Vasudev a Hindi

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)

Text of Vasudev a Hindi

  • 8/12/2019 Vasudev a Hindi


    The Vasudevahindi a Specimen of Archaic Jaina-

    Abbreviations used : Vh = Vasudevahindi I= MBhlrfigtri ; J M = Jaina-Mihirfigtri g = gauraseni JS = Jaina-Sauraseni AMg = ArdhamzgadhiP = Pischel's Prakrit Grammar JErz = Jacobi's Ausqewahlte Erzahlungeni n Mcihicrci~tri Mah. Nis. = Schubring, Das M8hEnisiha Sutta Pkt, Skt= Prakrit, Sanskrit.

    N the Introduction to his edition of the Avaiyaka tales the lateI Professor Leumann wrote on p. 1 : Since-as may be easilyunderstood-Jacobi, when he endeavoured to utilize the languageand contents of the Jaina tales for Indology, started with theUttariidhyayana Tikii of Devendra which was in his possession, andsince this author, belonging as he does to the period of decadence andtherefore more familiar with Sanskrit, writes a rather doubtfulPrakrit-therefore the editor was chiefly concerned with theestablishing of a thoroughly reliable Prakrit text . that was to besuitable for clearing the way for a more correct judgment andutilization of medieval Jaina Prakrit. The appearance of thefirst portion of Leumann's text was welcomed by Pischel in his Pktgrammar ( 21 in the following terms : The most important textin JM is : Die Avaiyaka-Erziihlungen. Herausgegeben von ErnstLeumann. 1 Heft. Leipzig 1897. The absence of any commentaryunfortunately renders the understanding rather difficult ; somepassages remain wholly obscure. But even these few forms show thatfrom texts in JM we may yet expect much new and importantmaterial.''

    In spite of all that has been done since then in the domain of Pktliterature and grammar, the hope expressed in Pischel's last sentencecan hardly be said to have been fulfilled. The work so ably begun byLeumann has never been continued : the first portion of his AvaiyakaErzahlungen has remained the last. Many other texts have becomeaccessible, but they are almost without exception open to Leumann'scriticism of Devendra : works like those of Haribhadra, Somaprabha,etc., bear witness to the skilful handling of a fixed-not to say

    dead -literary language by later authors, but they are not likelyCf. the following quotation from P.

  • 8/12/2019 Vasudev a Hindi


  • 8/12/2019 Vasudev a Hindi


  • 8/12/2019 Vasudev a Hindi


    322 L. ALSDORF-91, 14. To these must be added two optatives : ptisijjam, 6, 18, andpassejjam, 125, 3. A 1st sing. opt. in -jjam is also wanting in P wherewe find only -jjE, -jja, -jjEmi. That both forms (ind. -am, opt. -ijjam)are genuine archaisms is proved beyond doubt by the fact that theyhave counterparts in Pali (e.g. gaccham, labheyyam, cf. Geiger, Ptili,5 122, 127, 128). There -am instead of -Emi is peculiar to the languageof the gathas, i.e. the oldest stratum of the language. The only otherPkt text where a 1st sing. ind. in -am occurs seems to be theMahiinisiha Sutta, from which Schubring (Mah. Nis., p. 90) quotes theSloka-plda gaccham cetJham suvam ugham dhtivam nzsam palti~ziu p , and three single forms, also from verses, caram, na ninhavap,sakkunam = Saknomi 2 . This is interesting because we shall presentlysee that another peculiarity of the Rlahiinisiha is also shared by Vh.

    In the Mahlnisiha, the 1st plur. is often constructed with ahamor is otherwise used as a 1st sing. e.g. ahayam apucighimo, ndham. . . cukkimo, etc. In Vh we read, e.g. 84, 7, aham . dacchtimo ; 290,28, tao 'ham ttio luvtimo ; 291, 24, lavai ya me icchtimo . . ; 172,11, samcaramtinT . . . supimo ; 178, 22, mayti bhaniyti jti~ThEmotti. tao niggayti jtinihisi tti vottQym.According to P 3 457, the 1st person plur. of the iitmanepada iswanting in Pkt. In Vh I have noted it seven times, but in all casesit is used as a 1st sing., twice even with aha? : 147, 18, ahampadicchtimahe ; 206, 18, aham apuvatttimahe; 144, 7, ughio mi

    kattha m p ne vatttimhe tti cintayanto ; 352,22, cintemi : kummipaesarnmi watttimahe 139, 24, ramcimahe (v. l., mi ya ) ; 155, 16,uvabhunjtimhe . . ., bhutta-bhoyanp ya . ; 330, 19 (in a gahl ),bhapai : . bandhtimahe . .".This form in -timahe, used as a 1st sing., probably helps to explainanother very strange and hitherto utterly unknown form. Eleventimes there occurs a 1st sing. in -ahe : acchahe, 180, 14 206, 12 ;247, 1 ; aticchahe, 319, 24 tisahe, 289, 13, 29 ; dissahe (pass.), 199, 6 ;passahe, 218, 10 ptisahe, 293, 5 ; vattahe, 247, 12. Failing any otherexplanation, I believe that -ahe is formed from -timahe after the analogyof the proportion : 1st sing. act. -timi : 1st sing. med. -e (vandtimi :vande = vandtimhe : vandahe). And, lastly, a single form may benoted which-if not a mere mistake-looks like a compromise between-ahe and -e : 156, 17, 1st sing. acchae instead of acche.According to P 5 455, the 1st plur. ind. (which is used as 1stplur. imp. as well, 5 470) ends in -mo which may be replaced by -muin verses only. Yet in the prose of Vh -mu occurs not infrequently,

  • 8/12/2019 Vasudev a Hindi


    A SPECIMEN OF ARCHAIC JAINA MAHARASTRI 323e.g. ind. ainemu, 108, ; nu-yfinfimu, 117, 8 ; acchfimu, 115, 24 ;karemu, 117,17 ; imp. vasiimu, 8 2 , 3 ; harEmu, 10 0 ,2 anuvaydmu, 138,2 ; anumaggfimu, 138, 12 ; h rem u , 8 5 , 1 5 ; 109, 12 153, 15, etc.Now since, as we ha ve seen, th e 1st plur. m ay be used as a 1st well (prob ably originally as a plura lis majestatis), I have l i tt le doubtthat the 1st s ing. imp. in -mu taught by the grammarians but-according t o P , 467-not found in literature,l is nothing bu t a 1stplur. used as a 1s t sing. I n suppo rt of this explanation I can quotefrom V h a t least one 1st sing. imp . in -m_o: 12 2, 5, na me sobhai ihamacchium, avakkamfimo tti, it is no good for me t o st ay here, I willru n aw ay -Pischel believed t h a t -mu, -su, zc as terminations of theimperative corresponded to the indicative terminations -mi, -si, -i ,and mainly for this reason he disputed the usual derivation of -sufrom Sk t. -sva. If my ex planation of th e 1s t sing. imp. in -mu isaccepted, Pischel's view of -su-not ve ry convincing considering Pal i-ssu (cf. Geiger, Pfili, 126 an d note 1)-becomes wholly ~ n t e n a b l e . ~

    It has till now been taken for granted that forms of the aoristhav e survived in ARlg only. F ro m Vh we learn that they occurin archaic J M as well.3 W e even find in Vh several forms which areeither quite new or hitherto known only from grammarians.

    The 1st s ing. act . of th e aorist is very rare an d ends in -is sa p(P, $516 ; e.g. akarissam), with double s as in Pa li " (where, however,th e more usual form has a single s, cf. Geiger, P d i , $159 , iv). One suchform occurs Vh 225, 17 : d h a m tubbham kuppissam, I was notang ry with you. The context excludes every possibility of th e formbeing taken a s a future. Y et th e formal identity of a 1st sing. -issum with the 1st sing. fut. cannot be overlooked, and I believethat the doubling of the s (for which neither Pischel nor Geiger offer

    Jl . Schubrlng has now traced it in the hlahgnisiha, where a 1st sing. imp. demuoccurs twice M a h . X i s . , p. 91 .In Vh there occurs in a number of cases a 2nd sing. imp. in -dsu (e.g. vaccdsu,93, 15 179, 18 ghaddsu 94, 24 lcardsu 96 10). The long i of these forms may,of course, be explained by the influence of the parallel form in .ah;. We m y , however,also have before us the regular compensative lengthening due t o the double s (whichis seen in Pali - m u ) having been simplified.

    It might be argued that such forms are to be regarded as mereArdhamiigadhisms ", which do not prove anything for JM This argument would

    perhaps hold good if we had t o do with legendary, dogmatical, or disciplinarian texts.Where th e contents are so closely akin to those of the canonical scriptiires i t is notsurprising if the language betrays a strong AMg influence (cf. Mah. X i s . , p. 86 .But, except for some inserted legendary tales, the contents of the Vh are as secularand non-canonical as possible, and there can be no doubt that its language is J Mthroughout.

  • 8/12/2019 Vasudev a Hindi


    324 L LSDORFan y exp lanation) is actual ly d ue to th e influence of th e s imilar futureform. This assumption receives a welcome s up po rt b y anoth er formwhich is hi therto quite unknown an d without a paral lel in ei ther P k tor Pali. Vh 289, 27, we read : dacchihum c'aham, a n d I beheld.Now it is well known th a t besides th e normal futu re in -issiimi (-issum),-issai, -issfimo, etc., there exists in Pkt a second futilre in -ihiimi(-ilzam), -ihii, -ihEmo, etc . B u t if th e h of the se forms-as m ustobviously be th e case-goes back to sy > ss > s, we should expect beforei t (with compensat ive lengthening) rather th an i. This form with along i , not recorded by th e gramm arians an d not found in P or J E rz ,actually occurs in Vh, e.g. 51, 22, giiattiham ; 22, 28, bhunjiham ;78, 22, jiinihiimo ; 89, 21, pucchThCirno ; 91, 8 , j'ivihZmo 138, 7,dacchihiimo, etc.l The 1 st sing. belonging t o th e last of these form swould be dacchihum, i.e. the very same form we have just noted as a1s t sing. aor. This use of a 1s t sing. fu t. dacchihum as a 1 st sing. aor.seems to prove th a t a connection was felt to exist between th e 1st sing.fut . an d ao r, in - issum : th e iden ti ty of these two forms seems to hav ejustified th e use of a ny 1st sing. fut. as 1st sing. aor.

    There are, however, indications to show th a t th e relations betweenth e future and th e aoris t were not l imited to t he 1st person of th e s ing.The gram marian s know tw o ao rists formed with h instead of s which-to conclude f rom P , 516-have no t yet been found to occur in tex ts,viz. kchi besides kiisi (from k?.) and thZhi besides (hiisi (from sthii).Here th e h m ay actually go back to t he s of kiis5 an d thiisi. B u t it isvery significant th a t th e