________________
Loye and Loge in the same line, only the old forms should be accepted. It is a matter of contentment that some scholars like professors Madhusudan Dhaki and K.R. Chandra and others have drawn attention in this direction. I am hopeful that in the future editions of the canons, these facts will be attended to. As the lingual form of a book is very much helpful in determining its period, this is the responsibility of scholars that oldest form of the language of the work is retained.
On a comparative study we find that many words and parts of verses and prose of Acharanga, Sutrakritang, Uttaradhyayan, Dashavaikalik and Inatadharmakatha are also available in Rishibhashit. But the comparative study of the language forms of these reveals that from the view point of language the text of Rishibhashit is older. For example, a comparative study of Tetaliputta chapter of Rishibhashit and 'Teyaliputta chapter of Inata reveals that the language of Rishibhashit has predominence of the sound 'Ta' and is older. Similarly in Acharanga, Sutrakritang, Uttaradhyayan, and Dashvaikalik, whereas Aaya' word has been used for Atma, in Rishibhashit, except one or two places, the 'Aata' form has been used. This confirms its antiquity.
Conclusion Thus we observe that according to its language and subject matter, Rishibhashit is proved to be the oldest work of Prakrit literature. As we have proved earlier, this work is the oldest in the whole Pali and Prakrit literature, leaving aside, the first Shrut-Skandha of Acharanga, and belongs to the 5ih century B.C. it is not only that this work is important because it is old, but also because the mentions of the ancient sages and their beliefs are historically valuable. It contains details about some such sages about whom no further information is available. Uniqueness of this work lies in its being free of sectarian prejudice.
Its writing in the Jain tradition is a sign of the tolerence and openness of Jainism on one hand and on the other that the stream
226
FTHATE YANS