Jain Journal 1996 04

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 15

BANERJEE : ŞAṬKHANDAGAMA AND SAURASENI
Māhārāṣṭri on the one hand and Magadhi on the other. We also find kkh in Magadhi.
To sum up from the above discussions, we can say that kkh is the normal development of ks, while the other two developments (i.e. cch and jjh) are sporadic and are also confined to Māhārāṣṭrī only. In the case of Māgadhi either is possible, though kkh is the dominant
one.
113
Coming back to the Satkhanḍāgama it is found that this book has only kkh and not the other one.
(iv) The retention of bh in the root bhu in Sauraseni.
The root √bhū has several forms in Prakrit, depending on the dialects. In Mahārāṣṭrī the root √bhū > √hū and then √ho (a gunated form) to which the personal terminations are added, making it hoi, hosi, homi etc. Though initially bh does not become h as per rules of aspiration in Prakrit, in the case of √bhū it is an exception. But in Śauraseni this bh of the original Sanskrit root is not changed into h as in Māhārāṣṭrī. So the Sauraseni forms will be bhodi, bhosi, and bhomi. These forms of Māhārāṣṭrī and Śauraseni are very regular. In the case of Śauraseni, Hemacandra (IV.269) has optionally accepted hodi, hosi, homi as well. This form i.e. bh>h in Sauraseni is not regular even though we find this usage in literature. There are other two forms of the root √bhu which are also accepted both in Māhārāṣṭri and Śauraseni, e.g. from Skt. bhavati we have havaï in Māhārāṣṭri and bhavadi and havadi (HC. IV. 269) in Śauraseni. There are other forms as given by Hemacandra both in Mah. and Śau. as Mãh. huvaï, Śau. huvadi, so also bhuvaï in Mah., bhuvadi and huvadi in Sau. To speak frankly the base bhava or bhuva or hava and huva are of later origin than hu or ho. We can call these forms hyper-prakritisation directly from Sanskrit, or in other words, it is Sanskrit based form in Prakrit. The reasons of the development of these forms are not known to us, except that they are developed out of metrical necessity, and so we find these bhuva or huva, bhava or hava used mostly in poetry rather than in prose. Now if a manuscript reads bhuvadi or huvadi, bhavadi or havadi and its corresponding mansuscript reading is bhodi or hodi, I personally prefer the latter readings to the earlier ones, provided it does not disturb the metrical necessity.
In Kundakunda's works we come across more bhuva or bhava, huva and hava, rather than bhodi. The form hodi is, of course, also found there. In the Niryukti the forms havaï and bhavaï are more frequent than bhuvaï and huvaï. To my mind it appears that these