________________
प्राकृतसर्वस्वम् ।
Even if we accept the interpretation of Dr. GHOSH there is no reason why M forming the principal Pkt should not be used in a Saṭṭaka. As a matter of fact there was no such restriction against the use of M, for the Saṭṭaka named Vilāsavati by Mk stands clear testimony to it. He cites portions of metrical stanzas from the above work while illustrating the exceptional cases of dative use in M instead of genitive.48
82
Dr GHOSH has unnecessarily assumed influence of Ap. on the Mss. while there is clear evidence of the use of M even in his best Mss. as in case of pisunei, kai and others. Rajasekhara being savvabhāsā-caduro was fully aware of the dialectic variations between S and M and in fact he has used both these dialects in his play. But as it seems, he was not so particular about the correct use of them on the line of grammatical rules. The loss of intervocalic consonants as seen in the above examples is surely a M feature and not the influence of Ap.49
Dr GHOSH has also assumed the language of the Setuhandha to be S. His assumption is based on a singular phonetic feature found in it, viz. -ks> kh, >kkh which occurs in the work in "overwhelming number of
न च विष्कम्भकोऽप्यत्र प्रचुरश्चादभुतो रसः ।
अङ्का जवनिकाख्याः स्युः स्यदिन्यन्नार्टिकासमम् || SD VI. 276-77 To this may be compared the definition of Saṭṭaka by Rajasekhara himself:
सो सट्टओत्ति भण्णइ दूरं जो णाडिआए अणुहरइ ।
किं पुण पवेसविक्खंकाई केवलं ण दीसंति ॥
See PS V, 131.
Dr. GHOSH omits one important verse which is clearly in M. See etc. in KоNow's edition, KM. 1.7.
48.
49.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
