________________
A Comprehensive and Critical dictionary of Präkrit Languages (Introduction)
519
JŚ. (2) M., S., Mg. (3) Apa. The above sequence of languages within a group will be strictly followed, so that quotations from them will occur in that order. For example, if a word does not occur in AMg. then quotations from JM. and Jś will follow. The same arrangement will be valid for the second group, first M. and then s. and/or Mg. The Apa. quotations will come last, which is as it should be in view of the place of that language in the Middle Indo-Aryan group.
The sequence between the first two groups cannot be pre-decided. According to the evidence found either of them may get precedence over the other. Considerations like the phonetic shape of the word, grammatical peculiarities and meaning will be taken into account in this regard. The chronology of all the books used for this dictionary cannot be definitely settled vis à vis all the other books. Therefore a convenient sequence which will be followed in giving quotations is given in the list called 'Language and subject-wise classification with approximate chronology of the Prākrit works'. In the case of AMg. the traditional divisions of the canon are followed though no pretence is made of a strict chronological sequence. In the canon there are sufficient indications to believe that its parts do not belong to the same period and are often separated from each other by a long period of time. But for the convenience of reference, a book will be treated as one unit and all quotations from any of its part will come together. It should be particularly noted that even the demarcation of languages like AMg., JM. or JŚ. is not always clear and often remains doubtful. Traditions are divided as regards the number of the Prakīrņaka works and many of them are attributed to writers who lived long after the finalisation of the canon. For the dictionary of the present type such inaccuracies are inevitable. All that we can do in this regard is to label a word as older or younger.
For giving reference it may be noted that more than one edition of a book is required to be used for citations. This is because they differ in readings, orthography and divisions of the text. In a few cases a book has two versions, a shorter one and a longer one. In such a case a word may occur in one but not in the other. To meet this difficulty, references to more than one edition are given after the quotation, the second reference being in parenthesis. When we quote from a Cūrņi or a Țīkā we give reference to the folio, side (a or b) and line because without this help the explanation of a word in a given text cannot be easily traced in the commentaries. The system of numbering various parts of the text, except for the largest divisions is to say the least, chaotic and there is no agreement between different editions of the same text. The original divisions into śrutaskandha, Adhyāya, Uddeśaka