________________
156
Studies in
the Alamkārikas made no difference between Sanskrit and Prakrit literatures. They appreciated both. Some of them wrote in both. The norms laid down in their works were equally applicable to both and, indeed, till recently to literatures even in our modern languages. Even a scholar like Hemacandra, who has to his credit books on Prakrit grammar and prosody did not feel the necessity of preparing a treatise on Prakrit poetics. The fact, however, remains that the Sanskrit critical thought took little or no note of some of the interesting and peculiar aspects of the vast and varied Prakrit literature. The Alamkārikas, generally speaking, contented themselves merely with quoting Prakrit passages for illustrative purposes or alluding to certain works for illustrating types of composition. Corrupt Text :
The Prakrit text of many verses, is, in many places, corrupt or shows small or big gaps and in some cases it is so hopelessly corrupt that it becomes unintelligibie. In many cases the exact context from which they are drawn is not known and consequently they remain obscure. As the Prakrit text is carelessly transcribed in the Manuscripts, it falls to the editors of these works to present these Prakrit verses as correctly as possible, by tracing them to their sources or by referring to other works on Alamkāra, Grammar or Prosody wherever they are quoted. One must concede, however, that in spite of the best of efforts on the part of editors some verses still remain obscure, as their sources are irretrievably lost and they are not cited elsewhere. Dr. Weber has edited about 35 Gāthās from the works on Sanskrit poetics and incorporated them, by way of an Appendix., in his critical edition of Gāthāsaptašati : Ubet dap Sapta Satakam des Hala. Dr. AM. Ghatage has corrected some six Prakrit verses in the footnotes to his article on Māhārāsţii Language and Literature. Dr. A. N. Upadhye has corrected one very obscure Apabhramśa verse from Dhanika's Avaloka on Dasarūpaka which correction is incorporated by T. Venkatacharya in his paper entitled 'An Appraisal of the Hindi Daśarūpaka' in Journal, University of Gauhati XI : Arts. A considerable number of Prakrit verses I could correct by tracing them to their sources or through comparisons. A few of them are referred to here.
The passage "Apape......anurāo" in Sạngāraprakāśa Vol. I, p. 120 has been considered very corrupt. The significant, word 'Aņurāo' and the word 'Āśyāsaka' following this passage in the text led me to seek the source of these two verses in Setubandha and I succeeded in tracing the two verses as Setubandha IX. 1 and IX. 96 respectively.
The passage “Devaditi luņāhi.....gumariphellaparanya" (?) in Locana on Dhvanyāloka I. 16 has been considered extremely corrupt and absolutely unintelligible. The commentator "Bālapriyākāra” confesses his inability to rostore the original passage. I came across a corresponding passage in Abhinavabhūraii (Vol. 1, Ch. VI, p. 305) which reads "Vardhate" luņāhi..... Landhā". This too is absolutely corrupt. Parisistam 11to the Volume (p. 383) notes : Dhvanyālokalocanasya tālapatradarse. ....
