________________
INTRODUCTION
tion between -he, -hi and -him, where him can be as welf genuine. Hence besides Aujjhahe 2 7 5, Ujjhahe 4 1 8 we have Aujjhahim (S. hi, A. he) 5 1 1, Ujjhahim (A. °he) 5 12 9b, guhahim 19 9 4, silahim (A. °ha) 13 8 6.
65
$77. Here as elsewhere, the short e of the earlier orthography is spelt as i in the later orthography and hence the earlier form of the G.L. termination is -he and not -hi or him as held by Tagore'. Hence Alsdorf is right in considering the terminations of G. and L. of Fem. A stems as identical and we need not try to connect it with -asmin or -adhi.
$78. In later Apabhramsa -ahim is quite frequently used for the Loc. sing. of masc. A-stems.
$79. Besides -he and -him, thrice -hã is attested in L. sing. of the fem. A-stems: silahã and ilaha 12 19 gb, dikkhaha (P.S. °ha) 3 10 2; The Sanatkumaracarita has piyahã and niyahã and Savayadhammadoha 95 uses dalahã in the Loc. sing. sense. narayahã at Pahuḍadoha 5 is a similar instance of L. Sing. of masc. A stem. All these forms cannot be possibly just scribal errors.
$80. In G. plur. we find -hum and -hã, obviously extended from the masc. Thus chayahum and padayahum 3 4 7, muahum 19 2 8, cavantiyahum and acchantiyahum 19 9 4, sunhahum (P.S.) 19 4 9, sua-sariyahum 17 5 2, vijjahum (S. °he, A. hu) 12 9 7, vijjahu 9 11 9b; pivara-thanaha and varanganaha 3 13 2, dheņuvaha 3 13 5, kannahã (P.S. him) 10 7 1.
§81. sāsuāņa and sunhana 19 5 1 are Prakritisms.
Masc. I and U Stems
$82. The final vowel of the bare stem used in the Nom. Acc. sing. and plur. is optionally lengthened.
$83. -na and Anusvara are the terminations of I. sing. suravaiņā 2 3 2, pahuna 13 2 1a, Sumalim (S. Sumalem) and Malim (S. Mälem) 8 6 8, Välim 12 9 10, Sumalim 8 9 6, vairim 15 14 1, Harikesim 16 13 7, Sirimalim and alim 17 5 6; once the form ends in -em, Malem (rhyming with dalem) which betrays the influence of A declension.
To the derivation of this Anusvara of I. sing from -na (alina becoming alina becoming alim) Tagare" prefers
to
Jain Education International
to Añjanāyāḥ. A. is in many points more reliable than P. and S. so far as the metre, language and orthography of PC. are concerned. Had I only P. and S. at my disposal and constituted that text on their basis, I would have quoted Anjanaho as an instance of the extension of masc. -ho termination to the fem. A. stems. Similarly there are several instances in PC. of P. and S. giving the Nom. Acc. sing. of masc. A stems as ending in a while the corresponding reading in A. ends in u. Paying little heed to this sort of variable, defective and unreliable orthography of the Ap. Mss., the uncritical character of some Ap. texts and their indiscriminating use have marred many conclusions in Tagare's Historical Grammar of Apabhramsa which otherwise so far as the method of treatment is concerned, makes a valuable contribution to Apabhramsa linguistics.
(1) Tagare, 1948, §92.
(2) Over and above these terminations, Tagare gives a supposed instance of 'zero' termination in L. sing. of fem. A stems (Hist. Gram. of Apa. 92A and 93B and p. 160). The form in question according to Tagare is akhaini 'of a perpetual nature' qualifying ramaim supposed to be I. sing. from rāma = rāmā in Pahuḍadoha 42. This is a clear case of misinterpretation based on misdivision. The line actually reads jasu akhai nirämaim gayau manu i.e. yasya aksaye niramaye gatam manaḥ. Thus akhaini and ramai are ghost words and there is no instance of zero termination in I.
(3) Tagare, 1948, 168.
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
