________________
An Unassimilated Group in Apabhramsa
plain when we consider the metrical value of these words. In the majority of cases, all these groups in Apabhramśa do not make the preceding syllable long by position as do Sanskrit and Prākrit conjuncts. The only exceptions to this rule are, in Mahāpurāna : 20. 23. 7. G. K. rattadrahi M. B. P. rattaddahi; 16. 21. 2. G. K. niprānau M. B. P. nippānau; 48. 19. 4. K. nipraniya A. P. nippāniya. In the last two cases the prefix nis is responsible for the length of the first syllable. This metrical nature of the conjuncts with r is also apparent from the fact that in all cases one or the other Ms. does not show it and yet their readings are metrically faultless. As against the tendency of the Prākrits, they can remain even after long vowels without affecting them : 10. 12. 7. ānāprana, 35. 11. 20. mahadrahi 42. 2. 7. prangane prängane 47. 8. 15. cuo pränaindo and so on. This rule is applicable to the forms found in Hemacandra's grammar and Chandonusāsana as well. But the two stanzas written by Rudrata do not conform to it. In fact, the conjuncts there are of a different type as far as their metrical value is concerned.
Thirdly we find that all these Apabhramsa words preserve the group only initially. This is, in fact, a result of the preceding peculiarity. Here also Rudrata's stanzas differ in allowing words like mitra, vibhrama etc. where the conjunct occurs medially. These two facts would naturally lead one to enquire whether in all such cases we are dealing with real conjuncts or a mere graphical habit of writing them while the actual pronunciation had no groups. Such a supposition can explain their metrical value and their presence initially where alone can such conjuncts be written without violating the metre. But here, I think, there is much more than a difference of orthography. In fact, the Old Indo-Aryan and the Middle Indo-Aryan conjuncts written with r after consonants represent a sound in which the plosive is long or double while the conjuncts in Apabhramśa are pronounced with a single plosive as the first member, which satisfactorily explains the metrical value of the preceding syllable in the two cases. Thus mitra really represents mit/tra while the Apabhramsa form like anaprāna is anā/prāna.
With these facts ascertained, it is obvious that we cannot put side by side the Apabhramsa-Sanskrit stanzas of Rudrata and the genuine conjuncts of Apabhramsa works and put them together as marking an earlier stage of growth as Jacobi does. In fact, the Apabhramba verses of Rudrata are in a way artificial as they combine the Sanskrit and Apabhramśa conjuncts in spite of their difference in sound, with the help of a defective orthography.
The other argument of Dr. Jacobi is that Haribhadra in his