Jain Journal 1992 04

SR No.: 520106
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication
Publication Year: 1992
Total Pages: 70
Language: English
Classification: Magazine, India_Jain Journal, & India
File Size: 4 MB

Page 5

APRIL, 1992
be useless. So the readings where the elision of these sounds are found are to be accepted, But in case t is changed to d as in Sauraseni (where intervocalic d is retained), then, of course, that d is not elided. If that principle is followed, then we can avoid confusions of readings. The passages like suyam me ausaṁ or sudaṁ or sutaṁ me ausam are puzzling. In fact sudam is a Sauraseni influence
259
With regard to the changes between dh and h, dh is to be regarded as older than h, because dh is preserved in Vedic, e. g., Vedic idha > classical iha. This retention of dh is preserved in Sauraseni and in some Asokan Prakrits, e. g., idha na kimci jiva, etc. So also adha, atha>aha (Mahā). That is why in the history of OIA, there has always been an interchange between dh and h; e. g., āghāta and ahata, dhita and hita, grbhnati and gṛhṇāti. This is supported by Hemacandra's sutra kha-gha. tha-dha-bhām (I. 180) where intervocalic kh, gh, th, dh, and bh become h in Mahārāṣṭri. But dh is retained in Sauraseni and th also becomes dh in the same dialect. So the readings, with gh, dh etc. in Amg. seems to have been carelessly done.
In chapter II (pp. 35-52) Dr Chandra discusses some forms of some words which seem to him to be confusing. He cites examples of some words which have several forms, such as, ätman has attā, ātā, āyā and appä, and the endings of locative singular are found in -amsi, -ssim, -mmi, -mhi(m) and so on. In Chapter III (pp. 53-67) the author points out the antiquity and the place of the origin of the Agama texts through the analysis of the language. In the next two chapters IV and V Dr Chandra's main focussing line is on the characteristic features of Amg. In this connection, he has cited the views of Hemacandra (pp. 68-79) and has also suggested some principles to be adopted for the Amg. language (pp. 80-84). One complete chapter (VI, pp. 85-93) is devoted to the various Prakrit forms of one Sanskrit word kṣetrajña, and this shows how the Agama texts are inundated with several forms of the same word. In chapters VII and VIII Dr Chandra has discussed the question of stylistic presentation of some sentences (pp. 94-99) and finally the conclusion (pp. 100-106) of his thesis is synoptically adumbrated.
One of the most interesting points of his treatise is the discussion on the formation of past tenses in Amg. (p. 44f). In his opinion the forms like akäsi, ahesi, akarissam, āhamsu, abhaviṁsu, himsimsu and so on are the oldest features of the Agama texts. These are, in fact, the remnants of some of the aorist forms crept into the canonical text, and