Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 284

SOME REMARKS ON LANGUAGE OF ORIGINAL BUDDHIST CANON
165
vadikya in the seventh pillar edict at Topra and the Queen's edict at Kosam. Now as noted by LUEDERS himself (p. 118) the eastern treatment of Sk. rt is t and not d, cf. katavirxe etc. in the Dhauli and Jaugada major edicts. In my opinion -vadikyā is no exception to this general tendency since the form occurs in the north in the seventh PE of Toprā for which there are no eastern parallels. And as regards the Queen's edict, be it noted that Kosãm is situated on the left bank of Jamnā, about 28 miles west by south of Allahabad, which can hardly be expected to give evidence for an eastern peculiarity unless corroborated by other clearly eastern evidence.
The same thing has to be said about the change tth > ddh ($ 152) when LUEDERS cites Sk. aştakroģikāni > adhakosikyāni and Sk. nislisti
> nimsidhiyà both in the seventh pillar edict at Toprā. The normal treatment in the east in similar cases is st or sth > ţh, cf. setha in the Dhauli major edict, nithūliya in the pillar edicts etc. As noted above the instances which occur only in the seventh pillar edict at Topră should not be used as Asokan evidence in support of a particular feature being eastern. If the same feature is not found in the major edicts at Dhauli and Jaugada or in the other pillar edicts there is every reason for its being treated as non-eastern.
In view of the above examination of the Asokan evidence it is difficult for me to agree with LUEDERS when he observes (8 155) -- "Uber. blickt man das gesamte Material, das uns die Asoka- Inschriften und die literarischen Prakrits bieten, so scheint mir deutlich daraus hervor. zugehen, dass die Erweichung des tt, tth zu dd, ddh eine Erscheinung ist, die der Ostsprache angehört."
We may now take a couple of instances to show how his hypothesis regarding softening to be an eastern characteristic has led LUEDERS to support or suggest some far-fetched derivations. In $$ 159-165 he gives a very instructive Exkurs über kasuti, kaddhati, kassati. In Pāli we have the verbal base V kaddha, besides kasa (kamsa) and Vkassa which latter go back to Sk. Vkrs or v kars. Now about the origin of
V kaddha, WEBER naturally thought to connect it with the Sk. p.p.p. krsta. But LUEDERS objects to this and observes (p. 125), "Die Bestimmung der Heimat von kaddhati ist für die Entstehung der Formen von Bedeutung. Kaddhati kann sich nicht aus krsta weiter entwickelt haben, wie Weber, allerdings durch die vielfach im Prākrit auftretenden Schreibungen mit tth veranlasst, ZDMG. 28,375 annahm, da der Ubergang von inlautendem třh in ddh auf die östliche Sprache beschränkt ist. So gewinnt die Zurückfühurung von kaddh auf ein vorindisches *krzd, eine
Madhu Vidya/259