Madhuvidya

SR No.: 006525
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 762
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, & Philosophy
File Size: 17 MB

Page 315

M. A. MEHENDALE
u < -7.40 cf. piti (pit) and bhāti (bhrādr) in D, J, while pitu nd bhralu in S, M. Among the Mysore edicts jtr gives the northvestern form pitu, but br gives the eastern one piti. The original lraft therefore possibly contained piti owing to the influence of he king's speech. While this was rightly replaced by the non-eastern ritu in jtr, it was allowed to remain in br.
In br line 9, HULTZSCH reads prānesu drahyitavyan and translates firmness (of compassion) must be shown towards animals. He lerives (p. cxxviii) drahyitavya from ydth and regards that in this orm the vowel ? > 19.16 According to WOOLNER (Asoka Glossary, Calcutta, 1924) dra here represents dari? as he considers the form o be gerundive of * darhyati (from the same root v dịh). In any ase the form can be regarded as north-western, because in S we iave instances showing both the tendencies : Thus we have grahatha (gļhastha) showing > ra, and draśana (darśana), drasayitu (darśayitvā) showing transposition of 7.18
15. The same tendency is witnessed in the Niya Prakrta, cf. pitu, bhratu, madu, etc. BURROW, The Language of the Kharosthi Documents from Chinese Turkestan (Cambridge, 1937) 8 68, 72, BURROW, however, does not notice this treatment under -T. 85. The later Tor Dherai Kharosthi inscription of about 200 A.D.), however, gives -pitrinan as the language of this inscription is highly Sanskritized. See KONOW, Kharoshthi Inscriptions, (CII, Vol. 2, part 1, Calcutta, 1929), No. 92. Pāli has the vowel u as can be seen from the forms of pitar and mätar given by GEIGER 891 (for exceptional occurrence of the piti and mati in Pali cf. GEIGER 812, 877). In later Pkts forms with w are more common, though i forms occur in Amg. and JM (PISCHEL 8 55 $ 391). As regards piti in br. it may also be observed that the form had already come to the north through the Kälsi versions of the Asokan edicts. The D version once (IV. 4) gives pitu which may be due to assimilation cí. the form m o}t[il-pitu-susūsă.
16. In the Niya Prākta, however, the regular treatment of 1 is 1>1, Ti, but not ta (BURROW $5). With this we can compare the Abokan dridha etc. in S. Both ra and ti treatments are, however, found in the later Kharoşthi inscr. cf. MEHENDALE, Historical Grammar of Inscriptional Prakrits (Poona, 1948) $500.
17. Similar transposition of 1 is practically absent in the later Kharosthi documents (BURROW $ 39), but it is found in the Kharosthi Dhammapada. cf. drugati, pravata, etc. BURROW BSOS 8.428.
18. It may, however, be observed that the explanation of the form from V dth is not very satisfactory, as the use of this verb with prānesu would be unusual. Generally in such contexts we find the use of anārambha or anälarbha 'abstension from killing? (Rock Edicts 3, 4, 11, Pillar Edict 7). Once we have also sayamo 'gentleness' (better 'self-restraint') (Rock Edict 9), and once pāna-dakhinä 'boon of life' (Pillar Edict 2). The idea to be conveyed in such expressions is that no violence should be done to the animals, and this is hardly brought out by V drh 'to be firm etc.' with the locative prānesu. BLOCH (p. 150 and f.n. 16) also derives the text word from V druh, and compares with this expression the use of samyama in the rock edict IX noted above. He translates - (Il faut) se contraindre à l'égard des êtres vivants.
Madhu Vidya/290 Jain Education International