________________
Śrāvakabhini
adjustments and modifications, while the purport of several other texts has been incorporated in the text in the usual analytic and descriptive style of the work. Thus, the forms which seem to be corresponding to the middle-Indic grammatical formation and the BHS vocabulary may have crept into the text of the S. Bh. and YBS in the process of incorporating the subject matter of Pali and BHS works.
It is also not improbable that the scribe of the MS. who was fully conversant with the language, the vocabulary, the phonology, the morphological constructions and the syntactical forms of the BHS works, could not avoid the insertion of allied forms in the present text and thus the non-Sanskritic forms may be credited to the indiscriminate use, on bis part, of Sanskrit and Hybrid or Pali (Sanskritized) forms of the words.
Keeping aside these irregularities, Asanga is purely a Sanskrit writer and as in other works, here also he deals with topics relating to the various Yogācārabhūmis and the S. Bh. in Classical Sanskrit in the light of the Pali passages, the Mahāyāna Sūtras and the canonical works of the different sects (specially the Mahāśāsaka sect. This, in addition to the scribe's mistakes, is responsible for the non-Sanskritic forms found in the Ms. It is also not implausible that the scribe who copied out the Ms from some other Ms. usually committed the same mistakes in addition to other ones, which were already present in the basic Ms available to him. This fact is evidenced from the numerous side-notes and foot-notes which are incorporated therein in the process of revision and correction of the Ms.
Had Asanga followed the pattern of the BHS language, all his works would have naturally been written in the same language. Moreover, it is anything but trustworthy in the case of a writer of Asanga's status and calibre that he might have chosen Sanskrit for some of his works and BHS for
