Comprehensive Critical Dictionary of Prakrit Languages Volum 01

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

Page 16

(*9)
3. Prakrit Languages
from the south and the majority of Prakrit stanzas
quoted in the works on rhetorics. But the problem The dictionary quotes extensively from the seven
which needs a clarification pertains to the stanzas in main Prakrit dialects to illustrate the meanings of words
Sanskrit dramas and the Sattakas and the use of Sauraincluded and also makes a systematic attempt to trace
seni, Magadhi and various pars and fangs wbich may the origins of the words in the Indo-Aryan branch of the
occur in them. A brief history of this problem may help Indo-Europian fami'y of languages. For this purpose a
us to understand the situation, though the problem cannot brief survey of these languages may prove useful.
be completely solved due to lack of necessary evidence in The question about the peculiar features of each dis lect
this regard. and the relations among then make it necessary to name the dialects specifically when quotations from
i) Ardha-Māgadhi them are given. This is done by naming the dialect at
From among the MIA. dialects the Svetämbara the begioning and giving the name of the book at the
writers have used two closely related languages, Ardhaend.
Māgadhi and Jain Mābārāstri. to compose their capoThe bulk of he citations naturally comes from nical and post-canonical literature. The relation between the Prakrits known as Ardha Magadhi (AMg. ). Jain AMR and JM can be understood better by considering Mäbärästri (JM). Jain Sauraseni (S.), Maharastri the history of these langu ges Slowly AMg. has como (M.). Sauraseni (S), Magadbi (Mg) and Apabhramsa under the influence of Maharastri so as to develop into (Apa ). because the literature in these dialects is found what is now called Jain Mähärästri; and in the course of in large measure. The main problem which a lexico- a further development, this language is modified by the grapher meets in this case pertains to demarcating influence of Sinskrit on the one hand and the Apabhra. clearly one dialect from another and to decide to what mga dialect on the other, extent minor dialec al differences in a given Prakrit can
The oldest form of AMg. can be seen in the first be ascertained and isadicated Obviously a given quotation
books of Acāranga and Sūtrakrtänga and the older from a given book must be assigned to the langage parts of other works like Uttaradhyayana etc. It is
characterised, in its phonology, by the change of 1- to .. of the fact that many books use different dialects in
to a greater extent (anelisa Ayar. 1. 9. 1. 16, Süy. 1. different parts of the same work. Thus many books 15. 2): the loss of initial y (alāsuyam Ayar. 1.9.1. 1; written in JM. include long passages and stories in avakahāe Äyar. 1.9.1.2; āvanti Ayar. 1.4.1.2: alattaApa.. and many quotations from the canon occur in hinam Suy. 1. 13.1 ) and the change of -kh- to .ghIM. works. In tict it is often difficult to decide laghi Ayar. 1. 4. 2. 1; Suy. 1. 11. 23; aghāyam Süy. whether a given work is to be considered as being 1.1.2.1). In its morphology we have a number of written in AMG. O JM. In the present case only such old forms: the Nom. sg. in -e also in stanzas (cf. books as form the part of the Svetāmbra canon are uvahanasuyam Ayār. 1.9); forms of the past tenses cited under the sig um AMg, and others are considered saturusu Suy. 1. 11. 6; riittha Suy. 9.1.1: ahesi Ayar. to be in JM. This is obviously arbitrary and leads to 1.9.3.6); forms of the future (agamissa Suy. 1. 15.25) such results as considering the Ogha and Finda a present part. formed by -mina (abhivāyamine Ayār. Niryuktis ag beini! written in AMg, while the AvNi. 1. 9. ). 8): forms of Gerund with -atā (hantā Suy. and Ayar Ni, in JM. This problem is acute in the 1. S. 5) and iyāna (arustyānn Ayār. 1. 9. 1.3). Nous case of the Prakirnakas and again an arbitrary lecision often govern cases (kālamäknikhi Suy. 1. 11. 38) is taken by including all such works attr butel to and a few peculiar words are met with (anju straight Taasis in AM. and those of definite authors in JM. Süv. 1.9.1: Ayar. 1.9. 1. 7: acca-body' Ayar. 1.9. In case of doubt, the reader should refer to the classifi- 1.11: Süy. 1. 13. 17: adu.or' Suy. 1. 2. 2. 2. nhusā cation of books on the basis of their language, given daughter-in-law' Suy. 1. 9. 5). separately. All Prakrit works written by the Digan bara
The later and more usual form of AMg.is writers are given the designation JS. while under Apa.
distinguished from JM. by the additional features like are included works which are written by both the liga.
the lengthening of final -am before eva (eva meva mbara and Svetambara writers, and a few verses found in
samanāuxo Naya 1.9.53): i representing iti (Goyamā i the works of non-Jain writers.
ertman. Uvās. 86): forms of prati without the final -i In the case of other dialects, under Mähärastri are (puduppanna Suy. 2. 1. 15); Nom. sg. e in prose ( ceie included the well known older epics, and more recent ones Vivā. 1): Inst. sg. in -sä (kayasa Dasave. 6. 27); Dat.
P.D. *11