Prakrit Bhasha Ek Avichinna Dhara

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Prakrit Bhasha Ek Avichinna Dhara" by Kamlesh Jain, based on the provided pages:

The book "Prakrit Bhasha Ek Avichinna Dhara" (Prakrit Language: An Unbroken Stream) by Dr. Kamlesh Jain argues for the continuous and foundational nature of the Prakrit language, positing it as the primary source for the development of Indian languages, rather than a derivative of Sanskrit.

Key Arguments and Concepts:

• Prakrit as a Living Language: Jain emphasizes that Prakrit, meaning "natural" or "common people's language," was the vernacular spoken by the masses. Its primary characteristic is its constant evolution and adaptation, akin to an unbroken, flowing stream.
• Debunking Sanskrit Supremacy: The author challenges the prevailing scholarly view that Prakrit originated from Sanskrit. While acknowledging that many Prakrit grammarians and scholars like Hemachandra and Singhdevagani derived Prakrit from Sanskrit ("Prakriti Sanskritam, tatah bhavam tadagatam va Prakritam"), Jain argues that this perspective is a misinterpretation. These scholars, being primarily Sanskrit scholars, used Sanskrit as a base for analyzing and systematizing Prakrit grammar, not to establish a lineage of origin.
• Common Mother Tongue: Jain asserts that both Vedic Sanskrit and Prakrit have a common ancestor – a spoken vernacular that existed even before the Vedic period. This shared origin explains why certain words and grammatical features are similar in both languages.
• Dr. Richard Pischel's Support: The text cites Dr. Richard Pischel, a renowned Prakrit scholar, who is quoted as saying that it is impossible and misleading to attribute the origin of Prakrit to Sanskrit. Pischel believed Prakrit's roots were firmly in the spoken dialects of the people, drawing its core elements from a living, contemporary language.
• Literary vs. Spoken Prakrit: The author differentiates between the "spoken Prakrit" (deshabhasha) and "literary Prakrit." The spoken form continued to evolve organically, while literary Prakrit, influenced by grammarians, became more standardized and, consequently, more complex and less accessible over time. Examples like Udyotan Suri's "Kuvalayamalakaha" (779 CE) are mentioned as instances of grammar-influenced literary Prakrit.
• Prakrit as the Originator: Jain argues that the grammatical standardization of Prakrit led to its branching into what later became known as Apabhramsha and subsequently the New Indo-Aryan languages (Magahi, Gujarati, Dhundhari, Bundelkhandi, Bagheli, etc.). The unbroken stream of spoken Prakrit continued to evolve, even when its literary forms became fixed.
• The "Unbroken Stream" Analogy: The Ganga River is used as a metaphor. Just as the Ganga's flow cannot be ultimately dammed or stopped, the natural evolution of Prakrit, as a spoken language, could not be contained by grammatical rules. Any attempt to obstruct its flow would merely lead it to find new paths, similar to how spoken Prakrit continuously developed.
• Namisadhu's Interpretation: The commentary by Namisadhu on Rudrata's "Kavyalankara" is analyzed. Namisadhu suggests that "Prakrit" refers to the "natural speech of all beings, unadorned by grammar." He also proposes that "Prakrit" can be understood as "pra-krit," meaning "done before," and that this naturally accessible language is the root of all other languages. It evolves into Sanskrit and other forms through regional and grammatical refinement.
• The Role of Grammarians: The reason some grammarians linked Prakrit to Sanskrit was because Sanskrit served as the foundational linguistic model for them when they were creating Prakrit grammars. They used Sanskrit words as a base to explain the phonetic variations in Prakrit. However, this does not equate to Sanskrit being the parent language.
• Conclusion: The book concludes that Prakrit is not a derivative but the fundamental, continuously evolving stream that gave rise to other Indian languages. Understanding this unbroken flow is crucial for appreciating the true nature of Prakrit and its significant contribution to the development of New Indo-Aryan languages. Language, the author stresses, belongs to the common people, not to any individual, region, or sect.