Pali Aur Prakrit

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text "Pali Aur Prakrit" by Bramhadev Narayan Sharma:

The book "Pali Aur Prakrit" by Dr. Bramhadev Narayan Sharma discusses the crucial roles of Pali and Prakrit languages as the carriers of Jain and Buddhist traditions, respectively. These languages were chosen by Lord Mahavir and Lord Buddha because they were the vernacular languages of the common people at that time, allowing for wider dissemination of their teachings on conduct, penance, renunciation, and detachment. These messages were not only for India but for the entire world, enabling millions to escape suffering and achieve peace and liberation (Nirvana).

The author notes that while Lord Mahavir was senior to Lord Buddha and his tradition was older, the compilation of Jain Agamas occurred later than the Buddhist Agamas. The Pali Tripitaka was compiled in the first century BCE, while Jain Agamas were compiled and written in the 5th-6th centuries CE.

Before these great figures, Vedic Sanskrit was the dominant language, used for scholarly discourse. However, its difficulty led to changes, giving rise to Middle Indo-Aryan languages, from which Pali and Prakrit emerged. The text details linguistic transformations from Old Indo-Aryan (Vedic Sanskrit) to Middle Indo-Aryan, including:

• The disappearance of 'ṛ', 'ḷ' sounds.
• The replacement of 'ai' and 'au' with 'e' and 'o'.
• The substitution of 'av', 'ay' clusters with 'e', 'o' sounds.
• The use of anusvara (nasalization) instead of 'm'.
• The use of only 's' instead of 'ś', 'ṣ'.
• Changes in word and root forms, with many stem forms becoming similar to 'a'-ending stems.
• Changes in case endings, such as the genitive singular changing from forms like 'aśvasya' to 'aśvassa'.
• The incorporation of pronoun forms into noun declension.
• A reduction in verb forms and a decrease in the use of 'sananta' and 'yaṅanta' formations.

These changes resulted in the evolution of Middle Indo-Aryan, which encompasses Pali, Prakrit, Apabhramsa, and other languages.

The earliest accessible form of Prakrit is found in Ashoka's inscriptions. The text suggests that three regional variations of Pali or the contemporary vernacular existed: Eastern, Western, and North-Western. These dialects are believed to have developed into Magadhi and Ardhamagadhi (Eastern), Shauraseni (Western), and Paishachi (North-Western) Prakrit. Bharat Muni identified seven Prakrits: Magadhi, Avantī, Prāchyā, Śaurasenī, Ardhamāgadhī, Bāhlīkā, and Dākhinātyā. Hemachandra later added Paishachi and Lāṭī. However, for literary purposes, Magadhi, Ardhamagadhi, Shauraseni, and Maharashtri are considered the main Prakrits.

The author then compares Pali and Prakrit, highlighting their phonetic similarities. Both languages generally lack 'ṛ', 'ḷ', 'ai', and 'au'. The sound 'ḷ' often transforms into 'a', 'i', or 'u'. Both have short 'e' and 'o', and lack visarga (ḥ). 'Ś', 'ṣ' are replaced by 's', though Magadhi retains 'ś'. Both languages feature retroflex sounds. Intervocalic voiceless stops often change to voiced stops or semivowels ('v', 'y'), and intervocalic aspirated voiced stops become 'h'. Intervocalic voiceless stops also change to voiced stops in both languages.

A significant point of discussion is the relationship between Pali and Magadhi. While many scholars consider Pali to be Magadhi, the author argues that there are differences. The Magadhi described by later Prakrit grammarians and found in inscriptions and plays differs from Pali. Key features of Magadhi include the transformation of 'r' and 's' into 'l' and 'ś' respectively, and the nominative singular of masculine and neuter 'a'-stems becoming 'e'-ending. Pali, however, retains both 'r' and 'l' sounds, and the 'a'-stems typically end in 'o', not 'e'. Differences in the use of 's' in Ashoka's inscriptions (e.g., 'Mansehra') are also noted, contrasting with Magadhi's prevalence of 'ś'.

The author also compares Ardhamagadhi and Pali, finding many similarities in words like 'pure', 'suve', 'bhikkhave', 'purisakare', 'dukkhe'. They note that 'tad' often becomes 'seyya' in both. While 'r' often becomes 'l' in Ardhamagadhi, this is not consistent in Pali. Ardhamagadhi exhibits half the tendencies of Magadhi and half of Shauraseni Prakrit, suggesting its prevalence in regions west of Magadha and its development from the second stage of Aryan languages.

The text then explores the similarities between Pali and Shauraseni Prakrit, particularly in the 'o'-ending nominative singular of masculine 'a'-stems (e.g., 'puriso', 'buddho') and the change of 'ṣ' to 's'. Many words like 'sah', 'puris', 'dhamma', 'kamma', 'pasati', 'putta' are common to both. The transformation of intervocalic voiceless stops to voiced stops is also observed in both (e.g., 'magandim' from 'makandika'). However, Pali also shows a reverse tendency where intervocalic voiced stops become voiceless (e.g., 'akalun' from 'agaru'). The use of the suffix '-tūṇa' in Pali's past participle is compared to the '-dūṇa' suffix in Shauraseni, and a similar form '-tūna' appears in Paishachi. Similarities in forms like 'pekkha' and 'gamissati' are also noted. Yet, differences exist, such as Shauraseni's '-di' ending in present tense first-person singular verbs ('karedi', 'gacchedi') which is absent in Pali ('karoti', 'gacchati').

The author also briefly touches upon the similarities between Pali and Paishachi Prakrit, including the change of voiced stops to voiceless, the preservation of intervocalic consonants, and the assimilation of conjunct consonants.

In conclusion, the text argues that Pali cannot be separated from Prakrit; rather, Pali can be considered the initial form of Prakrit. As the language evolved, regional variations led to the development of names like Magadhi, Ardhamagadhi, Shauraseni, Maharashtri, and Paishachi. While some scholars question if Pali was a common people's language, the author suggests that it likely was, given Lord Buddha's instruction to learn the Dharma in one's own language. The diversity and multifaceted nature of these languages, along with the portrayal of various social strata conversing in Pali in the Tipitaka, support the idea that Pali was indeed a language of the common people, which later underwent literary modifications.

The book posits that the difficulty of Vedic Sanskrit led to natural linguistic changes, resulting in simpler forms found in Ashoka's inscriptions and Pali. This evolved into other Prakrits. The sequence of linguistic development might be: Vedic Sanskrit → Middle Indo-Aryan (Pali/Prakrit) → Sanskrit. The author concludes that Pali is an early form of Prakrit, and the diversification into various Prakrits occurred due to regional influences.