Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 51
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications
View full book text
________________
52
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
(MARCE, 1992
drawback is the want of proper material for such an investigation. Only a small portion of Prakrit literature has been as yet made accessible to the public. This consists mostly of grammare such as Vararuci's Prakrila-prabdga, the Prakrit portion of Hemacandra's Grammar and a few other kauyas. There are a number of other Prakrit works which when published will prove to be of much use for the philological study of the dialects. It is, I think, time to direct our attention to them and I am glad to note that they are receiving the attention of such a distinguished linguist as Sir G. Grierson, and we may confidently look forward for some of the Praksit works edited by him in a critical manner.
I shall, however, draw attention to a particular remark of his in the short note referred to above. In conceding what my brother said about Paiçaci as treated in the Kalpa. taru, he repeats his remark, first made in the Bhandarkar Commemoration Volume, p. 120, that Hemacandra in his grammar trests of three varieties of Paiçacika, one Paiçacika and two varieties of Calika.paiçacika. But we shall see from the following quotations from . Hema candra and his followers, that the former knows of only two varieties of Paiçaci, as was pointed out by my brother. Hemacandra has four sutras about Calike-paiçaci and they are given below with his own gloss thereon
चुलिका पैशाचिके तृतीय-तुर्ययोगद्य-द्वितीयौ ॥ ३२५ ॥ चूलिकापैशाचिके वर्माणां हतीयोः स्थाने बथासंस्बमाचरितीवी भवतः।। नगरम् | नकर । मार्गणः मनमो । गिरि-सटम् । किरि-नटं । ......कचित्रामाणकस्थापि । पडिमा इत्यस्य स्थाने पटिमा । बाबाल्यस्व स्थानेवाग ।।
रस्य लो वा ॥ ३२६ ॥ चलिकोपशाचिके रस्व स्थानेलो वा भवति । पनमय पनव-पकुष्पित-गोली चलनग्ग-लग्ग-पति-बिंबं सससु मख-सप्पनेसु एकातस-तनु-थलं लु। ................................................
नादि-युज्योरन्येषाम् ॥ ३२७ ॥ चूलिकापैशाचिकेपि अन्येषामाचार्वाणां मतेन तृतीयतुर्वयोरादौ वर्तमानयोर्बुज धातो च भावदितीया न भवतः ॥ गतिः। गती ॥ धर्मः । पम्मी ।। ...... नियोजितम् । । नियोजित॥
शेष प्राग्वत् ।। ३२८॥ . धूलिकापैशाचिके सृतीयतुर्थयोरित्यादि यदुकं सतोन्यच्छेषं प्राक्तनपैशाचिकवनवति ॥
मकर । महना अनबोर्नो पत्वं न भवति ॥ षस्व च नत्वं स्यात् । एवमन्यदपि ॥ It will be evident from the above that there is no reason to suppose that Hemacandra is treating of two varieties of Calikå-paiçaci. He, however, calls it Coliki-paiçacikam while other Prakțit grammarians call it Calikå-paiçaci simply. Sir George, probably, was led away by this difference in the name. Calik&-paiçacikam being neuter, its nom. du, as well
its loc. sg. will be Calik&-paigácike. But in the gloss of Hemacandra, it is to be taken as the loc. ag. and not as nom. du. Even if the word is taken as a feminine in d (which it is not as can be seen from the author's own gloss oneitra. 328 quoted above), the form Calika-paiçâcike will be nom. du. and not loc. o., which latter alone will make any sense in the glos. Trivikrama and Crutasågara, two Jain Prakrit grammarians who closely follow Hemacandra, avoid the ambiguity (if at all it can be called ambiguity) by adding the word bharaudm in their gloss after Calika paiçacyâm, thus leaving no room for any doubt as to the number of the dialects. As Trivikrama and Crutasagara follow Hemacandra very closely, the opinion of the latter may be known clearly from their works. I, therefore, grote below the portions of the grammars of Trivikrama and Frutas&gara dealing with Câlik-pmaçáci.
