Indian Antiquary Vol 42

SR No.: 032534
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 400
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 16 MB

Page 48

44
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
FEBRUARY, 1913.
"are,"
pronouns. Quite peculiar are the forms if "is" and " for the 3rd persons singalar and plural of the simple present of the substantive verb, both used in their original indicative meaning and therefore corresponding to the Braja and, respectively. I believe, they are to be explained as having arisen from two hypothetical forms: * (*) and *gaft" of the Apabhramça, which, though they have not yet been found, may reasonably be supposed to have existed beside the more recent forms and fa. As for the being retained in the terminations: f. f, instances of the same are not wanting in Old Hindi. Lastly, there will be noticed the use of the old genitive in-, which is also commonly found in the Old Gujarati as well as in Canda's poetry, and in the latter it appears to have superseded almost all other cases. In the same way, it will be found used with a meaning different from that of the genitive case in the example que fe in the 2nd caupal of the Paramajolistotra.
The conclusion, then, to be drawn is that the Paramajotistotra was written at a rather early period in the history of the Bhashas, which it is not possible to determine at the present day, and in a country lying to the West of the area where Braja was spoken. Whether this country was Rajputana or Gujarat, cannot be easily ascertained. The fact that some of the Western peculiarities, that have been treated of above-as for instance for the singular of the demonstrative pronoun and for the interrogative adverb of manner-seem to point rather to Gujarati than to Rajasthani, is of no great account in this question, as at that time the difference between the vernaculars of Gujarat and of Rajputana was much less distinct than at the present day. Be it remembered that both forms of speech have come out of the same stock, viz., the Çaurasen? Apabhram ça, and that their mutual connection still appears as a very close one, if we only compare the Old Gujarati with the Old Marwari.
I need not expend words in illustrating the contents or showing the literary importance of the Kalyanamandirastotra, the original, of which our Paramajotistotra is a version-nor shall I dwell on its being an imitation of Mânatunga's Bhaktamarastotra, and still less on the questions concerning the probable identification of its author Siddhasenadivákara. For all these particulars, the reader may directly refer to Prof. Jacobi's introduction to the edition of the stotra in the Tndische Studien (Vol. XIV [Leipzig, 1875], pp. 376-377) and to Pandit Durga Prasada's introductory note to the edition of the same stotra in the Kavyamala (Guchchhaka VII [Bombay, 1907], p. 10). Let me only say, in explanation of the fact that the present version is included in a Digambara MS., that the Kalyanamandirastotra is read by the Digambaras as well as by the Çretâmbaras.
The metre, in which the Paramajolistotra is arranged, is partly the chaupai, partly the dohd. The part of the work, that has been preserved to us, comprises 26 stanzas in all, out of which 18 are chaupais and the other 8 are dohds. The first stanza, from the initial words of which the version takes its name, is not found in the Sanskrit original, and is, therefore, to be regarded as an addition by the vernacular poet.
As regards the Braja text, which follows below, I wish further to note that I have tried faithfully to reproduce the realing of the MS., as far as it was consistent with the laws of grammar and prosody. So, I have kept purposely unchanged:-the sign, without substituting for it; the frequent inorganic nasalization of the vowel, before , ., ; the frequent substitution of for original, 3, and of for, etc. On the other hand, I have silently corrected all evident blunders like the substitution of for and the omission of the dot of the nasals, and I have kept carefully distinguished from the the, for which the MS. has no special sigu. All other cases, in which I venture to differ from the reading of the MS., will be found recorded in the critical notes at the foot of the text. Their being so copious should not be imputed to any excess of scrupulosity on my part, but rather to the great incorrectness of the MS.
The latter substitution is to be regarded as a Western peculiarity.