Dictionary of Prakrit for Jain Literature Vol 01 Fasc 01

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

Page 14

(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 Dasaveyalıyacundi, edited as in the case of Visesăvašyıkabhâsya or Sura- Paumacariya of Vimala, Uvaesamalá of Dharmadása, sundar ikatha. The game is true of the voluminous work Tattvarthasūtra of Umāsvāti along with his so-called Paumac iriya of Vimaja. On the other hand, references Svopajña Bhasya and Visesavasyakabhāsya of Jinato works like V yavahāra or BȚhatkal pa are very in- bhadra. The later volumes were edited by Sagarānanda's sufficient, the number of the uddesas alone being pupil Kancanasågara. given and in many other cases only the name of the book is all that is found. When MSS. are used it is
Though intended to deal with the words found in but natural that the author could not give the reference
tho Agama texts, which ara less known as is indicated to tolio, side and line, unless he also specified the exact
in the title, the work is fairly comprehensive as far as MS. which he bas used.
the canon is concerned. By the word Alpa-paricita,
it appears, the author took it to mean, not generally A long 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 teatures of the various Prakrit dialects like Sauraseni, Magadhi, Paisaci, Cüliká-Paigācī The real peculiarity of the work lies in the fact and Apabbramsa, in which the author follows very that it is a Prakrit-Sanskrit dictionary which also includes close y tbe Grammar of Hemacandra.
a fair amount of Sanskrit words occurring in the While giving the meanings of words, Dumbers 1, 2,
commentaries and their explanations given there. As an
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, lack of examples on which this was
followed. For each word included (either in Sanskrit based makes 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 commentators in Sanskrit as pretation given in the commentaries in Sanskrit, wbich
they are actually found in the editions. As the same has led him admit meanings which cannot be justified.
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 Prakrits taken
commentarors and even by the same commentator at as a whole and it has served its purpose well during
diferent places. The references again are in the form the last 60 years and more.
of the number of the folio ( the side being pot 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 paricita-Saiddhāntika- bundles or pothis As is to be expected from the sabdakosa consisting of five parts, published between 1954 editor of these books, the page 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 number 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 Desipamamalā of Hemacandra in an alphabetical order
explanations offered by the commentators and bas not with the meanings assigned to them by Hemacandra
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 Sāgarāpanda, a the excerpts which he needs for this purpose. This profound student of the Jain Agamas, 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 Sanskrit commentaries publisbed by the Sanskrit. For example ambadei in Uttarādnyayuna is Agamodayasamiti These are the only reliable editions explained by the word (iruskurute and in the Avašyaka available today for many of these works. The commen- by u palabhate. When a word like ainsalaga is explained taries on the canonical works were written by Haribhadra, as ainsagata, the etymological or derivational process Silanka, Hemacandra, Abbayadeva, Malayagiri, Santi- gets obscured because the word consists of the stem suri, Dronácārya and Candrasuri, covering a period of ansala and ga from the root gam-, wbile in the other more than five hundred years, which was mostly devoted the stem is anisa and the other element is gata- & past to the writing of Sanskrit commentaries. This dictionary passive participle of the same root gam-. When u patyan takos roto of all the 45 books of the canon along in Viy, is explaiged with the words anatica, unadstath,