In Search of the Original Ardhamagadhi English Translation

Author(s): K R Chandra, N M Kansara, Nagin J Shah, Ramniklal M Shah
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad

Page 106

RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL ARDHAMĀGADHI as in 'paveiya't pavedita', is also the peculiarity of the later Prakrits. In the Saurasenī and the Māgadhi, the 'd' is generally retained, and in the Pāli and the Paiśācī, the 't', too.
(12) The Ardhamāgadhi is related more to the Māgadhi, but not to the Mahārāstrī; the very occurrence of the element 'Māgadhi', in the name 'Ardhamāgadhi' of this language indicates its antiquity. Had it not been so, the language could have been termed as 'Ardha-Mahārāstrī' or ‘Ardha-Saurasenī' ?
(13) From this viewpoint, whatever archaic forms (nominal, verbal and of participles) occur in the senior texts of Ardhamāgadhī, they indicate that this language is nearer to the Pāli and Ashokan dialect of the East but not to the Mahārāstrī.
(14) Originally, the Ardhamāgadhī language was not a mixture of Māgadhī and Mahārāștrī : it is the distortion of the process of a later period.
Now, therefore, if the sentence under discussion belongs to the age of Lord Mahāvīra, being the very utterance from his holy mouth, or if it be the faithful reproduction of his speech in the written form by his Ganadharas, the sentence should, in that case, read as follows :
‘esa dhamme suddhe nitie săsate samecca logaṁ (or lokam) khettannehi' pavedite'
If this speech is not as it was uttered by Lord Mahāvīra, or it was not as presented by the Ganadharas, or it is not the reading of the First redaction at Pātaliputra of the fourth century B.C., but rather of the Third and Final redaction fixed up in the time of Devardhigani at Valabhi (fifth-sixth century A.D.), or it was he who has compiled/composed the scriptures, in that case there is no question of any discussion for us, and anyone can accept/adopt whatever reading that may occur in the context'.
89