________________
224
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ DECEMBER, 1927
THE APABHRAMŠA STABAKAS OF RAMA-SARMAN: A FEW SUGGESTIONS.
BY MUHAMMAD SHAHIDULLAH, M.A., B.L. The reconstruction of the Apabramsa Stabakas of Rama-Sarman by Sir George A. Grierson (published in the Indian Antiquary, 1922-1923) is, to say the least, marvellous and quite worthy of the veteran scholar. But as it is based in many places on conjectures, extremely bad as the text is, there is room for suggestions.
Verse 3, line 3. sipá (sida, nipa, nida) nite has been amended as si pradike. This suits the metre. This will give the Apabhramsa form chappa (or, chippa). But chappd (or, chippa)
<sipra is unknown. Moreover by accepting siprádi as a gana, which is evidently the intention of the author, where ch< 8, there crops up a serious defect in the treatment of the subject. In the preceding line he states k(Ich ?) < kop. But there is a large number of cases in Apabhramsa, where ch <ks, which remains unprovided. I would, therefore, suggest the reading kesiptádile. This gives a gana, where ch<ks like kurdi of Markandeya and akryádi of other Prakrit grammarians. In fact kripta is included in the above gana of those grammarians. In Apabhramsa also we find chuttha, chudha = kripta, both the forms occurring in the Bhavisatta Kaha. It will be interesting to know what name Râma Sarman gives to this gazia in the Pråkrta Stabaka.1
Verse 28, lines 1 and 4. nrtiluti. Both have been amended to luti. But there is very clearly -r in the first place, though it has been misread as -u. As regards - in the second place it can be taken for -r, just like süni in v. 4, 1. 2. We cannot be sure of Märkandeya's reading lut for Int.
Verse 30, line 1. grhnô. This has been corrected to gunho-. But the change of - to - 4 is unnecessary, as -r is permissible by v. 4. Hemacandra actually enjoins (IV. 394) the form grnha for his Apabhramsa:
Verse 31. line 1. tóma tônnasuthi has been amended to t6 mg tanna (? tenni) suthi (? aéhi). In this reading we should expect måm after tvám in the second line. But this does not suit the metre. I would suggest the reading tômam tánza abêhi. tomam = tvám ; cf. Pk. tumam, tánna = tênám ; cf. Pk. täna, tanam; Middle Assamese tán, Eastern Bengal dialect tán. For abêhi cf. Beng. ebe; in the text su might represent a, and e, bê.
In the third line of the same verse we find båhunyatityøditam. Sir George suggests báhulya for båhunya, or váhunya. But he does not amend the reading. I would suggest båhulyakénôditam ; ty can easily represent n.
In the next Stabaka v. 10, 1. 4 the text gives prácyáta sóvattapadávilamba. This has been amended to Pracyå tu Sôratta-padávalamba. Sir George is not fully satisfied with the reading sôratta. I would suggest tad-rastra. This exactly corresponds to tad-débiya in the description of Pracyá given by Markandeya. 1 A reference to Sir G. Grierson has olicited the following reply.
C.E.A.W.O., Jt. Editor. In this valuable Note on the Apabhrathéa Stabakas of Rama-sarman, Mr. Muhammad Shahidullah. in regard to his suggested reading kriptddiked in verse 3, says " it will be interesting to know what name Rama Sarman gives to this gana in the Praksta Stabaka".
The gana referred to is in I, iii, 5. In I, iii, 4, the author deals with Prakt ch a p, to and other compounds that do not concern us. He then goes on in 5:
laksmth sadakah khalu makpikddi utksipta rkpoka (7 skądka) iha praviştah kesano kwamāyām api vã cha-karah aksy-ādi uskrēpu api dráyatē ca.
Comm. lacchi, sariocho, macchia, ucchito, riccho, accho (? ucсho). Adi-abdát, chattar, chiran, raccho, ityadi-grahah. kanadau chanam, chama,p acchan (7 pacchi), dochan (? accht), vaccho. paki khanam, khamā, kukkhs (1 pakkht), mukhs (? makkhi), rukkho. The Comm. is corrupt in parts, and some of the words are doubtful.
G, A, GRDERSON,
