Comprehensive Critical Dictionary of Prakrit Languages Volum 01

Author(s): A M Ghatage
Publisher: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute

Page 12

(
5)
The references are quite accurate when they are with the commentaries written on them and incidentally taken from the works which the author himself has a few non-canonical works like Dasaveyalıyacunni, edited as in the case of Visexävusyukubhâsyu o Suru. Paumacarya of Vimala, Uvaesamala of Dharmadása, sundarikatha. The same is true of the voluminous work Tattvarthasūtra of Umāsvāti along with his so-called Pau muciriya of Vimala. On the other hand, references Svopajna Bhasya and Visesavasyakabhasya of Jinato works like V vorhänt or Brhutkulpa are very in- bhadra. The later volumes were edited by Sagarananda's sufficient. the number of the uddsas alone being pupil Kancanasigara. given and in many other cases only the name of the
Though intended to deal with the words found in book is all that is found. When MSS. are used it is but natural that the author could not give the reference
the Agama texts which are less known as is indicated to folio, side and line, unless he also specified the exact
in the title, the work is fairly comprehensive as far as MS, which he his used.
the canon is concerned. By the word Alpa-pur citri,
it appears, the author took it to mean, not generally Along introduction of 64 pages is added which
found in the classical Sanskrit literature or less known contains a detailed grammar of the Prakrit in general outside the Sanskrit works written by the Jain scholars. and the characteristic features of the various l'rakrit dialects like Sauraseni, Magadhi, Paisacī, Culika Paisacī The real peculiarity of the work lies in the fact and Apabhramsa, in which the author follow's very that it is a Prakrit-Sanskrit diccionary which also includes close y the Grammar of Hemacandra.
a fair amount of Sanskrit words occurring in the
commentaries and their explanations given there. As an While giving the meanings of words, ournberg 1, 2,
editor of the texts of the Agamodayasamiti, one can 3 etc are used to indicate their different senses. But
well understand the procedure which the author has in most cases, ack of examples on which this was
followed. For each word included (either in Sanskrit based inakes it very difficult to decide their correctness.
or Prakrit ), he adds by way of explanation the The author has put great faith in the traditional inter
relevant statements of the conimentators in Sanskrit as pretation given in the commentaries in Sanskri, which
they are actually found in the editions. As the same has led him adinit meanings which cannot be ustified,
word occurs in a number of canonical books, the author But it must be admitted that, in spite of the deficiencies
has put together the explanations offered by the different of the work, it is the only dictionary of Prakr's taken
commentarors and even by the same commentator at as a whole and it has served its purpose well durung
different places. The references again are in the form the last 60 years and more.
of the number of the telo i the side being not indicated ) The only other dictionary which needs to be referred because nearly all the books are in the form of folioto is a publication called Alpa parıcita-Saidcbantika- bundles or pothis As is to be expected from the sabdakosa consisting of five parts published between 1954 editor of these books, the prge number is mostly accurate and 1979 thus taking 25 years to complete. It contains and one can locate the word and its explanation by a total gumber of 1256 pages and an additional supple- reading at most the two sides of the folio. ment of 56 pages devoted to listing the words of the
The author has made no attempt to weigh the Desinamamala of Hemacandra in an alphabetical order
explanations offered by the commentators and has not with the meanings assigned to them by Hernacandra
suggested bis own views in this matter. But this is not himself, and hence has no independent value.
an important loss because the reader bas before him all This work is prepared by Muni Sāgarānanda, a the excerpts which he needs for this purpose. This profound student of the Jun Ayamas, and responsible method often gives rise to some problems like a choice of for the editions of the major works of the canon along the meaning among the divergent explanations in with the Sar skrit commentaries published by the Sanskrit. For example (embadei in Uttarādnyayuna is Agamodayasamiti These are the only reliable editions explained by the word liruskurute and in the Avaśyaka available today for many of these works. The commen- by upalabhate. When a word like ansalaya is explained taries on the canonical works were written by Haribhadra, as amsagnia, the etymological or derivational process Silanka. Hemacındra, Abhayadeva, Malayagiri, Santi- gets obscured because the word consists of the stem suri, Dronacarya and Candrasuri, covering a period of amsalu and ga from the root game. while in the other more than five hundred years, which was mostly devoted the stem is awsa and the other element is gatu- a past to the writing of Sanskrit cominentaries. This dictionary passive participle of the same root gam-. When u näiyam takes gote of all the 45 books of the canon along in Viy. is explained with the words anālica, anadıkan,