________________
144
प्राकृतसर्वस्वम् ।
rāștrī as the Prākrit par excellence besides the other dialects such as Saurasenī, Gaudi, Lāți and others.3 Then according to him the other language, in which Kāvya may be composed, go by the name Apabhramsa and Bhūtabhāṣā." This Bhūtabhāṣā, though later identified with Paiśācī, was called as such even in the tenth century A. D., as is evident from Kávyamimūnsā. Rājasekhara too like Daņdin enumerates Apabhraíša and Bhūtabhāṣā as separate languages beside Prākṣta. Thus to recognise Apabhraíśa and Paisā.cī (Bhūtabhāsā ) as separate divisions not coming under the general features of Prākrit has been a very old idea beginning from Daņdin if not earlier.
Though primarily a rhetorician, Daņņin has wielded considerable influence on Prākrit grammarians, for, while dealing with Mahārāștrī, they very often actually term it as simply Prākrit which is obviously due to the declaration made by Daņdin about Mahārāştrí being the Prākrit par excellence. Moreover, from the way Mk and Lakşmīdhara have quoted the view of Daņdin it is clear how much importance was attached to the view of Daņdin even in the matters of Prākrit by the orthodox grammarians. So it seems quite reasonable that some ancient grammarian who flourished after Dandin combined the views of both Bharata and Daņdin and classified Prakrit into four main divisions as we have seen in case of Pu, Mk and Rt. The long quotation given by Mk in his introduction in regard to the classification of Prākrit must have come from some Prākrit grammar of an unknown author. Despite the
3. See KD. I. 35 4. Op. cit. I. 36, 38
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
