________________
96
11. By the time of Ptj. a number of such pairs were seen current. Thus, bhiruka beside P's bhiluka (on 3.2.174), plakşa: praksa (1.433.1), aśvavāla : asvavara, Müladeva: Muradeva, laghusyada: raghusyada, alam: aram, svanguli : svanguri, kapilaka: kapiraka, tilvilka: tilvirika, loman: roman, pāṁsula : pāṁsura, kalman karman, śukla: sukra ( on 8.2.18) and paliyoga: pariyoga (on 8.2.22).
(e) Voicing.
1. P mentions libi side by side with lipi to derive the forms libikara and lipikara (3,2.21).
:
2. The name Patañjali, probably a patronymic from Patañcala Kapya (of BĀrUp 3.3.1, 7.1), bears according to Weber and S. Sen,31 an MIA stamp.
3. Mañcaka is noted by Ptj as corrupted in his time into manjaka (I.14.20, II.201.3).
4. DhP shows ag- (130) beside Vak- (129) in identical sense.
(f) Devoicing
1. As was pointed out by me elsewhere,32 the tendency of devoicing in the following cases: 1, kupya, recorded by P (3.1.114) as an irregular form, derived by Ptj from gup- (II.86.22 );
2. sankara current with P (3.2.14) and Ptj and suggested by Kuṇaravāḍava (who preceded Ptj) to be a corruption from sangara (II.100.8f.)
3. payya-recorded as an irregular form by P ( 3.1.129) is derived by (Kty and) Pij from ma- (II.89.13). If that were correct, could this be regarded as a case of devoicing at the time of P ?
(g. 1) Cerebralisation: Unconditional
n33
1. The roots ✔pan-, No pan- (3.1.28; DhP 1.466f.), √bhan- (RV) : bhan- (DhP I. 474), mun- (DhP VI. 44) etc.
2. Kty (1.3.1.2) has noted the form aṇapayati.
3. Ptj (1.20.12) has noted the form Devadinna.
t #85
1. There is a root pat mentioned In DhP (1.318, X.212, 311 ).
2. Ptj has mentioned the pairs, varṇa-samghata : varṇa-samghata and pada-samghata pada-samghata (II.104.2-3).
# (id) < 186
Jain Education International
:
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
