Jain Journal 1996 04

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

Page 17

BANERJEE SAṬKHAṆDĀGAMA AND SAURASENI
A careful perusal of all these examples will immediately reveal the fact that the change of ry to yy cannot be a pure Śau. form. As j is changed into y in Mg. (Hc. IV. 292) and therefore ry is also assimilated to yy in Mg. whereas the change of y intoj is found in Mah. as well as in Sau. So it seems that this character of Sau., i.e. ry changing into yy is a loan from Mg., because that is one of the dominant characters of Mg. So Sanskrit ārya > Māh. Śau. ajja, and Mg. ayya. Though Hemacandra has given this rule in the case of Sau. this is in fact a Mg. rule as is known by his sūtra (Hc. IV. 292). The picture is given below:
In Pkt., or for that matter in Māh, the initial y is changed into palatal j (Hc. I. 245) e.g. yadi > Pkt. jaï; yama jama and so on. But when it is in the middle position this ya is generally elided in Mah. (Hc. I. 177) and is again replaced by ya-śruti. (Hc. I. 180), e.g. samaya> samaa samaya.
115
Apparently it seems that perhaps medially -ya- is not elided; but that is not the case. In Śau. also the same form occurs. But in Mg. this -ya- is not as such elided, but is retained. This is mostly evident in the case of conjuncts. In conjuncts ry is normally assimilated to jja (<* rj). e.g. ārya> ajja; kārya> kajja. The same form is also found in Śau. But in Mg. as there is no j, it is assimilated to yy, e.g. ārya> ayya; kārya kayya. Naturally there is no scope of ry> yy in Śau. unless we accept that it is a loan from Mg.
In the Sau. passages of Skt. drama the assimilated form jj of ry is found. Whereas in the Mg. passages yy is found. In the works of Kundakunda the form jj is found, and the form yy should be regarded as badly edited texts in Sauraseni.
In the commentary on the Saṭkhaṇḍāgama the forms are mostly found with jj and not really with yy, unless it is mistakenly incorporated into the text.
Morphology
(vi) Declension
- ablative singular in du/do.
In the case of declension, Śau. has not got as such any peculiarity except in the abl. sg. of a- base. In this particular case the retention of a is normally found, i.e. from Skt. narāt we have narādu or narado, while narāuand narão will be in Mah. This peculiarity can be justified by the general rule that in Sau. the intervocalic -d- is retained. And hence Hemacandra has made a sūtra of the abl. sg. as nases tto do du hi hinto lukaḥ (III. 8) where in his vṛtti he has said dakāra-karaṇam