________________
INTRODUCTION
Mk finds full play in this example. Even though his account of Śābari as well as of Audrī is too incomplete to give us a clear idea of the dialects concerned, his approach to the subject deserves ample admiration since nowhere else do we have such information especially about Audri. His work is important from the grammatical as well as from the historical point of view. The example cited by him about Audri points to a very remote period at least to the 10th century A. D, when the Oriya language was not free from Prākritisms and Apabhramsa influence, a clear testimony to which is borne out by the example itself.74 Unfortunately no dramatic wark has as yet come to light which has used this dialect. No doubt this dialect relates to Orissa and I am afraid, if a character belonging to Orissa was assigned this dialect.75
38. About Abhiri Mk's account is far from satisfactory. All that he says is that the said Vibhāṣā is exactly like Šābari with this exception that the former78 has ia and ua for ktvä and with this much peculiarity it is not so much deviated from Sābarī." Pu knows no Ābhīrī. Rt supplies us with some more information about this dialect. He says that in the word Kicaka
74. Rt while distinguishing Ap from Vibhāşã says that although the dialects such as Sakāraka, Audra, l'rāvida etc. partake of the nature of Ap,, if they are employed in stage plays and such other works they are not to be considered as such, PK II. 3. 31.
75. Krşņa Miśra puts Mg on the lips of the letter-bearer wbo belongs to Orissa. See Prabodhacandrodaya. II. This work is the earliest extant record of presenting a character belonging to Orissa.
76. Dr. M. M. Gaosa translates here as the latter' which is faulty. See PK, p. 138.
77. Mss and B read reāl na in G )tyapabhramsah wbich is not clear. For further elucidation see footnote under XV, 10.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
