Kansvaho

Author(s): Rama Paniwada, A N Upadhye
Publisher: Motilal Banarasidas

Page 14

INTRODUCTION
xiii
added hyphens to indicate the separate members of a compound expression with the hope that this might facilitate the understanding of the text. I have not introduced them meticulously but only as far as practicable. I do agree with PANDIT3 that pi, tti etc. are all used and are to be pronounced as enclitics in Prākrit ; but when he insists that they should be printed without being separated from the words to which they cling, I fear that he is carrying the principle to a logical extreme which results into a practical disadvantage that some of the combinations not only present a difficulty but also assume a misleading form. The convention of writing them separately has been established now through the efforts of eminent editors of Prākrit texts. Really speaking avagraha has no legitimate place in Prākrit Phonology, especially because there is no rigour of Sandhi in Prākrit as in Sanskrit. But remembering that Rāma Pāṇivāda is writing under strong Sanskrit influence I have introduced the avagraha here and there. If it was not to be introduced, there were two alternatives before me : either the two words should be written in combination or written separately without avagraha. The former would have created some difficulty in understanding and the latter would have given rise to quite awkward words which have never been current in Prākrit in earlier literature. So to avoid these disadvantages I have introduced avagraha which should not be quite objectionable in the work of an author writing under the strong influence of Sanskrit.
The transcripts are quite reliable so far as the Sanskrit Chāyā is concerned. The Chāyā in both the Mss. is in perfect agreement : there is only one solitary case where there is a different reading with a corresponding difference in the Prākrit text (i. 38). There are minor different readings on the common
3
Ibidem, Critical Notice p. x.