constitution of the text based on JP but also discussed grammatical forms and presented a translation in English. Paišācī language and literature have been a matter of great scholarly curiosity, investigation and even speculation for one main reason, namely, the Brhatkathā of Guņādhya was written in Paiśācī.
The two Mss. J and P vary in details of readings; individually the Mss are not without faulty readings; and they seem to have suffered unconscious syllabic changes because the Paiśācī passages come in the midst of nonPaiśācī ones. As these passages are thoroughly scrutinised by MASTER and KUIPER, only a few observations will be added here in the light of the rules of Hemacandra. In these passages the tendency to retain invervocalict (quite possible in Pāli-and now and then even in Ardhamāgadhī both of which form along with Paiśācī an earlier stratum of MIA), to change even d to t, to use n instead of n, to prefer yy (=dy) for ji, to use verbal forms like lappiyyate, ujjhit (t)u [ū] na and to use words like Kusumotara tämotara in Hemacandra) sinnāna and hitapaka is quite in tune with the rules of Hemacandra. The use of I for 1 and some traits of Cūlikā Paiśācī are not noticed here.
Then may be studied together three contexts in the Kuvalayamālā in which some conversational passages occur; first (55.15 f.), talk of the decrepit-anddestitutes; secondly (63.18 f.), prescriptions of the Grāma-mahattaras for the purification of culprits who have committed the sin of mitra-droha; and thirdly (151.18 f.), the conversation between the boys belonging to a residential school. The grammatical substratum for these passages is literary Apabhramsa (the first pāssage could be easily styled as Apabhraíśa); but there are certain elements in them which give a different tone and flourish to them. The Indian society has all along a two-fold current of languages: the literary and the spoken. In a way, they were independent, but all the while running parallelly with mutual interaction. These three contexts, under study, are a part and parcel of a
A. N. UPADHYE: Paiśāci Language and Literature, Annals of the B. O. R. I., XXI, parts i-ii, pp. 1-37, Poona 1940, in which are included some earlier references. A. MASTER : The Mysterious Paisāci, JRAS, 1943, 217 f. V. RAGHAVAN: The original Paisāci Bșhatkathā, Bhārata Kaumudi, Allahabad 1947 pp. 575-588; see also his Bhoja's Srngāra-prakāśa' (Madras 1963), pp. 846 ff. Asada, a commentator on the Sarasvatikanthābharana believed that the Paisāci quotation panamatha etc., given by Hemacandra is the adi-namaskāra of the Byhatkathā, Bharatiya Vidyā (Hindi) III, i, pp. 231. Dr. SUKUMAR SEN (Journal of the O. I., XI, 3, pp. 193 ff, especially pp. 207-8) holds the view that what the Prākrit grammarians call Paisāciwas probably the early MIA literary language which after being cultivated by the southern schools of Buddhism later received the name Pāli in Ceylon'. There is no doubt, and it is accepted, that Pāli and Paisāci have much in common, and form perhaps the earlier group.