________________
S, M, Shaha
.
nasal, Pugala, from which Pali puggala might have originated. But in the opinion of Prof. TEDESCO, this etymology is insatisfactory, both as regards its form and meaning; because one does not see how purns (man, male.) could yield puls, and purns is essentially not individual, but male.
These etymologies lead one to following conclusions :
(1) Both the Jaina traditional etymologies of Puggala are somewhat satisfactory as regards the meaning of the term, but they are quite unsatis. factory so far as the form is concerned. It appears that in the case of the first etymology of Puggala (i, e. put or pud+gala--pudgala Puggala or poggala) they postulated a Prakrit puggala to be derived from a Sanskrit Pud gala: wliile in the case of the second ctymology of puggala (i. e; q a r fteffa. पुरुषेण वा गीर्यन्ते इति पुद्गलाः'1) in addition to assuming Sanskrit origin of the term, they try to follow the definition of Puggaln as offered by the Bhagavatisttra i, e. 67505 ETU Up altrafic It seems that they were aware of the form Poggala “an irregular and awkward form as Mrs. Rhys DAVIDS calls it. But instead of tracing its Prakrit etymology; they kept in vicw its Sanskrit equivalent pudgala and tried somehow to impose the two activities or functions of pürana and galana on it.
(2) Buddhaghosa's explanation of Puggala too is fantastic and far from convinciug. His definition of puggala restricts its meaning to 'hellish-beings' and hence suffers from the fault avyāpti narrowness'.
(3) As pointed out by Prof; TEDESCOS etymologies offered by the lexicographer such as professor Rhys DAVIDS, Williams STEADE and Franklin EDGERTON also are not convincing: 'Pugg' cannot be derived from purs. Besides, purus means 'male' and 110t 'individual'. This derivation too suffers from avyāpti 'narrowness.'
(4) Prof, TEDESCO, while deriving Puggala from Pathakala, a derivative from Sanskrit Pythak rather over-emphasises its Buddhistic tradition. He has, I am afraid, not given due consideration to the meaning and form (esp. meaning) of Puggala as preserved in the Jaina tradition.
Since Puggala is originally a Prakrit word and Pud gala is merely a Sanskritization of the same, the etymological investigation is concerned only with the latter form. As Pointed out by Prof. TEDESCO it is possible the Buddhist proto-canon was (probably) in a kind of old Ardhamāgadhi, closely connected with the original language of the Jaina sutra (before this language was transformed into later Middle Indic and underwent western influence), and therefore, both currents of Puggala the Buddhistic and Jaina, spring from the same dialectic source-old Ardbamägadhi. And, therefore, I feel that it is not correct to treat Puggala or Poggala as a Prakritization from some hypothetical Sanskrit word. It could be a loan from non-Ary an or some Dravidian language. There are three roots with which prakrit Puggala or
