Sambodhi 1977 Vol 06

Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 76

30
S.N. Ghosal
these characteristics, is designated as Jaina Mähäräştri by Jacobi. We may briefly mention these : (1) Here k frequently becomes changed into g e.g, ego, amugo, asugo, savago, ägāro ete. (2) So c becomes j e.g. pisacs becomes pisāji. (3) The use of the ya-śruti is quite frequent particularly when it comes to fill the hiatus between two a vowels, e.g. sayadham, nayaram, mayanko, gayā, mayano, nayanam, etc. (4) Here the cerebralization of the słental consonants is copiously found particularly in the forms of the past participle e.g. vāvaco, madayam, padimā, padamsuā, dolā, danda etc. (5) though the change of the dental n into the cerebral is a special feature of the Māhārāştri dialect Hemacandra retains the dental n at the initial syllable of a word and in the medial only when it is doubled, e.g. nayanam, nayararii, nihao, nävio, sennam, da innan, manni, ahinannu etc. (6) In Mālārāştri the acknowledged suffix of the absolutive is - ūņa, but Hemacandra sanctions the use of some others like -ccā (e.g. bhocca, naccā, soccā etc.),-uāņa (c.g. kāyāna souāna etc.), -ttu (e.g. vandittu), -ttum (e.g. mottum datthum etc.), -ttă (e.g. banditta), etc. All these features are in fact drawn from the Ardla-Māgadhị dialect but are recognised as constituent elements of the Māhārāștri speech, which Hemacandra simply designates as Prākrit. Owing to these features the Māhārāştri of Hemacandra becomes to Some extent different from that, which is presumed by the authors of the secular Prākrit texts.
It is a fact that the Māhārāștri dialect employed in the non-canonical works of the Svetāmbaras, is much different from the popular Mahārāștrı specch. Here one finds many features of Ardha--Māgadhi, which being mixed with Māhārāştri give the latter a distinct character. Jacobi calls this Māhārāștri as Jaina Māhārāstri but suggests another name also, which is Jaina Saurāștri. Tbat one finds here the preponderance of the ArdhaMagadbi features has been admitted by Pischel too. But it is a notable fact that the Prakrit grammarians do not mention it and are in fact absolutely ignorant of the speech.
In the same manner the non-canonical texts of the Digambaras are composed in the Saurasepi dialect, which is much different from the traditional Saurasenj speech. Here the influence of the Ardha-māgadhi speech is remarkably deeper, atleast more than that which one finds in JainaMāhārāstri. Occasionally some features of Mahārāştri too have crept into this speech. Jacobi has called it Jaina-Sauraseni, although the grammarians of Prakrit do not recognise this speech.
Now in the absence of any authentic evidence it is very difficult to admit the separate occurrence of these two Prākrit dialects--namely the Jaina-Mahārāstri and Jaina-Sauraseni. The Ardha-māgadhi dialect, in which the canonical texts of the Jainas are composed, left a tremendous influence