________________
Who is The Author of the....
6. Pt. Bechardas Doshi had observed: "From the linguistic point of view, grammarians have given three types of Prakrit: (1) Prakrit that is based upon Sanskrit; (2) Prakrit that is like Sanskrit (3) Native Prakrit.....The grammar (of Hemacandrācārya) belongs to the first category."61
195
In consonance with the above-mentioned view, if we examine the language of the original text of the Pañcasūtra, we will be convinced of its being the language, observing as it does all the later rules of the Hemacandrīya grammar. The language of the works such as the fagfaff and so forth by Haribhadra sūri is typologically the same. We can understand this phenomenon after taking into consideration the Prakrit words coming from Sanskrit and those bearing the similarity with Sanskrit, employed by the author, in his works. And the same is the situation with the Pañcasutra. For this very reason, there is no difficulty at all in taking Haribhadra sūri as the author of the original text of the Pañcasūtra.
Even though some scholars are led to suppose that the language of the Pañcasūtra is not Prakrit (Jaina Mahārāṣṭrī) but is Ardhamāgadhi, like the language employed in the ägamas, yet they have not put forward convincing reasons or evidence in corroboration of this supposition. It is possible that, having seen the employment of in the singular forms of nominative case in construction like अणाइजीवे, भवे, कम्मसंजोगणिव्वत्तिए, दुक्खरूवे,
62 etc., those scholars might have been led to stipulate the language of the Pañcasūtra as Ardhamāgadhī. But against it, had they taken into account the unambiguously employed in the Prakrit language in the singular forms of the nominative case elsewhere in many places in this very work in the construction such as रागदोसविसपरममंतो, केवलिपण्णत्तो धम्मो, सरणमुवगओ, विवरीओ य संसारो, अणवट्टियसहावो' 3 etc., they would not have arrived at the above supposition. Quoting the view of M. Winternitz, Kulkarni concludes: "The language of the post-canonical Jain works is partly Prakrit-the so called Jaina Mahārāṣṭrī and partly Sanskrit. The language of the other Prakrit works of Haribhadra sūri is Jaina Mahārāṣtrī, whereas the Pañcasūtra is written in Ardhamāgadhi prose. So Acarya Haribhadra sūri was possibly not its author, but it is a treatise written by some ancient Acārya prior to Haribhadra sūri."64 But the striking similarity of the language
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
