Some Topics in the Development of OIA MIA NIA

Author(s): H C Bhayani
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 17

4. -sm- > -mh- >- mh
(1) Amg. māhaņa “Brahmin' According to Pischel cquating (i.c. deriving) Amg. mahaņawith Sk. brāhmaṇa-, following Weber and others is linguistically impossible ($ 250). He derives the word from mākha- 'pertaining to a sacrifice from Sk. makha- 'sacrifice' and equates it, therefore with mākhaņa “sacrificial' (priest)
But, it seems, māhaņa- can be explained as 'regular' phonological development of Sk. brāhmaṇa-.
1. We know that in several Sanskrit forins there was variation of b- and v- in the initial position, for example, the root bịh- /vrh- and its derivatives, brsi/vrsi etc. So we can assume a variant form vrāhmaṇafor brāhmaṇa
2. vrāhmaṇa- changed first lo vámhaņa- then to vầhana > māhana-, involving the change - mha--hà- with the loss of nasaliration due to the following nasal. For -va- > -m- Pischel § 261
S.N. Ghosal has given a similar cxplanation in a paper referred to below, but simplification of conjunct consonants with lengthening of the preceding short vowel is mostly a later development. We can rather account for the -a- of māhana- with the fact that in Eastern Prakrits a long vowel preceding conjunct consonants was preserved and the conjunct got simplified. (Pischel 87: Bloch, p.92)
2. Pk. kohamda, 'pumpkin, -gourd'
We know that the Sk. Ablative ending smāt first changed to -mahā (Pk.) and then to -hà. So also the locative ending -smin first changed to -hi and then to -hi (Pischel, $8 313, 425)
Sk. kusmānda > Pk. kohmda- through the changes -smā > mhaha-, with the lāss of nasaligation due to the following nasal (Pischel $ 127, also $8 76, 89, 312; Turner accepts Kuiper's view that the word is of Munda origin (DIAL, 3374; Ghosal acccpts Pischel's view : S.N. Ghosal, The word mahaņa in Prakrit, Sambodhi, 8, 1989-80, p. 15-20)
Sk. kusmāņda-is probably a Sanskritization of Pk. kumhamda-.