Apbhramsa of Hemchandracharya

Author(s): Hemchandracharya, Kantilal Baldevram Vyas, Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad

Page 123

(94)
correctness. Almost all the translators take af as an absolutive of, which is neither necessary nor a priori probable. Hemacandra has listed roots ending in having another stem in प also (eg. हुव- हुप्प, जुव जुप ), which may probably be a dialectal variation. It is thus that > >. De Vreese would render vs. in Sanskrit as: एतद् श्रुत्वा शकुनिं स्थितं पुनर्दुःशासनेोऽब्रवीत् । ततो जानाम्येतं हरिं यदि ममाग्रेऽब्रवीत् ॥ "To Sakuni speaking thus Duḥsasana in his turn said then I know, if it was Hari who spoke to
0:0
me."1 The obvious flaw in De Vreese's reconstruction lies in equating टिउ = स्थितं, एहो = एतं, which goes against the usual tenor of Apabhramsa. The meaning of the verse also suffers from lack of epic lucidity and pointed relevance. Dr. Bhayani's translation very closely follows the Dodhakavṛttikāra.
The context supports my rendering off in the first hemistich as 3, and in the other as ब्रूते . It is natural to consider af as a contraction of, Pres. 3rd Pers. sing. The past tense in the first hemistich is derived from the historical use of the Present. Looking to the amorphous material presented by Hemacandra it would be highly virtuistic to seek a very rigid grammatical basis in every formation. Besides, the contractiou
अइ > इ has been so common in the languages which sprang from Apabhramsa within a century or so of Hemacandra. e. g. Old Gujarati >aft, 3 > af, etc. 392. व्रज् - धातोः कुत्र ( आदेशः भवति ) ।
In Apabhrain'sa the root of (the verb) aafa has g ādeśa.
I De Vreese. Ibid, p 5.
-