Collected Articles Of LA Schwarzschild On Indo Aryan 1953 1979

Author(s): Royce Wiles
Publisher: Australian National University

Page 62

THE INDECLINABLE JE IN MIDDLE INDO-ARYAN L. A. SCHWARZSCHILD
Australia
"The emotive aspect of word-meaning is even more variable and unstable than its cognitive side"-in this and similar statements it has often been pointed out that those parts of speech which are emotive, emphatic particles and exclamations in particular, are very variable in their use. They do not form part of any regular system, as do declensional and conjugational forms and they are therefore more liable to sporadic alterations: They are sometimes used too much and then fall out of favour again according to the demands of fashion and even according to individual taste. This is shown by the loss in English of expressions such as "verily", "in sooth", and exclamations such as the angry "sirrah". Similar and constant changes are noticeable even in a country of profound respect for the past such as India. The study of this ephemeral type of usage is beset with difficulties as can be shown by an examination of the Middle Indo-Aryan particle je, used with the infinitive.
The type of infinitive that occurs most frequently in the Svetämbara Jain canon is that in -ttae. The infinitive in -um, -ium derived from the Sanskrit (i)tum is less usual, but gradually becomes more frequent in the later portions of the canon. It is sometimes associated with the particle je as in bhareum je, kareum je found in the Uttaradhyayanasutra (19,40). There are also isolated examples of the infinitive in -um followed by the particle je in the Panhavägaraṇāim, and there is one instance in the Nayadhammakahão (I. 9.). This usage persists in some of the later Jain Mähärüstri texts, such as the Paumacariya, the Samaraiccakaha, the Dhurtakhyāna and the Kuvalayamälä, The usage is particularly frequent in Jain Sauraseni, for instance in the Bhagavati Aradhana and the Malacara. On the other hand the infinitive with je is missing from Some of the other narrative texts, notably the Vasudevahindi and the Jambucariya; it is practically unknown in standard classical Mähärastri and occurs only once in a text of the extent of the Ravanavaho (kaum je, 4.36), and also once in Häla and then only as a variant reading, while it is completely absent from the Vajjalaggam. The fact that this usage was not generally current in Mähäräştri, the prakerstam prakṛtam, led to its omission from the grammar of Vararuci, and it therefore also tended to be ignored by the modern grammars. Hemacandra mentions the emphatic particle je (II. 217), but not its
211
-104
LA SCHWARZSCHILD
use with the infinitive. He does however give an example of the use of je with the infinitive, the example being the variant reading from Hala. In modern grammars the special use of the particle je with the infinitive is barely mentioned anywhere except in the works of Schubring, S. Sen and A. N. Upadhye and H. C. Bhayani.
One of the most striking features of the particle je when used with the infinitive is that it does not at first sight appear to add to the meaning of the sentence. Thus in the Jain Sauraseni of the Bhagavati Aradhana (p. 362 of the edition in the Muniśri Anantakirti Series), one finds a succession of phrases containing infinitives, some with the particle je and some without it: paso va baddhidum je, chittum mahila asi va purisassa; sellam va bindhidum je, pasko nimajjidum mahila, 'woman is like a fetter for tying a man, like a sword for hewing him down, like a dart for piercing him, like a quagmire for drowning him'. This alternation is noticeable even in the earliest texts where the infinitive with je is found, e.g. in the Uttarddhyayanasutra 19, 40: jaha aggisihä dittä päum hoi sudukkarā, taha dukkaram kareum je, täruppe samanattanam, 'just as it is difficult to control a fiery flame that has been lit, it is difficult to be an ascetic in one's youth'.
It becomes clear even from a few examples that the infinitive always precedes the particle je, which has therefore been considered enclitic. In fact the position of je is nearly always final. It occurs at the end of the sentence in prose, e.g. in the Kuvalayamälä (p. 111 of the edition in the Singhi Jain Series): ta na juttam mama jivium je 'therefore it is not right that I should live', and p. 108, jalanihi na tirae langheum je 'it is impossible to cross the ocean'. In poetry the characteristic position of je is at the end of a verse or half-verse: in the examples quoted from the Bhagavati Aradhana and the Uttaradhyayanasutra three of the half-verses end in baddhidum je, bindhidum je, and kareum je, but there is no je after chittum, nimajjidum and paum, where it would not be in a final position. Seeing that it concluded a phrase, je was never used with an infinitive that depended on a following adjective or past participle. This means that it is completely absent in the frequent type of phrase kareum payatto (or pautto), kareum samaḍhatto, 'having set out to do something". and kareum vavasiya 'having decided to do something'. It is similarly excluded from any other type of expression where the infinitive is closely linked with the following word.
It therefore becomes apparent in both prose and verse that the particle je when used after the infinitive conveyed a final emphasis: the particle singled out the infinitive from the remainder of the sentence. As is so often the case with particles, je soon lost its empha
212 -105