Dictionary of Prakrit for Jain Literature Vol 01 Fasc 01

SR No.: 020316
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A M Ghatage
Publisher: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute
Publication Year: 1993
Total Pages: 176
Language: English, Sanskrit, Hindi
Classification: Dictionary
File Size: 16 MB

Page 15

(6) ajñātikam, rnätitam and anātitam, the reader can make III. LINGUISTIC BACKGROUND OF up his mind only by going through the original texts.
THE DICTIONARY When the Prakrit form uggei is explained as āgneyi,
To understand the derivations and etymologies (tan gafafa) at Avašyaka 315, the other form
given in the dictionary, it is quite pecessary to keep in aggeyi as agnikoni at Bhagvati 493 and Thānanga
mind the exact position the Prakrit dialects occupy in 133, difficulties arise because of the lack of context,
the general development of the Indo-Aryan languages wbich become clear only when we go to the originals and
Frequent references will have to be made to the earlier look at the whole context. Aggibhūi is explained as
stages of the languages as also to the later developments Agnidyocajiva at Ava. 172. When the passage is read
which the Prakrits have undergone. It is also necessary in full one realises that Agnibhūts bad a number of
to fix the scope of each Prakrit used for this work and lives one after another and one of them was Agnidyuta,
to indicate which works are included under a given a Brabmin, hence the explanation ought to mean the
name. It is bardly possible to explain the derivation of soul of Agnidyua Brahmin' which was the same as that
Prakrit words without comparing them with their OIA. of Aynibhüls.
equivalents and numerous words can only be understood In spite of all such curiosities, the work is a very
in the light of their use in the NIA, languages. Hence a useful compilation to serve as an index not only to the
brief survey of the development of Indo-Aryan is given canonical texts but also to the voluminous Sanskrit
below. Relation of the Prakrit words with those found commentaries, which could not have been done by any in the
in the other Indo-European languages is rarely found and one else better than Sagaraganda, who carefully edited only incidentally discusse all these works over a life-time.
1. Historical Linguistics There is also a fair amount of lexical material for The science of language has succeeded in establishsome dialects of Prakrit which should be noted here. ing what is called the genealogical classification of This material is in the form of indices and glossaries with languages and thus grouping them into different families. or without meanings, some of them being also without This idea ot a family of languages is mainly based on an exact reference to the passages of the works on historical facts. As it is chiefly a historical concept, which they are based. In this regard a reference should according to which a parent language undergoes succesbe made to the indices of the Ardha-Magadhi canon sive changes resulting into the emergence of divergent published from Ladoun and to the indices of individual but related languages at a later stage in which each works, attached to the editions published in the Jain member of the family is, in reality, nothing but & more Agama series published from Bombay. But even here no or less modified form of the original speech, the method uniform plan has been followed and the original divisions which can legitimately help build up such groups capof the canonical works into Srutaskandbas, Adhyāyas, not but be historical, in which the earlier stages of the Udde sakas and Sutras is beglected. In both these given languages are followed upto their common original publications the Prakiraakas are neglected. Most of the form. In the absence of such material, however, the published Apabbramsa texts possess good word-indices comparative mezhod bas to be used either to supplement and recently an attempt is made to put them together in it or, in rare cases, to take its place. We compare languone work called a dictionary of Apabhramśa. Unfortu- ages as regards their geographical location, their inherited nately the compiler has not taken trouble to avoid the vocabulary (Daturally excluding borrowed words ), deficiencies and mistakes of the individual indices and inflectional peculiarities, types of syntactical groupings bas simply repeated them in bis work. Unipdiced works and, above all, phonetic correspondences amenable to have been simply beglected, thus impairing its value. more or less rigid application, to show their relatedness. Another small dictionary confined to the works of But the extreme modifications, which a language may Kundakunda in Jain Sauraseni is also available and is undergo in course of its evolution, make this procedure of some use.
only lead to results of a positive nature. We can provo In view of this situation the present dictionary
two languages as related but cannot assert that any two
languages were not so related in the past. has made it a point to scan all the words in these works and particularly the Ardba-Magadh Dictionary, If the similarities found in the languages help us in tho Päiasaddamahanavo and the Alpa-paricita-saiddhān- grouping them into families, sometimes of wide extent, the tika-sabda kośa and to indicate their differences or mis. facts of common innovation lead us to put two or more takes under the corresponding words of its own. languages into a more compact group, torming A sub