Anusandhan 2001 00 SrNo 18

SR No.: 520518
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shilchandrasuri
Publisher: Kalikal Sarvagya Shri Hemchandracharya Navam Janmashatabdi Smruti Sanskar Shikshannidhi Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 292
Language: Sanskrit, Prakrit
Classification: Magazine, India_Anusandhan, & India
File Size: 15 MB

Page 33

26
Foot-notes: 1. Āyāramga-Sutta, Part I, Preface, pp. viji-xiv, London, 1882. 2. Ācārānga-Sūtra, Erster Śruta-skandha, Leipzig, 1910. 3. Ibid No.1. 4. See Kalpasūtra, (Preface pp. 3-7), Sārābhāi Manilāl Nawāb, Ahmedebad, 1952; Prof. Ludwig Alsdorf also agreed with the former and admitted that there was imperative need to reconsider the whole problem seriously. 5. Ibid No. 1. p. viii. 6. Pischel's Comparative Grammar of Prakrits, Para 18. 7. See Ibid foot-note No. 4 and the editions of Amg. Canonical Texts by Prof. W. Schubring, etc. 8. In the text of Acārānga edited by Jacobi, there are numerous usages retaining medial consonants and they are just like Pāli language. Pischel (para No. 18) rejects the idea of inclusion of Amg. under Mahārāșțrī and would like to connect it with Māgadhi Inscriptions. He further says, it is likely that at the time of compilation of the canon at the councils of Mathurā and Valabhi, the original dialect got a western colouring. At Valabhī particularly the influence of Mahārāștrī might have been quite considerable. But such an influence could not have been significant because even by it the basic character of Amg. was not touched. 9. Medial = and Y = & in some usages is not due to the influence of Sauraseni as scholars believe, but this kind of voicing the unvoiced medial consonants seems to have begun before Christian era and later on this trait became the main feature of Sauraseni. 10. Initial dental nasal I - is retained by Indian editors of Amg. texts, but in some cases it is cerebralised into UI - which is definitely a wrong practice as far as Amg. is concerned. 11. T and are changed to in Ashokan inscriptions of the East, and therefore the same rule for Amg. and their change into ouL in it is to be regarded as a wrong practice. 12. The -ņi (ToT) suffix of neuter Nom. and Acc. plural is archaic which is replaced by -im (-3) in the later Prakrits. As far as the archaic nature of Amg. is concerned -ni (1) should be used in place of -ņi (for) in the light of Pāli and Ashokan inscriptions. 13. Comparative Grammar of the Prakrit Languages.
Dr. K. R. CHANDRA 375, SARASWATI NAGAR NR. HIMMATLAL PARK AMBAWADI AHMEDABAD 380015