Fragments Of The Earliest Eastern Prakrit Grammarians

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided text, "Fragments of the earliest Eastern Prakrit Grammarians" by Satyaranjan Banerjee:

This paper, presented at the 22nd session of the All India Oriental Conference in 1960, focuses on the contributions of early Eastern Prakrit grammarians, namely Śakalya, Māṇḍavya, Kohala, and Kapila. The author notes that these grammarians are primarily referenced in the works of later scholars like Purusottama, Ramatarkavāgisa, and Mārkaṇḍeya, who incorporated their views into their own Prakrit grammar treatises. While the direct works of these early grammarians are not extant, their linguistic insights can be gleaned from these later commentaries.

The paper identifies the Eastern School of Prakrit grammar as the context for these early grammarians. Mārkaṇḍeya, in his Prākṛta-Sarvasva, explicitly mentions Śākalya, Kohala, Bhara, Vararuci, Bhamaha, and Vasantarāja as his predecessors, indicating their importance in the Eastern tradition. Māṇḍavya is mentioned by Ramatarkavāgisa, and Kapila by both Ramasarma (presumably Rāmatarkavāgisa) and Mārkaṇḍeya. The author posits that these grammarians likely belonged to the Eastern school or their views were widely adopted by scholars of this tradition.

The core of the paper then presents specific linguistic observations attributed to these early grammarians, as collected from the texts of Purusottama, Ramatarkavāgisa, and Mārkaṇḍeya. These observations cover various aspects of Prakrit grammar:

1. Formative Suffixes:

• Feminine Word Formation: Śākalya (according to Mārkaṇḍeya) states that feminine words ending in consonants are formed exclusively with the suffix 'i'. For other feminine words, either 'i' or 'ā' can be used (e.g., māņiņi, mānamsiņi, sohanā, sohani).
• "Matup" Suffix: This suffix, indicating possession or abundance, is formed with 'ha' according to Śākalya and Māṇḍavya. Otherwise, it is formed with 'alla' or 'ella' (e.g., ekkaho, puttaho, versus ekkallo, ekkello, puttallo, puttello).
• Past Participle ("kta"), Infinitive ("tum"), and Indeclinable Participle ("ktvā"): Śākalya and Mārkaṇḍeya suggest that 'e' or 'i' can be added to these forms, though no examples are provided.

2. Declension of the Second Personal Pronoun:

• Accusative Plural: Śākalya and Mārkaṇḍeya indicate the form 'tumbhe' for the accusative plural, alongside the more common 'tujjhe' and 'tumhe'.
• Locative Plural: Śākalya's view, as recorded by Mārkaṇḍeya, includes 'tujjhesu (m)', 'tumhesu (m)', and 'tumbhesu (m)' for the locative plural.

3. Future Tense:

• Śākalya suggests that the future tense is formed with 'ssa' instead of 'hi'.

4. Gerund (Ktvā):

• Śākalya and Mārkaṇḍeya attribute the use of 'tu' or 'tum' (or 'tumam') for the 'ktvā' gerund.

5. Verbal Substitutes:

• Śākalya's contributions include the formation of the verb 'tuvara-i' from Sanskrit 'tvar', and 'bhinda-i' and 'chinda-i' from Sanskrit 'bhid' and 'chid' respectively.
• Sauraseni Dialect: Śākalya is credited with the Sauraseni substitution of 'bho' for the root 'bhū' (meaning 'to be'), and also the form 'ho'.
• Kapila's View on "grah": Kapila, according to Ramatarkavāgisa and Mārkaṇḍeya, does not approve of the substitute 'genha' for the Sanskrit root 'grah' in the past participle ('kta') and the gerundive adjective ('tavya').

6. Magadhi Dialect:

• Kohala is cited as stating that Magadhi is the language spoken by demons (rākṣasas), religious mendicants (bhikṣu), Jainas (Kṣapanaka), and menials (ceṭī).

The paper concludes by presenting an appendix detailing the specific citations and English translations from the works of Purusottama, Ramatarkavāgisa, and Mārkaṇḍeya, supporting the attribution of these grammatical views to Śākalya, Māṇḍavya, Kohala, and Kapila. This detailed appendix serves as the primary evidence for the author's claims regarding the early Eastern Prakrit grammarians.