Ashok Ke Abhilekho Ki Bhasha Magadhi Ya Shaurseni

This document discusses the language of Emperor Ashoka's inscriptions, arguing against the assertion that it is Shauraseni Prakrit and instead positing that it is primarily Magadhi or Ardha-Magadhi, influenced by regional dialects.

Here's a breakdown of the key arguments and points made in the text:

Central Argument:

The core thesis is that Ashoka's inscriptions are not Shauraseni Prakrit. Instead, their language is primarily Magadhi, with significant influences from other regional dialects, leading to it being classified as Ardha-Magadhi by some scholars. The idea that Ashoka's inscriptions are Shauraseni is presented as a "well-planned conspiracy" and a misrepresentation.

Countering the Shauraseni Claim:

• Disproving Shauraseni Characteristics: The text meticulously examines supposed Shauraseni characteristics and finds them absent or incorrect in Ashoka's edicts.
  • 't' to 'd' sound shift: Shauraseni is characterized by the shift of 't' to 'd'. Ashoka's inscriptions do not show this. The word 'hoti' (is) is consistently used, not 'hodi' or 'bhavadi', which are Shauraseni features.
  • 'n' to 'ṇ' sound shift: Shauraseni also features the shift of dental 'n' to retroflex 'ṇ'. Ashoka's inscriptions largely lack this retroflex 'ṇ'. The word 'pitṛ' (father) appears as 'pití' or 'pitú', characteristic of Ardha-Magadhi, not the Shauraseni 'pidú'. Similarly, 'ātmā' becomes 'attā' or 'attnā', not the Shauraseni 'ādā'.
  • Absence of Shauraseni Lexicon: Words like 'hit' (beneficial) are consistently used, not the Shauraseni 'hid'.
• Misattribution by Scholars: The text references Dr. Sudip Jain quoting Prof. Bholashankar Vyas as stating that the oldest form of Shauraseni Prakrit is found in Ashoka's Girnar inscription. The author strongly refutes this, calling it "misleading" and lacking any "solid linguistic basis."
• Ardha-Magadhi Affinity: The language of Ashoka's inscriptions is described as an intermediary language, most closely related to the Ardha-Magadhi found in Jain Agamas.
• Shauraseni's Later Development: It's argued that Shauraseni as a literary language didn't exist until three to four hundred years after Ashoka. The Shauraseni associated with dramas and Digambara Jain texts is a later development.

The Dominance of Magadhi and Regional Influences:

• Central Language of Magadha Empire: The text asserts that Ashoka adopted the language of the Magadha Empire, a widely spoken language in North India that evolved from Vedic language and was similar to, and developing parallel to, classical Sanskrit.
• Magadhi as the Core: Due to the Magadha Empire's centrality, Magadhi was the primary influence in Ashoka's inscriptions.
• Assimilation of Regional Dialects: As a language of administration and propagation, it naturally absorbed sounds, words, and idioms from other regions. This is why variations exist in the inscriptions found across different parts of India.
• Ardha-Magadhi Classification: The language is therefore described as a Magadhi or Magadhi language, but distinct from the Magadhi of dramas and grammars. It is also referred to as Ardha-Magadhi, which is acknowledged to be slightly different from the Ardha-Magadhi in Shvetambara Agamas but closer than to Shauraseni.
• Regional Variations as Evidence: The text specifically mentions that Ashoka's inscriptions were adapted and translated into local languages for different provinces, explaining the textual variations. This demonstrates an awareness of and adaptation to diverse regional dialects.

Jain Connection and the Digambara Argument:

• Shauraseni in Digambara Literature: The text points out that the language termed "pure Shauraseni" in Digambara Jain literature (like Kashayapahuda, Shatkhandagama, Kundakunda's works, Dhavala, Jayadhavala) developed from the Magadhi/Ardha-Magadhi of Ashoka's inscriptions. This further supports the idea that Ashoka's language wasn't Shauraseni.
• Misidentification of Jain Shauraseni: The author explicitly states that the language being called "Shauraseni" in Digambara Agamas is neither grammatically correct Shauraseni nor the Shauraseni of dramas. It's a "khichdi" (mixture) of Ardha-Magadhi, Shauraseni, and Maharashtri Prakrit, with varying proportions in different texts.

Scholarly Basis:

• Dr. Rajbali Pandey's Authority: The text heavily relies on Dr. Rajbali Pandey's extensive analysis in his book "Ashoka ke Abhilekh" (Ashoka's Inscriptions). Pandey's classification of Ashoka's language into four regional divisions (Northwestern, Central Indian, Western Maharashtra, Southward) is cited as authoritative.

Conclusion:

The document strongly argues that Emperor Ashoka's inscriptions are primarily in Magadhi, influenced by regional dialects, and can be considered Ardha-Magadhi. The claim that they are Shauraseni Prakrit is demonstrably false, lacking linguistic evidence and being a misinterpretation that serves to mislead readers. The Shauraseni found in later Jain literature is seen as a development from the language of Ashoka's edicts, not the other way around.

The inclusion of the actual text of several of Ashoka's inscriptions at the end of the excerpt serves as supporting evidence for the linguistic analysis presented.