________________
66
TULASI-PRAJNA, Dec., 1990
5. On the Change of cch in Mägadbī:
On the change of-cch, grammarians prescribe śc. All the gramma. rians did not make any sūtra on this particular issue But Hc. Tv., Pu , RT., and Mk. have some sūdras on this particular issue, But their pattern of making the sūtras is different. Hc. has suggested ch becomes śc by the sūtra chasya. Śconādau (4.295), where he mentions ch as the pattern of a sūtra. Hc. is followed by Tv. whereas Pu., RT., and Mk. have formulated the sūtra where cch becomes Śc (Pu. XII, 11. RT. 2.2.18, Mk. V.7) while Pu., RT., and Mk. are very clear and categorical in formulating the sūtra where-cch-becomes Śc, Hc. is pedantic in formulating the sútra. The reason that Hc mentions only ch is not dificult to understand. In a sense Hc. means cch. As in most of the cases non-initial ch is accompanied by cch, the formation of the word automatically will be chh and because initially conjunct cch does not occur. Hc. has not naturally mentioned cch in the sūtra, so that he can distinguish between initial ch (where initial ch can occur even in Prakrit and Sanskrit), Hc. did not feel it necessary to formulate the sūtra with cch. In this connection, his pattern of formulating sūtra even in the case of Mahārāștri is also the same. For example, in the case of substitute for ks-kkh. cch or jih noninitially Hc. has formulated the sūtra as kşh khaḥ kvacit tu-cha-jhau (2.3). The simple meaning of this sūtra is kş, initially or non-initi
y becomes, kh, ch and jh. If initial, then kh remains, but if noninitial, then kh, ch, jh are reduplicated i.e. becoming kkh, cch and jjh by the rule anādau seşa-deśayor-dvitvam (2. 89), it means whenever there is a question of substitution for conjunct consonant, the substitution must always be doubled in non-initial position. So initially naturally it will not be doubled. In the case of aspirates like kh, ch, jh, the doubling of the aspirate is not tolerated, as a result the first one would be de-aspirated by the sūtra dvitiya turyayo-ruparipūrvaḥ (2. 90), Hc. has followed this principle of reduplication and substitution throughout his grammar and naturally here he wants to apply the same principle. For example, in another sūtra of Māgadhi rrajo jaḥ (4.294) the substitution of j is doubled ñ, which follows from the previous sūtra ny ny jñ ñj ññh (4.293). So according to Hc. gaccha becomes gaśca whereas chāle (Skt. kşāraḥ) and not ścāle.
Probably the other grammarians have wanted to make the point clearer than other grammarians and hence, they have made the sūtra cch. But in the case of initial ch which should not be śc at least according to Hc. and Tv. is not clear from the sūtras of pu., RT., and Mk. In their vịttis they have not even given any example where their rule is violated,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
