Comparative Study Of Language Of Shatkhandagama And Pravachansara - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided text, "Comparative Study of Language of Shatkhandagama and Pravachansara" by K.R. Chandra:

This paper by K.R. Chandra undertakes a comparative linguistic analysis of two significant Digambara Jain texts: the Shatkhandagama (SA) and the Pravachanasara (PS). The primary goal is to determine the chronological priority of these texts, as their composition dates are uncertain, ranging from early Christian centuries to the 6th or 8th century AD. The SA is attributed to Pushpadanta and Bhutabali, while the PS is attributed to Kundakundacharya.

The study focuses on linguistic features, comparing them with the grammar of Sauraseni Prakrit as documented by Hemachandra. The PS is analyzed in its entirety, while only the first four parts of the first volume of the SA are covered. The author aims to test the claims made by editors that the language of these texts belongs to the earlier Christian centuries.

The comparison highlights several key linguistic differences:

Phonetic Features:

Nasals: Hemachandra's grammar allows optional variations for initial and medial 'n' (n-, -n-, -nn-) and the nasal of 'ñ' (ñ-, -ñ-, -ññ-), including the use of anusvara for palatal nasals. However, the SA and PS consistently use the cerebral nasal 'n' (n-, -n-, -nn-) and anusvara for palatal nasals.
Future Tense Suffix: Hemachandra prescribes the augment "-ssi-" for the future tense. In contrast, the PS consistently uses "-ssa-" (e.g., करिस्सामि - karissāmi).
Verb Stems: The stems "bhuv-" and "huv-" from the root "bhū" (as cited by Hemachandra) are not found in either the SA or the PS.
Medial Consonant Changes: The study provides detailed analysis of medial consonant changes in both texts, with the following observations:
- SA (Jain's edition):
  - Tendency towards preserving intervocalic consonants more than elision.
  - Medial '-k-' is generally voiced and sometimes elided.
  - Medial '-g-' is retained.
  - Medial '-t-' normally changes to '-d-', and is at times dropped.
  - Medial '-th-' is sometimes softened and also changes to '-h-'.
  - Medial '-dh-' is normally preserved and at times changes to '-h-'.
  - Medial '-bh-' generally changes to '-h-' and at times is retained.
  - Analysis shows 30% retention, 19.5% voicing, and 50.5% elision of medial consonants, with elision being significantly higher.
- PS (Upadhye's edition):
  - Tendency towards preservation of intervocalic consonants than elision.
  - Medial '-k-' is generally voiced and at times elided.
  - Medial '-g-' is retained.
  - Medial '-t-' normally changes to '-d-', and at times is dropped.
  - Medial '-th-' is sometimes softened and also changes to '-h-'.
  - Medial '-dh-' is normally preserved and at times changes to '-h-'.
  - Medial '-bh-' generally changes to '-h-' and at times is retained.
  - Analysis shows 15% retention, 49% voicing, and 36% elision of medial consonants, with voicing being more prevalent than in the SA, and elision less so.
- Critical Remarks on Upadhye's Opinions: The paper points out some inaccuracies in Upadhye's assessment of phonetic changes in the PS, particularly regarding the frequency of '-k-' voicing and '-dh-' to '-h-' changes.

Morphological Features:

Locative Singular Suffix: The suffix "-i" is more popular in the PS (30 instances) than in the SA (8 instances). The archaic locative singular suffix "-e" is found in about 25% of cases in the PS, compared to only 6% in the SA.
Absolutive Forms: The suffix "-u" is prevalent for absolutive forms in the PS, and the suffix "-ūṇa" is not found. The SA, however, does feature absolutive forms with the "-ūṇa" suffix.

Conclusion:

Based on the phonological and morphological evidence, K.R. Chandra concludes that the language of the Shatkhandagama (SA) is of a later evolutionary stage than that of the Pravachanasara (PS) in the development of Middle Indo-Aryan dialects. Therefore, the date of composition of the SA is younger than that of the PS, implying that Kundakundacharya lived a few centuries before the composition of the Shatkhandagama.

The paper also notes a point raised by the editors regarding the Pravachanasara, suggesting that the inclusion of earlier verses might influence the linguistic analysis.