Prakrit Boliyo Ki Sarthakta

This document is an excerpt from a book titled "Prakrit Boliyo ki Sarthakta" (The Significance of Prakrit Dialects) by Jagdishchandra Jain. It discusses the historical context, linguistic characteristics, and scholarly study of Prakrit languages. Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided pages:

Page 1: Introduction and Historical Context

• Misconceptions about Prakrit: The text begins by addressing a negative perception of Prakrit, citing a passage from the Garudapurana that associates it with "Lokayat" (materialism), "kutarka" (false logic), and "mleccha bhashitam" (barbarian tongues), suggesting it's not to be heard by Brahmins. The author counters this by stating that no language is inherently praiseworthy or blameworthy; each has its place in linguistic evolution.
• Classification of Indian Aryan Languages: The document outlines the three stages of Indian Aryan languages:
  1. Old Indian Aryan Languages: 2000 BCE to 600-500 BCE.
  2. Middle Indian Aryan Languages: 6th/5th century BCE to 10th/11th century CE.
  3. Modern Indian Aryan Languages: 10th/11th century CE to the present.
• The Supremacy of Sanskrit: The text highlights the rise of Sanskrit to a prestigious position in Indian literature after Panini (5th century BCE) codified its grammar in his "Ashtadhyayi." Sanskrit became the language for philosophy, logic, poetry, grammar, lexicography, astrology, medicine, etc. Its influence grew so strong that other languages seemed less impactful.
• Impact on Prakrit Literature: An example is given of "Sattakas" (short plays based on dance) written purely in Prakrit around 900 CE, which later disappeared due to the dominance of Sanskrit or their adaptation into Sanskrit. The renowned poet Rajashekhar, while composing Sattakas like "Karpuramanjari," had to explain the Prakrit passages in his Sanskrit play "Balramayana" with Sanskrit translations due to the pervasive influence of Sanskrit. The practice of providing Sanskrit explanations for Prakrit parts in Sanskrit dramas continues even today, aiding students in understanding Prakrit.

Page 2: Western Scholars and the Study of Prakrit

• Pioneering Western Scholarship: The author expresses gratitude to Western scholars, particularly Germans, for their scientific study of Prakrit dialects in a modern manner, especially when only manuscripts were available. Key figures mentioned include Albert Weber, Hermann Jacobi, Hoeg, Cowell, Richard Pischel, and Hoernle.
• Key Publications:
  • Albert Hofer's "De Prakrita dialecto libri duo" (1836).
  • Christian Lassen's "Institutiones Linguae Prakriticae" (1837).
  • Albert Weber's work on Maharashtri, Ardhamagadhi, and Apabhramsha.
  • Edward Müller's work on Ardhamagadhi.
  • Hermann Jacobi's study of Jain Maharashtri and his edited work "Ausgeweto Erzelungen in Maharastri" (Selected Tales from Maharashtri) with linguistic commentary.
  • E.B. Cowell's publication of Vararuci's "Prakritaprakasha" (1854), with a second edition including English translation, notes, and Bhamaha's commentary (1860). Cowell also published "A Short Introduction to the Ordinary Prakrit of the Sanskrit Dramas" (1875).
  • Hoeg's "Vergleichung des Prakrita mit den Romanischen sprachen" (Comparative study of Prakrit with Romance languages) (1869), comparing sound changes in Prakrit with Spanish, Portuguese, French, and Italian.
  • A.F. Hoernle's work on the history of Prakrit linguistics.
• Richard Pischel's Monumental Work: Richard Pischel is highlighted as having done the most significant work. After a deep study of unpublished Prakrit manuscripts, he produced "Grammatik der Prakrit Sprachen" (Grammar of the Prakrit Languages) in 1874. This was later translated into English by Subhadra Jha (1957) and into Hindi by Hemchandra Joshi (1950).
• Limitations of the Hindi Translation: The author notes that the Hindi translation by Hemchandra Joshi has many errors, and despite a correction sheet, there are still inaccuracies regarding the usage and texts from Jain Agamas.
• Further Research Needed: The text points out that the Hindi translation of Pischel's work did not include important compositions related to ancient Jain Agamas, their commentaries, and recently published Jain narrative literature. Therefore, the most up-to-date comparative study of Prakrit languages is still pending.
• Ludwig Pallesdorf: His scholarly article "The Vasudevahiṇḍi: A Specimen of Archaic Jain Maharashtri" in the "Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies" (Vol. 8, 1936) is mentioned, where Pallesdorf related the unique linguistic usages in Vasudevahiṇḍi to the earliest stages of Prakrit development.

Page 3: Regionality of Prakrit Dialects

• Jain Monks and Vernaculars: Citing the Brihatkalpabhashya, the text emphasizes the need for Jain monks to be proficient in the various regional dialects spoken across the country to effectively disseminate their teachings to the general populace.
• Mahavira and Buddha's Language Choice: The author notes that Mahavira and Buddha, in the 6th century BCE, chose to preach in Prakrit dialects understandable to the common people, rather than in the scholarly Sanskrit language prevalent at the time. Both figures were active in Magadha, so they adopted the Magadhi dialect spoken there for their sermons.
• The Nature of Sanskrit: The text explains that the Aryans considered Vedic texts sacred, necessitating precise pronunciation of Vedic hymns. Errors in pronunciation (regarding letters, मात्रा, words, or accent) were believed to displease the deities and thwart the speaker's desires. To preserve the integrity of the Vedic text, the Vedangas (Shiksha, Chandas, Vyakarana, Nirukta, Jyotisha, Kalpa) were created. Shiksha and Vyakarana focused on pronunciation accuracy. Despite this, even great Rishis sometimes mispronounced mantras. This led to the importance of studying Pratishakhyas and grammars. Panini's contribution in formulating grammar rules is reiterated here as a monumental work in linguistics, refining the unpolished Vedic language into the cultured Sanskrit.

Page 4: The Meaning and Origin of Prakrit

• "Prakrit" as Natural and Vernacular: In contrast to Sanskrit, "Prakrit" is defined by Namisadhu (11th-century Jain scholar) in his commentary on Rudrata's "Kavyalankara" as "natural, unadulterated by grammar, the spontaneous activity of speech of all worldly beings." Alternatively, it means "that which came before" or "easily understood by children and women, forming the basis of all languages."
• Prakrit as a Corrupted Form of Language: Bharata's "Natya Shastra" (18.2) refers to Prakrit as a corrupted form of language, lacking refinement and undergoing various transformations, which hints at its regionality.
• Alternative Interpretation of "Prakrit": The text discusses the view of some older scholars like Hemachandra (12th century) who interpreted "prakriti" not as natural but as Sanskrit, deriving Prakrit from Sanskrit.
• The Question of Vedic Aryan Speech: A significant question is raised: what language did the Vedic Aryans speak before the Vedas were composed? The author notes a lack of resources to definitively determine this vernacular. While Vedic Sanskrit was based on this spoken language, it likely differed. Could this vernacular be called "Prakrit" (in a broader sense, not limited to the Prakrit we know today)? Over centuries, changes occurred in the vernacular due to geographical, economic, and social factors, eventually leading to what we now call Prakrit. Prakrit signifies the language of the common people, spontaneous speech, unrefined by grammar like Sanskrit.
• Relationship between Sanskrit and Prakrit: The text explores the possibility of Prakrit being derived from Sanskrit if "Sanskrit" is understood as the pre-Vedic or Vedic-era spoken language. However, it counters that Sanskrit emerged from refining and civilizing the raw, unpolished language of the Vedic era. Therefore, the common language of the pre-Vedic or Vedic period cannot be called Sanskrit. Linguistically, both have distinct places and origins, though their roots are the same, they represent different aspects.

Page 5: Linguistic Affinities and Grierson's Classification

• Prakrit and Vedic Similarities: The document points out that many grammatical forms and words in available Prakrit texts are closer to Vedic language than to Panini's Sanskrit. Examples include:
  • 'o' instead of visarga in the singular of the nominative case for 'a'-ending words.
  • 'bhis' in the plural of the instrumental case for 'a'-ending words.
  • Loss of final consonants.
  • Use of the genitive instead of the dative.
  • Use of 'tana' (Prakrit) instead of 'tvan' (Vedic) for past participles.
  • Substitution of the fourth consonant of a class with the aspirated 'h' (e.g., dh = h; gadh = grah; ghnanti = hanti; ardh = arh).
  • Transformation of 's' and 'dh' to 'l' between vowels.
  • Several Prakrit words used in Sanskrit (e.g., vikshipti from vikshipti, gopendra from govinda, masrun from masin, dyut from jut, vikrit from vikat, kshudr from kshull, shrithir from shithir, vidusak from vidus or vidusan, aryika from prajjuka, marsh from maris, bhadram te from bhadanta).
• George Grierson's Classification: Linguist George Grierson's three stages of Prakrit are mentioned:
  • Primary Prakrit: Vedic language and its successor, Sanskrit, are considered literary forms.
  • Secondary Prakrit: Includes Pali, Prakrits mentioned by grammarians, Prakrits in Sanskrit dramas, literary Prakrits in general, and Apabhramshas of grammarians.
  • Tertiary Prakrit: Encompasses modern Indo-Aryan languages.
• Diversity of Prakrit Dialects: The text reiterates that due to regional variations, Prakrit did not achieve the uniformity of Sanskrit. This prevented the creation of a universally accepted, comprehensive grammar at the level of Panini's "Ashtadhyayi." Grammarians from Eastern and Western traditions developed their own Prakrit grammars, often with conflicting views on matters like the use of 'y', 'n', and nasalization. The use of words like 'prayah' (often), 'bahul' (abundant), 'kvachit' (sometimes), and 'va' (or) in grammars signifies the diversity of Prakrit dialects.

Page 6: Grammatical Variations and Popularity of Prakritaprakasha

• Dialectical Differences in Grammars: Eastern tradition grammarians like Vararuci discuss dialects not mentioned by Western tradition grammarians like Hemachandra. Vararuci mentions Maharashtri, Paishachi, Magadhi, and Shauraseni. Hemachandra adds Chulika Paishachi and Apabhramsha. Hemachandra also mentions Arshaprakrit or Ardhamagadhi but states that not all rules apply to it. Grammarians like Trivikrama, Simharaja, Lakshmidhara, and Appaya Dikshita follow Hemachandra, often excluding Arsha or Ardhamagadhi.
• Popularity of Vararuci's Prakritaprakasha: Vararuci's "Prakritaprakasha" is considered the oldest available grammar. It attracted numerous commentaries, including Bhamaha's "Manorama," Katyayana's "Prakratamanjari," Vasantraja's "Prakratasanjivani," Sadananda's "Subodhini," and Narayana Vidyavinoda's "Prakritapadatika." Ramapani Vada from Malabar also wrote a commentary. Like Bhatti's "Bhattikavya" and Hemachandra's "Dvyashraya," Krishnalilasuka from Kerala composed "Sirichandakavva" to explain the rules of "Prakritaprakasha."
• Structure of Prakritaprakasha: Of its 12 chapters, 9 deal with general Prakrit (Maharashtri). Chapter 10 discusses Paishachi, Chapter 11 Magadhi, and Chapter 12 Shauraseni. The commentaries by Katyayana, Vasantraja, and Sadananda focus only on the first 9 chapters, suggesting Vararuci might have primarily considered Maharashtri as the standard literary Prakrit of his time. Chapters 10 and 11 on Paishachi and Magadhi might have been later additions by Bhamaha or an unknown grammarian. Chapter 12 on Shauraseni also lacks Bhamaha's commentary.

Page 7: Disagreements on Prakrit Dialects

• Disagreements Between Eastern and Western Grammarians: The text details disagreements between the two traditions regarding Prakrit dialects, highlighting regional and temporal variations. Disagreements exist on word and verb classes.
• Variations in Dialectal Classifications:
  • Vararuci considers Shauraseni as the basis for Paishachi.
  • Markandeya lists 11 "Pishacha" regions and names three Paishachi dialects: Kaikeya, Shaurasen, and Panchala. Ram Sharma Tarka Vagish adds Gauda, Magadha, and Vrachada Paishachi. Western tradition grammarians do not have such classifications.
  • Independent works in Paishachi are unavailable, with Gunadhya's "Badakaha" (Brihatkatha) lost.
  • Magadhi, like Paishachi, Ardhamagadhi, Shauraseni, and Maharashtri, lacks independent compositions, with its usage primarily found in Sanskrit dramas.
  • Vararuci and Hemachandra discuss some Magadhi rules, suggesting the rest can be understood from Shauraseni. Markandeya considers Shauraseni as the "nature" of Magadhi.
• Ardhamagadhi: This is identified as the language of Shvetambara Jain Agamas, referred to as "Arshavachana" or "Devavani" (divine speech), similar to Sanskrit being called "Girvana" (divine). As a "ghas-bhasha" (a language that naturally manifests), it's considered to have an independent origin, not requiring grammatical rules. Kramaḍishvara calls it a mixture of Maharashtri and Magadhi. Markandeya identifies Magadhi as Ardhamagadhi due to its proximity to Shauraseni. Ardhamagadhi in Shvetambara texts, being a vernacular, underwent changes over time and region, incorporating elements of Magadhi, Shauraseni, and Maharashtri. It's noted that Buddhist Agamic Magadhi differs from that in Natyashastra and Prakrit grammars, and similarly, Shvetambara Ardhamagadhi differs from that specified in Natyashastra and Prakrit grammars.
• Shauraseni: This is the language of Digambara Agamas. Phonetically, it's considered a transitional stage in the development of Middle Indian Aryan languages, preceding Maharashtri. Bharata's Natyashastra mentions Shauraseni but not Maharashtri. Shauraseni is found in Sanskrit dramas by playwrights like Ashvaghosha, Bhasa, Shudraka, Kalidasa, and Vishakhadatta. Vararuci suggests Sanskrit as the basis for Shauraseni. Being influenced by Sanskrit, Shauraseni displays many ancient artificial forms.

Page 8: Maharashtri Prakrit

• Maharashtri as the Best Prakrit: Maharashtri, considered the best Prakrit from the 6th century CE onwards, is described as an ocean of aphoristic gems. From a phonetic perspective, it's highly rich.
• Gahasattasai and Gaudavaho: The "Gahasattasai" (Gatha Saptashati) is written in Maharashtri. This Prakrit was extensively used in lyrical compositions. Later, Maharashtri became so popular that it was referred to as "common Prakrit."
• Vararuci's Focus: Vararuci's "Prakritaprakasha" focuses on Maharashtri. Works like "Gahasattasai" and "Gaudavaho" are written in Maharashtri, yet their authors simply named their language "Prakrit."
• Maharashtri in Sanskrit Dramas: Maharashtri is also found in Sanskrit dramas.
• Interchangeability of Rules: As Maharashtri and Shauraseni gained literary status, the lack of fixed rules for each led to the application of rules of one Prakrit to another. Purushottama, in his "Prakritanusashana" (11.1), discusses Maharashtri. (The text mentions further details are available in Jagdishchandra Jain's "History of Prakrit Literature").

In essence, the excerpt explores the journey of Prakrit from a vernacular of the common people to a subject of rigorous scholarly study, contrasting it with the dominance of Sanskrit and highlighting the diversity and historical evolution of its various dialects.