________________
INTRODUCTION
133
From a grammatical point of view there is nothing very abnormal in Pravarasena's use of forms with d for t. It is true that Hemacandra regards the change of medial t to d as an exclusive feature of Sauraseni, and objects to its use in Prāksta, i.e., Mahārāştri.1 His criticism is directed at Vararuci who allows this change in words like ţtu, rajata, sarad etc., and recognises forms like those used by Pravarasena: mailada, rāmādo, de etc.?. Vararuci evidently draws his materials from an earlier phase of Mahārāşiri, while Hemacandra's objections are based on a later phase when the process of vocalisation of the consonants had become complete. He seems to have drawn his conclusion from works like the Gaüdavaho and the Lilāvai where the change of 1 to d is conspicuous by its absence'. Accordingly he reads uu for udy in the Setu verse 6.11 quoted in his Kāyyānuśasana".
It may be noted that examples of d for 1, some of them admitted by Vararucis, are found also in the Gathäsaptašatr, especially in the NS ed. with the comm. of Gangādhara: de 1.15; 6.53; 7.7, 53; āada 4.1; niggadā 6.5; dāva 1.90; 2.68; ņivvudi 1.85; 3.29, 42; devadā 2.94; ņecchadi 3.5; visada 4.43 etc. Weber adopts some of these forms: de, dāva, nivvudi 5.21; while he reads parido not found in the NS ed. (5.54). In some cases Weber gives the forms with d as variants. It may be added that si. milar forms are also found occasionally in certain Mahārā
1 379 oferee scarfag (cf. Vararuci 2.7) $carto4974: I Thalhalfaaz
La tā sfà asta i asa fe #g: 3 33 etc. HC 1.209; Waal 767 प्राकृते पीणया इति भवति । पीणदा इति तु भाषान्तरे। तेनेह तलो दा न क्रियते
ibid. 2.154. 2 See Vararuci 2.7; 4.10, 22; 5.6; 6.32 etc. 3 Cf, Upadhye, Lilāvai, Introd., p. 83. 4 Vol. 1, Bombay, 1938, p. 361, quotation no. 550. 5 Cf. Vararuci 2.7; 6.32.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
