Madhuvidya

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

Page 607

REVIEWS
59
therefore, favourably disposed towards the suggestion made by BOEhrLINGK-ROTH in PW that Skt. edamūka contains eða 'sheep' and therefore it means 'dumb like a sheep'. LUEDERS further observes that the meaning ‘idiot' attested in Pāli can be easily had from 'dumb like a sheep'. That is true; but being 'dumb' is not in any way a special characteristic of sheep and hence, while explaining the word it would not be sound to proceed from the meaning 'dumb like a sheep'. In fact the word seems to be definitely not known to old Sanskrit literature. Starting, therefore, from the surer meaning 'idiot' attested in Pāli literature it may be suggested that the latter part mūga of the compound elamuga may not have anything to do with mūka 'dumb', but that it may go back to Sk. mūrkhi 'fool': edamūrkha > elamukkha > elamukka > elamūka > elamūga. The word would then literally mean 'fool or simpleton like a sheep'. In that case edamūka would appear as wrong Sanskritisation of Pāli clamūga.
So far as the form mūka < mūrkhal' is concerned, instances of loss aspiration are witnessed both in Pāli and Prākrit, GEIGER 62 (also $ 40) cites ikka < sksa, Takkasila < Taksasilā, etc.; PISCHEL S 213 gives sarkalā Amg, JM, Ś< śrnkhalā, but sankhalā M, S, sankhala Mg, etc, and $ 302 sakkuli and saṁkuli < śaskuli; sukka Amg, JM < śuska, but sukkhu M, Amg, s, suska Mg, etc. The change k > g occurs in Pāli, and it has been noted by LUEDERS as an eastern characteristic in $ 87 and f.n. 1, GEIGER $ 38. He also considers in § 122-8 132 (see also p. 102, f.n. 2) certain cases of hyper-Pälism in which k appears for g. Thus from the formal point of view there is nothing objectionable in deriving ejamūga from eŅamurkha.!!
Under ela in eļamūga PTS Dictionary observes as follows:-"A rather strange use and explanation of eļamūga (with reference to a snake “spitting") we find at J III.347 where it is explained as "eļa-paggharantena mukhena elamugam", i.e., called elamuga because of the saliva (foam ?) dripping from its mouth, v.l. elamukha." This explanation of the commentator is obviously mistaken. ela does not mean saliva or foam, and secondly this sounds a very strange description of a serpent. In the Gāthīs the serpent is otherwise described only as kanha, uggateja,
10. LUEDERS does not discuss the loss of aspiration as a regional characteristic. It may be pointed out that in the inscriptions of Asoka the loss of aspiration is noted in the Girnar version in the forms of the root tisth-, cf. Vtista G, but titha or citha in other versions; also cf. sesta (srestha) G, but sretha Shah; Man., setha Kal; gharasta (grhastha) G, but gahatha Man., Kal., grahatha Shah, gihitha Top. The form idha in the Girnar version (and once in the Dhauli) as against hida of the re. maining versions is the case of an old preservation.
11. § and Mg give mukkha (PISCHEL S 287), and murukkha is noted for the eastern language by Mārkandeya (§ 139) and Sauraseni ( 131).
Madhu Vidyā/582