________________
Introduction
117
and conclusion are not free from mistakes; and that according to his opinion, the name 'Digambari language' is a better designation. I do not understand, when there is practical agreement between Pischel and himself, and between his results and those of mine (excepting Apabh. elements in Chappāhuda), why Denecke objects to the designation, Jaina Sauraseni. Any name can be given, just as Dr. Jacobi once intended to call Jaina Māhārāştri as Jaina Saurāştri,1 but one must prove first that the name previously suggested is connotatively defective, and that the name proposed is more significant. As remarked above, Pischel's designation has been not without a precedent; and the name, Jaina Saurasenī, is capable of signifying the main traits of this dialect. The word Jaina shows that it is primarily handled by Jaina authors and that it contains some dialectal features of Ardha-Māgadhi, the traditional name of the canonical language of the Jainas; the word Sauraseni shows that it has some parellels with Sauraseni of the grammarians and even of the dramas: and further the term Sauraseni is wide enough to imply the Sanskritic influence, as the Sauraseni of Sk. dramas is moulded after the fashion of the Sk. idiom. So Pischel's designation is sufficiently significant, and no new christening is needed. The new name proposed by Denecke is not significant and comprehensive. The name, Digambari language, on the very face of it, does not indicate a Pk. dialect; it ignores the deep Sauraseni back-ground of the dialect; and it is misleading, in view of the fact that the Digambara authors have adopted, at different periods as well as side by side, different languages and dialects as the one we are discussing, Sanskrit, Tamila, Kannada, and so forth. Thus Denecke's proposed designation is not significant, as it includes matter not needed and excludes important traits of the dialect. I am aware that this Jaina Sauraseni, the dialect of the gāthās of Pravacanasāra, has come, in later days, under the influence of Māhārāștri and Apabhramśa, but that is outside the scope of the present discussion. To conclude, (p. 123:] Pischel's designation viz., Jaina Sauraseni, is sufficiently significant; and it need not be changed, simply for the sake of changing it.
HISTORICAL BACK-GROUND OF JAINA SAURASENI.-Is it possible to outline the historical back-ground and the circumstances, that might have been responsible for the shaping of the Jaina Sauraseni dialect? A couple of centuries after the nirvāņa of Mahāvīra, as a result of the severe famine that is said to have taken place in Magadha, a portion of the Jaina community, under the leadership of Bhadrabāhu, migrated to the South;2 and this has been the historical starting point of Jainism in South India. The Jainas, that migrated to the South, could conveniently stick up to their ascetic practices; but those, that remained behind, became slack, to a great extent, due to difficult days of famine. At the end of the famine, the members of the ascetic community in the North convened a samgha for the restoration of the sacred canon, as so many monks, who were the repositories of the sacred lore, had been the victims of famine. It was at Pätaliputra that the canon was shaped, as it was then available from the various monks that had survived the famine. This canon, naturally, being shaped wholly by those that were remaining in the North and who had
1 His Intro. to Kalpasūtra p. 18, Leipzig 1879. 2 South Indian Jainism chap. II; Ardhamāgadhi Reader ixl etc..
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
