prakrit vibhasas

7/30/2019 Prakrit Vibhasas

1/30

The Prakrit VibhasasAuthor(s): George A. GriersonSource: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (Jul., 1918), pp.489-517

Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25209411 .

Accessed: 24/04/2013 03:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Press andRoyal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Irelandare collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain andIreland.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 162.105.141.193 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 03:29:07 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/25209411?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/25209411?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup


2/30

XIVTHE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS

By Sir GEORGE A. GRIERSON, K.C.I.E., M.R.A.S.

pISCHEL, in ??3, 4, and 5 of his Prakrit Grammar,refers very briefly to the Vibh?s?s of the Prakritgrammarians. In ? 3 he quotes Mfirkand?ya's (Intr., 4)division of the Prakrits into Bh?s?, Vibh?s?, Apabhramsa,and Pai?aca, his division of the Vibhfisfis into S?k?ri,C?nd?li, S?bari, ?bhirik?, and T?kki (not fi?kkJi, aswritten by Pischel), and his rejection of Audhri (Pischel,Odri) and Dr?vidi. In ? 4 be says, "Ramatarkavfigisaobserves that the vibh?mh cannot be called Apahhraihsa,if they are used in dramatic works and the like." Herepeats the latter statement in ? 5, and this is all that hesays on the subject. Nowhere does he say what the termvibh?s? means. The present paper is an attempt tosupply this deficiency.1It will be advisable to begin by ascertaining what theword means when used as a technical term by Sanskritgrammarians. According to Pfinini I, i, 44, it means"option". A verse is quoted from the S?rasvata in theLaghu Kaumudi on Pfinini III, iii, 113,2 in explanationof the word bahulam when applied to a grammaticalrule. It runs as follows :?

kvacit pravrttih kvacid ajoravrttihkvacid vibh?s? kvacid any ad eravidh?r vidh?nam bahudh? samiksyacatur-vidham b?hulakam vadanti.Ballantyne's (No. 823) translation of this is as1 I must here record my indebtedness to Dr. Thomas, who has beenkind enough to read through the proofs of this paper, and whose

suggestions have enabled me to clear up obscure points that baflled myunaided efforts.. 2 The verso is quoted by Pischel in his translation of IfCmacandra,i, 2, in quite d iHe rent connexion. He seems to have forgotten

it whendealing with Vibh?s?s in his Prakrit Grammar.

This content downloaded from 162.105.141.193 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 03:29:07 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/30

490 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASfollows: "Seeing that the application of certain rules isvarious, they specify four varieties [under the termbahulam], viz., sometimes they are applied [when therewas no express rule for their application] ; sometimesthey are not applied [in spite of an express rule for theirapplication] ; sometimes [vibh?s?] they are optionallyeniploj'cd or not; and sometimes there is some otherresult [licence permitted by the rule]." As Ballantynewrote his translation in Benares, we may safely assumethat his rendering of the word vibh?s?, as the optionalapplication or non-application of a rule, represents themeaning traditionally understood by Vaiy?karanas of thepresent day.So far for Sanskrit grammarians. Prakrit grammariansemploy the above rule in the same sense, for the Sarasvataverse is quoted with approval by M?rkand?ya (iv, 64).1We therefore conclude that, primarily, a Vibh?s? isa form of Prakrit in which the rules of the Standard or ofsome other dialect are applied or not at option. Letus now see what further information we can gain fromthose who have written on the subject.2 We commencewith Bharata.

Bharata (xvii, 49) says,3 " the base languages bornamid (1) Salearas, (2) Abh?ras, (3) C?ndalas, (4) Sabaras,(5) Dravidas, (6) Audras, and those of (7) Foresters aredescribed, in a dramatic work, as 'Vibhfisfi '." Furtheron he says [53], "the (l) Saleara language is used bySalearas, ?akas, etc. (?).4 (3) Cand?li (sic) is to be used1

R?ma-garman, in the Prdkrta-kalpataru, continually uses vibh?s? astho equivalent of va.2 It may be stated that Vararuci, Heniacandra, and Laksmidhara areall silent regarding it.*Tho verse, as we shall see, is quoted both by Prthv?dhara and byM?rkand?ya, and I emend the corrupt text of the K?vyam?l? edition toagree with what they give.4 There is something wrong with the text here. I give, for S?k?r?,what seems to me to have probably been the meaning of the original.As in 49, 1 correct ?abar?n?tfi to ?ah?r?n?th. The syntactical connexionof the rest of the line is doubtful.



4/30

THE PRAKRIT V1BHASAS 491among people of the Pukkasa1 and similar castes.[54] The (4) Sabara language is to be used by charcoalburners, hunters, and those who live by implements ofwood ; and the (7) Vanaukasi (Forester's) dialect issometimes employed by the same persons. [55] The(2) ?bhiri or the (4) S?bari is employed by those whodwell in hamlets for stabling cows, horses, goats, andsheep, and the (5) Drfividi amongst Dravidas and thelike." It will be observed that, in the text as we haveit at present, there is no description of No. 6, the languageof the Audras.

Prthvidhara prefaces his commentary on the Mrcchakatikfi with an account of the various dialects employed inthe play. The whole will be found on pp. 494 ff. ofGodabole's edition. I extract from it the followinginformation, relevant to our subject. He begins byincluding Vibhfisas under the general class of Apabhraihsa,thus differing from the writers to be subsequently quoted.He says that there are four languages falling under thehead of Apabhraihsa, viz. Sakfir? (sic), C?nd?li, S?bari,and that of the Takka2 country. As no Sabara appearsin the play,

noexample of S?bari is to be found in it.He then quotes Bharata xvii, 48, for a list of the Prakrits,and 49 for a list of the Apabhraihsa dialects. The latteris given by him as follows, and this text is certainly, sofar as the names go, more correct than that found in the

Kfivyam?l? edition of Bharata:?Sak?rAbhira-O?nd?la-Sabara-Dr?vidOdra-j?hhin? vane-car?n?rii ca vibh?s?h sapta kirtit?h"There are seven base Vibhfisfis, viz. those born amid

Hak?ras, Abhiras, C?ndalas, Sabaras, Dr?vidas, in Udra(Orissa), and that of Foresters." Vibh?s?s are languages

1 Or PuhkaAa, the offspring of a Nis?da on a S?dra woman. SeeManu, x, 18.2 Godabolc prints " Dhakka", but the alternative reading "Takka'is that which should be adopted. See JRAS. 1913, pp. 882 3.



5/30

492 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS

(bh?s?h) of manifold sorts (vividh?h). They are " base ",because they are used by base characters. By "the languageof Foresters " is meant the forms of speech collected underthe head of "Takka-bh?s? ". In this play . . . among thespeakers of Apabhramsa, the brother-in-law of the king(the Sak?ra) speaks the Sak?ri (aie) dialect. The twoC?ndalas speak the Cand?l? (sic) dialect, and M?thura, the

gambler, speaks the Takka dialect. . . . In aak?ri (sic)and Cand?l? (sic) the palatal s is used [instead of s or s],and I is used in place of r. In the Taldea Viblms? theletter v [? n] is common [cf. Mark, xvi, 3, below], andowing to the frequent employment of Sanskrit words,both dental s and palatal s are found in it. [There is alsothe following verse about S?k?r? :?]apdrthamakramam vyartltam punar-uktam hat?pamaml?ka-ny?ya-viruddham ca sak?ra-vacanam viduh.

"They know the language of the Sak?ra as containingwords without meaning, words used in wrong order orwith wrong meanings, tautology, mangled similes, and asunidiomatic." * They call a king's left-handed brotherin-law "Sak?ra", because his language is full of theletter ? (?a-lc?ra)?We have further information on the subject of the

Vibh?s?s in the third S?kh?, or main section, of thePr?krta-kalpataru of R?ma-sarman (Tarkav?giaa). Ourknowledge of this work is conlined to the one veryincorrect MS. (No. 1106) in the India Office Library.It is described at some length by Lassen (Institutiones

I. Pr., pp. 19ff. and App.), but the section here devotedto the Vibh?s?s is vitiated by the fact that thecorresponding leaves of the MS. are in the wrong orderand wronglv numbered, and that this was not recognizedby Lassen.3 His account of the Vibh?s?s oh pp. 21 ff. and

1A very similar verse is given by M?rkamleya. See p. 503 below.2Wrong. See

S. L?vi, Th??tre Indien, p. 3G1.3 The correct order of these pages of the MS. is 396, 406, 40a, 41a.



6/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS 493in App. 1 ff. is therefore quite incorrect. So far as I can

make it out, the following should be the text of thepassage. I give only the verses describing each dialectin general terms. The verses giving details are sodoubtful in their readings that it would not be safe toattempt their emendation. This is of little consequence,as all that Rfima-?arman says is also said by Markand?ya,with numerous examples, and the account of the latterwill subsequently be given in full. As a preliminary,I give first, as well as I can make it out, the concludingverse of the second S?kh?, immediately preceding theaccount of the Vibh?s?s. It deals with D?ksin?tya?a minor Prakrit dialect, not a Vibh?s?. This is requisite,as the dialect is referred to later on in this paper inconnexion with Tfikki. Unfortunately, the MS. is herevery incorrect, with more than one scribal blunder, andwith at least two lacun . My restoration is doubtful,though the sense, as testified by Markand?ya, is certain.In order to show this, I also quote the correspondingpassage of the latter. R?ma-aarman's metre is here theSv?gat? (? w ? ^ w w ? w w-). Letters

inserted to fill up lacun are enclosed in square brackets.Other emendations are not indicated.d?ksin[?ty'\a-pada-samm[i]litam yat

samskrt?di-[kavi\bhis churilam casv?dus?ram (?) amrt?d api k?vyamd?ksin?tyam iti tat katltayanti."They call a poem, sweeter in its essence even than

nectar, intermingled with words of the South, andoverlaid with Sanskrit [(?) by poets composing inthat] l and other languages, 'D?ksin?tya.' "

Markand?ya (Comm. to xii, 38) says:?No rule regarding D?ksin?tya, and no example of it1The use of kavibhih here is awkward. What is wanted to fill tho

lacuna is some word meaning " words " rather than " poets ".



7/30

494 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASexists. All that we know about it is what is said by

Niruddha-bhatta, viz. :?d?ksin?tya-paddlambi samskrt?ngam vijrmbhitamk?vyam ply?sa-nifysyandi d?ksin?tyam it?ritam."A nectar-dropping poem, which ismanifested as havingits body Sanskrit, but depending on words of the

South, is called 'D?ksin?tya'."From the above it is evident that R?ma-?arman's verseis only a reproduction of Niruddha-bhatta's in another

metre.We can now discuss the section of the Pr?krta-kalpataru

dealing with the Vibh?s?s.At? vibh?s? navadh? nirukt?[h]S?k?rik? pr?g annsisyat? 'tramadddi-yukt? nirav?ci r?jnah

sy?lah sak?raa capolo 'bhi-\? 'ti-]murkhah. 1.s?k?rik? tasya vac? vibh?s?

nind[y?gama-nyaya(?)]-kalddi-h?n?asy?s tu siddhih khalu Mdgadh?tah?c? v?tra duspreksa-sadrksay?lt sy?t. 2.

[After describing the D?ksin?tya, he goes on :?]1. After this, the Vibh?s?s are defined as ninefold.Here S?k?rik? is first taught. A Sak?ra has been definedas the brother-in-law of a king, haughty and overweening,

ill-mannered, and an exceeding fool.2. The S?k?riki-vibh?s? is the language used by him,vile, breaking

the rules of grammatical construction, andvoid of elegance.1 Its basis is to be found in Magadh?.?[He then begins his description of the peculiarities ofthis Vibh?s? :?In the words duspr?ksa- and sadrlcsa-, ?c is1There are some words here the reading of which is doubtful. Theyare evidently adjectives describing the dialect. Cf. Prthv?dhara on

Mrcchaka(ik? (as quoted above). "Words are used having no meaning,in wrong order, in wrong meanings, with repetitions, and with confusionof metaphor." The MS. appears to read nind?gamany?sakal?dihin?.



8/30

THE PRAKRIT VIJBHASAS 495optionally (substituted for k$), and so on to the endof verse 9. Verse 10 is:?]

C?nd?liketi prathit? vibh?s?pravalcsyat? c?tra yath?pad?sam?sa tu sarhsidhyati Sauras?n?Ma,(jadliy-iipas?sa(H\c)-vas?na samyak. 10.

The Vibh?s?, known as C?nd?liki, will now be describedas it has been taught. Correctly speaking, it is basedpartly on Sauras?n? and partly on Mfigadh?. [He thengoes on to describe the peculiarities of this Vibh?s?, endingwith verse 15. He does not say who speaks it.]

ath?cyat? samprati S?bari yarnpurodit? M?gadhikaiva sute

ang?rika-vy?dha-vahitra-k?sthopajivin?m v?ci niyujyat? 'sau. 16.

Next, we proceed to describe S?bari, which the formerlymentioned M?gadhi alone produces. It is employed inthe language of charcoal-burners, hunters, (?) boatmen,and those who live by wood-cutting. [Markand?ya, xv,1, 2, says it is based on C?nd?li, but sometimes goes backto the original Sauras?n? and M?gadhi of that dialect.][The author goes on to verse 21 with a description of thisVibh?s?. He then says :?]

?ka?va s? M?gadhikatra bh?*?vibhidyat? p?tra1-vibh?datas lu

?bh?rik?-Dr?vidikAutkal? caV?naukas?-M?ndurik?ti n?mn?. 22.

Moreover, there is only the M?gadhi Bh?s? alreadymentioned, but, according to the characters [employing it],it has been subdivided into different varieties, namedrespectively ?bhirik?, Dr?vidik?, Autkali (or Auclri), theSpeech of Foresters, and the Speech of Ostlers.

1The MS. has dtltra, which, at a friend's suggestion, I have correctedto paira.



9/30

496 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS?bh?rilc?ydm aparam vis?mm

vadanti k?cit tarn ilia bravlmiasy?s tu siddhih khalu Sdbar?tah

sa-sau punar dantya-sa-kdra cva. 23.Some people say that there is another kind of

?bh?rika, and that I now proceed to tell:?They say thatit is to be derived from S?bari, and that the letters s and? are to be pronounced as a dental s. [The author then,in verses 24-6, tells what other authorities say about thisVibh?s?. He says nothing more about the other Vibh?s?smentioned in verse 22. He then goes on :?]

T?kk? vibh?s?m khalu torn vad?miy? dy?tolcdradika-dh?rta-vdcy?

a[ny?] punar Dr?vida-bh?sayddij>ravisya[tc] y aira, na lalcsma tasy?h. 27.

I now, forsooth, mention the T?kki Vibh?s?, which is tobe spoken by gamblers and other knaves. Another kind[of T?kki] is infected by Dr?vida and other bhdsds. Ithas no special characteristics. Cf. Markand?ya, xvi, 2,below.

(Tho next half-verse is very corrupt. It seems to readas follows :?)sydt sakdrdt Samskrta-Sauras?nyoslu siddhir asydd bahala podante.This I correct to :?sydt samkar?t Samskrta-Sauraseny?s

tu siddhir, nt sydd bahulam podante.This Vibh?s? is formed from a mixture of Sanskrit andSan rasen i. It often bas n at the end of a word. [Thisagrees with Markand?ya xvi, 1, 3. In the rest of thisverse, and in verses 29, 30, he gives further particulars ofthis Vibb?a?, and then goes on :?]

Sakdr Odra- Dra vida d i -v?c?'pabhram?atdm yadyapi sam?rayanti

sydn n?lakddau yadi sampray?g?na?tdsv apabhram?atay? tathesfah. 31.



10/30

THE PRAKRIT V1RHASA8 497Although the languages of the Saltara, of Udra

(i.e. Odra), of Dravida, and of others approach the natureof Apabhraihsa; nevertheless, if their use is in plays orin similar works, that use is not prescribed on the groundof their falling under the head of Apabhraihsa. [Thisverse is quoted by Lassen (p. 21 ), and the reading talhfatah,given above, is doubtful. Lassen reads tathals?, which hecorrects to talhaisah, but, whatever was intended, I donot think that his suggestion is borne out by the MS.A remark to the same effect is made by Markand?ya inregard to Takk?, as quoted below.]This concludes R?ma-sarman's account of the Vibh?s?s.

According to him there are nine, viz. :?1. Sfikfirik?.2. Cfind?lik?.3. S?bari.4. ?bh?rikfi5. Dril vid ik?6. Autkali or Audri7. The Speech of Foresters8. The Speech of Ostlers9. T?kki, which is liable to be mixed with Dr?vidik?.He adds that even if a Vibh?s? can be classed as

a form of Apabhraihsa, it is a Vibh?s?, and not anApabhraihsa, if it is employed in drama.Our next authority is Markand?ya Kav?ndra's Pr?krtasarvasva. A good edition of this work has beenpublished, and with the help of this and of five MSS.which are at my disposal, I am able to translate nearlythe whole of the portions dealing with the Vibh?s?s.In the commentary to verse 2 of the Introduction, theauthor quotes Bharata xvii, 49, as follows:?

Sak?rA bhira- C?ndala- Sabara- Dnlvid A ndhraj?hlhin? vanccar?n?m ca vibh?s? n?takderay?h1Sic. Wo shouldexpect Awfrajtih, but M?rkandCya, who was himselfa native of Orissa, always spells it as above.

These five are onlyforms of M?gadhi.



11/30

498 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS"The base speeches of the following people, and of

foresters, are called 'Vibh?s?s', which appear only indramatic works :?Those borne amid?

1. Sak?ra.2. Abb ira.3. C?ndala.4. Sabara.5. Dr?vida.6. Audhra."

He does not consider the language of Foresters as? ?a distinct dialect, for, as we shall immediately see, helimits the number in this list to six.He criticizes this list in the 4th verse, saying: "The

real Vibh?s?s are not six, but only five in number, viz.S?k?ri, C?ndal?, S?bar?, ?bh?r?, and T?kki." In thecommentary on this he says : " It is implied that Audhr?is to be excluded, because its inherent character is to befound in that form of S?bari which imitates the languageof the Odhra country."1 But, it will be objected, why isDr?vidi excluded, and T?kki substituted for it? T?kkiis included in accordance with the following verse: ?

Takka-d?siya-bhdsdydm dr?yat? Drdvid? tathdatraivdyam vis?s? 'sli Dravid?n?drt? param?"Dr?vidi also is observed in the language of the Takka

country. Here there is only this peculiarity, that itis particularly honoured by the Dravida [? school ofwriters]." By thus declaring that the inherent characterof Dr?vidi is to be found in T?kki, we gather that theexistence of T?kki is established.

1 It may be noted that at the present day there is a Munda languagecalled Savara, spoken in the south of the Orissa country. See LinguisticSurrey of India, vol. iv, pp. 217 if.2 The same verse is- quoted in the comm. to xvi, 2 ; but the secondline runs:?

tatra ctlyatti vii?so 'sti Dr?vitlair ?drt? param.



12/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBIIASAS 499So far for his Introduction. He deals with each

Vibh?s? separately in Badas xiii-xvi of his work, ofwhich I now proceed to give a full translation :?Here begin the Vibh?s?s. Accordingly, the first of all,the S?k?ri is now taught.xiii. S?k?ri. ?RFPW ?TT^rft I


13/30


The [Prakrit] conjuncts tth and kkh sometimes remainunchanged [instead of becoming sth and ?k, as inMagadhi(xii, 7, 4)]. Thus, atthdnagad? pandid? via vakkhdndimkal?di [arth?nugatah pandita iva vydkhydndni kar?ti],be explains like a Pandit who understands the meaning[or possibly arthdnagataJi, like a Pandit who does notunderstand, or dsthdnagatah, like a Pandit in an assembly].

^r ^?^r im iThe otiose suflix -ka- is common, as in ?sak? ddsikd?

puttak? [esa ddsydh putrah], this son of a slave-girl.*wrfat?^K*ft*rwRP5 *g: i$ i

Letters are often changed, elided,or added. Thus :?

?s?manas?? ka?n? ?alisc? [?sa mamisyolp kov?h sadrksah(xiii, 2)], this man is like a poet.kdm?na dajjhadi khu m? hadak? tava??i [kdm?nadahyat? m? hrdayam tapasv? (Mrcch., Godabole, p. 26,1., 11)], m}r pitiable heart is burnt by love. [The printedtext of the play gives slightly diff?rent readings.]

vibbh?san? pulis? [vibh?sanah purusah], a blusteringman. In these passages we should properly have manus??,hadakk?, and vih??an?.

Declensional terminations are wrongly used, one foranother, and so also conjugational terminations andgenders. Vowels also are pulled apart [i.e. diphthongsare separated into their components]. Thus:?

(a) Confusion of declensional terminations :?tumam pa-ttanam scinta [tvam pattanam (accusativefor locative) tistha], stay thou in tbe city; hakk? ghal?nopa?s?mi [aham grh?no (instrumental for accusative or

locative) pravi?dmi], I enter the house. [The same alsooccurs in Magadhi (xii, 36).]



14/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBI?ASAS 501(b) Confusion of conjugational terminations :?se vi ?aachanti [so 'pi ?gacchanti (3rd person plural for3rd person singular)], he also comes; tu/marlipi ?asch?mi

[tvam api ?gacch?mi (1st person singular for 2nd personsingular)], thou also comest ; hakk?vi aa6chasi[ahamapi?gacchasi (2nd pers. sg. for 1st)], I also come.

(c) Confusion of gender :?savv? mahil?

pulis?tti kilidam

[sarv? (masculine pluralfor feminine plural) mahil?h pnrum (for purus?h) if.ikriditam (neuter singular for feminine plural)], all thewomen sported in the character of men ; isthik? hasid.?[stri hasitah (masculine for feminine)], the womanlaughed.

(d) Pulling apart of vowels :?sailini [for Mg. Pr. ??lini, Skr. svairini], a wantonwoman ;miaind? [for Skr. mrg?ndrah], a lion ;asdi?uhini

[for Skr. aksauhini], a complete army.wttm g*rt srf%?sn?t i? i

Declensional terminations are sometimes dropped.Thus :?

ghala vasasi [grh? (here the termination of the locativeis dropped) vasasi], thou dwellest at home; phnllantipnppha p?dava-parid? mahukam pianti bhamala-uhl[phullanti pnnp?ni p?dapa-parit? madhn pibantibhramara-kul?ni (here the case termination of pupphahas been dropped, and kula- is treated like a masculine)],the flowers around the shrubs bloom, and the swarmsof bees sip nectar. Here, although the droppingand interchange of declensional terminations is alsoallowed in M?gadhi [by xii, 36], we gather, from therepetition of the rule, that [substitutions such as vascafor vrksa- and others enjoined by xii, 19 ft'., do not applyto S?k?ri, but that] only [the regular M?gadhi substitute,in which e.g. by xii, 4, Prakrit Ickh becomes 61c,viz.] luska-,



15/30

502 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASfor Prakrit rukkha-, Sanskrit vrk?a-, and so on, is to beemployed. [In other words, while the general rules forM?gadhi are to be followed, special rules laid down forspecial words are not to be followed.] Thus, we have inthe Mrcchakata [sic] palahuda-bhamal? lavanti lu6ke[parabhrta-bhramar?h ruvanti vrlcse], the cuckoos andthe bees sing in the trees. [Here laslc? represents theSauras?n? rukkh?, with the regular M?gadhi change ofr to I and of Iclch to 61c. According to Markand?ya'?grammatical system, the various forms of M?gadhi arederived, not from Sanskrit, but from Sauras?n?. Thepassage quoted does not occur in any of the S?k?rispeeches in either Stenzler's or Godabole's edition of the

Mrcchakatik?.]

Contrary to the rules of prosody, a vowel is optionallynot long [by position] before a conjunct consonant,as in :?

?6e IcJchu raa?1 vagghe vva sahava-vil?[?sa ?chain r?jate vy?ghra iva svabh?va-viraJi],

he, forsooth, by nature a hero, shines glorious like a tiger.[Here the metre is Vasantatilaka (-^ ? w w w? w w ? w-), and] the va of the word vagghe

must be scanned as short [although by the ordinary rulesof prosody it is long by position].Under the precept "bahulam", viz. that the rules ofPrakrit grammar are not universal, but have exceptions,we account for such irregular forms as paiigan? ghdlam[Sauras?n? pangun? gharam\ Sanskrit pang?r grham],the house of the lame man, and others, which will befound each in its proper place as it occurs. Moreover :?

1The MSS. vary amidst rampa, rdmpha, rtld, and rdmya. All these,except r?tl, are impossible in Prakrit. The printed edition suggestsrdai, which suits the metre and gives good sense. I therefore adopt it.



16/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS 503vyartham tv apdrtham punarnkti-ru-pi

hatdpamam cdsadr??pamam capratyalcsa-l?kddi-vir?dhi c?nyozny?ya-prat?pam ca ?ak?ra-v?kyam.1

"Containing words with wrong meanings or with nomeanings, tautological, with mangled similes or withsimiles that are no similes at all, contradicting ocularevidence, convention, etc., and in other respectsunidiomatic, is the speech of the Sak?ra." By "wrongmeaning" is meant "not in agreement in sense with thewords preceding or following". "With no meaning"implies both words [with meaning] which when usedtogether give no meaning, and also words altogetherdevoid of meaning. So also the Maharsi Bharata hassaid :?

dgama-linga-vihlnam viparltam nyayo-d?so-kdlad?hmada-m?rkhat?bhim?n?dya??varydt sydc chokdra

vacanam."The speech of the Sak?ra, owing to his power accom

panied by pride, folly, and vanity, is wanting in signsof inflexion or gender, and is opposed to the idiom ofcountry or period. [Cf. the quotation from the Sdhityadarpana on p. 499 ante. I have not traced this verse inthe printed editions of Bharata. The Sak?ra is describedin xxiv, 105 (K?vyam?l? ed.), and his gait in xiii, 347(Grosset, cf. K?vyam?l? ed., xii, 130).] Merely asexamples, the following are quoted :?

[Much of what follows is quite incomprehensible to me,and even where I attempt to give Sanskrit equivalentsto the Prakrit, I do so only with great hesitation. In thefirst place, as we shall see from the various readings,21Comparo the similar verge quoted by Prthvldhara, p. 492 ante.2 My authorities for the text are as follows :?P. is the text printed in

Vizagapatam in 1912. 0. is a MS. written in the Oriy? character,which has been kindly lent to me by Pandit Sad?siva Misra, of Purl.Hn. and Hb. are two independent copies, in the Nfigarl and BengaliJRAS. 1918. 34



17/30

504 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASthe text is far from certain, and in the second placethe language is designedly incorrect and intended to bemore or less nonsense. Even if the text were certainlyestablished, there would still, therefore, be the widestroom for conjecture, for Markand?ya has given no clue asto what he intended the meaning to be. Moreover, thereis no context to guide us. The passages evidently comefrom some, dramatic work which I have failed to identify.

Other extracts, apparently from the same play, occur inthe preceding s?tr?s. One passage, quoted in s?tra 6,does occur in the Mrcchakatik?, but in sutra 8 another,stated by Markand?ya to come from that play, has not.been found in either of the printed editions consulted byme. Before giving these samples of the speech of theSak?ra, I must here express my acknowledgments toDr. Thomas and to Dr. Barnett, who have given memuch kind help in my endeavours to elucidate the manydifficulties that have presented themselves.*]

1. hakk? pamgulc? paggal?1 vannami nom vand?mi[aham jningur vdtuloh ; varn? ?nom vand?], I am lameaud(?) mad ; I extol him in a hymn.

[XP. inserts here vannadhd atthilc?, which is notauthorized by any of my MSS. P. also marks the wiiolewith a query. I cannot equate paggal? with any Sanskritword. Pndgala suggests itself, but the meaning is hardlysuitable. The reading is borne out by all MSS. I suggestthat it is a D?sya word connected with the Hindi p?gal,mad, the derivation of which is unknown. I takecharacters respectively, of tho MS. No. 1555 in the library of the AsiaticSociety of Bengal. They have been kindly lent to me by Dr. Hoernle.Ox. is the Bodleian Wilson MS. No. 1586. Io. is the India Office

Mackenzie, No. 70. Ox. and Io. are both written in the N?garlcharacter, and are both evidently copies of the same original.* As I am at present engaged on the preparation of a critical editionof M?rkand?ya's grammar, I shall be grateful to any reader who maysuggest, either in the pages of the Journal or to me direct, explanationsof these difficult passages.



18/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS 505vamiami as intended for vamiammi [Skr. varn?], in thesense of gita-kram?],2. larhg? talamg? 6akalaridcalimg?l [raiig?t tarangahsakalankaliiigah], let the wave, accompanied by the

moon, toss.[*P. separates 6akalam kalimg?. The words seem tome to make better sense, as written above. Kalanka

lingalp, he whose distinguishing marks are dark spots,= the moon. The MSS., of course, do not separate anywords.]

3. e6? p?sakas?sik?l masakik? makk?iik? 6?nik?2 (?).[*O. -s?nik?. 2P. m?6ik?, O. 6?nik? or 6?6ik?. Others

6?niJc?. The word-division is that of P. I do not ventureto give a Sanskrit equivalent or translation of this passage.It seems to be equivalent at the beginning to es? p?saka6?s?c?. Numerous conjectures can be, and have been,made for the rest.]

4. uddenti ?6? gagan? mah?ga? 1lusk?6u bnkkanti- pid?namasc?.

[nddiyant? ?s? gagan? mah?gaj?h, vrks?su bukkantipnr?iia-matsy?h], these great elephants are flying in thesky, and old fishes are howling in the trees. '

\} So P. All others mah?na (= asm?kam), which, if themetre is Indravajr?, suits the verse better, but gives littlesense. The employment of mah?ga? gives one shortsyllable too many. If, however, we read the first syllableof uddenti short, as we are entitled to do by s?tra 9,the first line becomes a Varhsastha, and is correct withmah?ga?. The two lines then become upaj?ti. 2So P. ;O. Hnb. dukkadri or (Hnb.) ?dri. Ox. vakadi, Io.bukadri.]

5. al?l?puggal?1 pugga?2 6cay?ggas idha nugga id?*yaggadha 6 6ug?na 6genha6u genha7 (1).

[Here, again, I do not venture to give a Sanskritequivalent or translation. The text, as given above, is



19/30

506 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASsimply a copy of P. *O. Hnb. al??l? yuggal?. 2O. yugga?,

Hnb. yugma?. P. Ox. Io. as above. 80. ?yaycagga(l),Hnb. ?ahayugma, Ox. ?capgtigga (?), P. Io. as above.4O. Ox. Io. idhatyugga?do, Hnb. vety?gga?do. 6O. Io.UJaggadha, P. Ox. yaggodha, Hnb. yugmadha. 6P. Ox.Io. ?ug?na. O. either ?ug?na or encona (not clear), Hnb.suc?na. 70. genha?ugg?na, Hnb. genlta?ugm?na, Ox. Io.genha?ug?na.]

6. ?tfeTx?/M&2 Ix]ulamgamohahali)td 8gaan?4 pajjalamti ?[?t? j)twia7fc kuranga-mah?harinah gagan? prajvalanti],but these antelopes and great deer shine forth in the sky.

f1Hu. trad?, Hb. ?do. 2P. uiya. 8P. O. Hnb. mahalind.Ox. Io. as above. 4Ox. Io. gone. 60. Hnb. ajjalitti, Ox.Io. aj?;a?a??i??.]

7. hakk? pandid?, nanna yj?iiam?,1 ?addam2 kadh?mi,saddam2 pucch?mi \aham panditalp,. ndnyaj j?n?misabdam kathay?mi, ?abdam prcchdmi], I am a pandit,1 know nothing else, I speak a word, I ask a word.f1P. ?addam yj?dmi, O. nannanayj?nami, Hnb. nanna

yntdnami, Ox. narnam\ioy?\tanii, Io. narmiamyjdnami.2Hnb. sabdam.]In the above examples [the various irregularities] areto be understood as each occurs. [That is to say, no

general rules can be laid down, and as each irregularityis met with it must be disposed of on its own merits.]Now begins C?nd?lL

xiv. C?nd?lL

C?nd?li is generally based on Magadhi and ?auras?n?Thus, ?s? ye?l? ??lam ?l?vidum Idind ?na?t? [esa c?rahs?lam ?r?payitnm rdjn?jnaplah], this thief has beenordered by the king to be impaled.



20/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS 507

In respectful address, the vocative of a-bases ends in ?.Thus, ayj? blia6t?lak?, hakk? panam?mi [?rya bhatt?raka,aham pranam?mi], noble sir, I bow.

Also, according to Bhaghatha-vardham?na, the sautetermination is used in the nominative singular of a-bases.Here there is no question of respect. Thus, ?6o puli?o[??a purusah], this man. From the use of the word en,and, in the s?tra, we gather that the M?gadhi terminationsi and ? [xii, 26] may also be used.

This refers only to pronouns and the like. Thenominative plural of pronouns ends in ?, whether masculineor feminine. Thus, y je i6thik? [y?h striyah], whatwomen ; yje puli?? [y? puru?ali], what men.

The termination of the genitive singular feminine is 6a,not i, ?, a, or ? [as ordained by v, 28]. [In other wordsit is the same as in the masculine.] Thus, [just as wehave in the masculine] aggi6sa 6ih?k? [agn?h sikh?],a flame of fire, [so we have in the feminine] buddhissavaddhim? [buddh?r vrddhih], an increase of wisdom.

t*re f : n^ i? iThe locative singular ends in mmi, as well as in ?.

Thus, ghalammi or ghal? [grh?], in a house ; vanammi[van?], in the forest.

gftalT 1 ^: S?f^ Il Il[In M?gadhi, Sauras?n? tt and tth become 6t and 6th

respectively (xii, 7).] This sometimes does not occur inC?nd?li. Thus, pettam pHl?6i katlh?na [p?tam p?rayasikasl?na], thou fillest the bag with difficulty.



21/30


The only termination of the gerundive is ia. Thus,alal? kukkulam genhia da?ca [ar?-r? kukkurom grh?tv?gaccha], hulloa ! bring the dog here.

TWwret^^s^wNh ie iIn C?nd?li there is a wide use of rustic words and

meanings. Thus, ayjo ma? masdn? hindont?no mahani?kannail kanaa-khandak? laddh?. Tarn ho?k? vikkiniamaddham kinia jiettam p?la???am [adya may? ?masdn?hindam?n?na mahdn karnakalp (for karnikd) kanakakhandak? labdhah. tad ohom vikr?yo mddhvam kr?tvdp?tom p?rayisydmi], to-day, while walking about in thecemetery, I found a large piece of gold, an earring.I shall sell it, and, having bought sweetmeats, fill my bag

with them.In this dialect, as in S?k?ri [xiii, 7], we find elisions ofdeclensional terminations and interchange of cases, etc.Now begins S?bari.

xv. Sabar?. ^tt^^t; *n^t*f%:' l


22/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS 509I offer reverence. But when not respectful, we have ?hi,le yc?lak?, ?hi [?hi, r? c?taka, ?hi], come, O servant, corne,^i ^n^ffaaf? im

The only form of the pronoun of the 1st person is hake,as in hak? ?ae [aham ?gatah], I am come.H%nfaf?*?- #: i$ i

For the locative singular, besides the usual ?, we mayhave the termination i or the termination him. Thus,vani (or vanahim or van?) gaccha [van? gaccha], go intothe forest.

i^i fNiqit *rr "^f?c^ >iFor the genitival suffix k?raka- we may optionallysubstitute k?aka-. Thus, amha-k?akam (or amha-k?lakam)

dhanam [asmadiyam dhanam],our wealth.

vfaw^ y$*m> Ic IIn other respects S?bari is like the preceding Vibh?s?s.Thus it elides declensional terminations, interchangescases, changes, elides, or inserts letters, and employs rusticexpressions.

Audhr?. *rTTOf?*ft?tW^WlftTfNn^: IQIIf we add local words of the Odhra country and ofSauras?n?, etc., to S?bari, and only to S?bari, we get theAudhri dialect.1 Thus, [metre D?h?]?

d?va jas??nandana ?cara mai karwna-l?saettik? jamailacchaili pitta? savva-kil?6a.[d?va, ya6?d?-nandana} kxira mayi karuna-l?samihatyah janmatah asmi iti(?)2 pidayati sarva-kl?uah.]" O divine son of Yas?d?, pity me a little ; as a resuitof birth I am a dweller in this world, and there

fore every kind of misery tortures me."1Regarding the spelling of the word Audhra, see footnote on p. 497.9 The Sanskrit equivalent of jamaiiacchaiii is very doubtful. Whatis given here has been suggested to

meby

a friend to whom I submitted the passage.



23/30

510 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS?bh?r?. ^pf?sf?H wi m v* ^3^ *nwwjj: i ?io i

?bh?r? also is the same as S?bari, except that thegerundive ends in ia or ua, and that it is not verycorrupt. Thus, ga?cia or gadua [gatvd], having gone:padhia or padhua [pathitvd], having read.

Now begins T?kki.xvi. T?kki. -zm\mm^ ifh$* *T*taf?ifin? 111T?kki is a mutual mixture of Sanskrit and ?auraseni.It is the language of gamesters, merchants, and others ofthe sort. Thus, it is said :?

prayujyat? ndlok?dan dyut?di-vyavahdribhihvanigbhir h?na-d?hois ca tad dims takka-bhdsitam."The speech of Talc k a is that which is employed in

plays and the like by professional gamblers and bymerchants of lowly position."Moreover :?

But Hari?candra considers this to be an Apabbraih?a,because [as he maintains] Apabhraih?a is used by theskilled in dramatic compositions. People consider this asreferring to Dr?vidi also. For it is said :?

takka-d???ya-bhdsdydm drsyat? Dr?vidi tath?tatra c?yam vises? 'sti Drdvidair ?drt? param."Dr?vidi appears also in the language of the Takkacountry. Its specialty in this respect is that it isparticularly honoured by Dr?vidas."1

^c?nrq^T^ 3r?sr*i i? iThe vowel n is in many cases added at the end ofa word, but not always. [This is the ordinary terminationin Apabhraihsa of the nominative singular of a-bases.]Thus :?

1 Cf. another version of these lines on p. 498.



24/30

THE PRAKRIT VIBHASAS 511r?u asama-samara?ka-mallu

maana-man?hara-deha-s?husakala-sastrastra-vidy?-pravvnn[r?j? asama-samara?ka-mallah

madana-man?hara-deha-s?bhahsaMla-6astr(Utra-vidya-pr(iv?nah]."A king, an unequalled champion in the fight, illustriouswith a form as beautiful as that of the god of love,

skilled with knowledge of every arm and weapon."As this termination is " not always" added, we havebhanai v?ni kavir?a [not ?cavir?u] [bhanali v?nimkavir?jah], the poet laureate utters poetry.

n *r?: 181The termination of the instrumental singular is also e,

as in khagg? (or khagg?na) paharasi [khadg?na praharasi],thou smitest with a sword.t ?*ft *W IM

The termination of the dative-ablative plural is ham orhum. Thus, rnkkhaham padidn [vrks?bhyah jmtitaJ.i],fallen from the trees ; gharahu/rii calidn [grh?bhyascalitah], gone from the houses. By the precept bahulam," not always/* we also may \nxverukkh?himt?,gharesumt?.

^T*ft m i? iThe same terminations may optionally be used for the

genitive plural, as in bamhanaham (or bamhanahum orbamhan?nam) dhann [br?hman?n?m dhanam], thewealth of the Br?hmanas.

i f?w^:W*m^3^ f?^sr? I IIn the case of kim and other [pronouns], this optionaltermination, ham, of the genitive plural has the penultimate vowel lengthened. Thus, k?ham [kes?m], of whom ?

j?ham [ye??m], of whom ; t?harii [tes?m], of them ;?daham [?t?s?m], of these ; im?ham [?sam], of these ;where we also may have k?nam, j?nam, and so on.



25/30

512 THE PRAKRIT VlBHASAS?rfaaf? ?ff *r^ i* i

The pronoun of the 2nd person is tunga, as in tungosarva-vidyd-pravlnu [tvam sarva-vidyd-pravlnalp], thouart skilled in all knowledge.

^?f?^ ?ffcnfam: ie iThe 1st personal pronoun is ammi, hum, or mama.

Thus, ammi (hum or mama) pandidu [ahom ponditalt],I am a learned man.

t?mwb? & ^ ^rrc?; i


26/30

THE PRAKRIT VlBHASAS 513that he is mistaken in this conclusion, and that suchterms indicate merely the various forms taken by standardApabhraih?a when spoken as a second language inDravidian countries, much as the modern Hindustani ofthe Deccan differs from that spoken in Lucknow.

M?rkandeyas account of the Dr?vidi Vibh?s? is evidentlymuch to the same effect. He says that T?kki is calledDr?vidi because it is much honoured by Dr?vidas. It istherefore important to ascertain exactly what T?kki is.He describes it as the language of the Takka country inthe northern Panj?b, but he cannot mean that it was notspoken anywhere else. On the stage, which pretends torepresent actual conditions, it was allotted, not to nativesof that country, but to members of certain professions,whatever their nationality. This gives a clue towardsunderstand in?* the statement that it was honoured bv

Dr?vidas, and an explanation will be found if we considerthe nature of the language. In the first place, it is saidto have been the language of professional gamesters and ofsmall merchants. These were just the two great classes ofthe population whose business would take them far fromtheir homes, and who possessed a certain amount ofeducation. Reputable or not, they belonged to what weshould call the middle classes. Fairly well-to-do, inpursuit of their callings, they went about, using whatmust have been the current colloquial of the Aryan semigentility of the greater part of India. The nature of thelanguage showed that this was exactly the position thatit was suited to fill. It was a mixture of Sauras?ni andSanskrit, with a touch of Apabhrariis*a. Of all the

Prakrits, Oauras?n? was that which was most closelyallied in its grammar to Sanskrit, and which wascumbered with the fewest d??ya, or local, vulgar words.These semi-genteel folk, to show off the smattering ofeducation that they had received, would interlard thisPrakrit with as many tatsamas, or Sanskrit words, as



27/30

514 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASthey could remember, and would occasionally, by a lapseof dignity, drop into the Apabhraih?a of the common folk.We learn from the grammarians that the people of theTakka country, which included within its borders theimportant city of S?kala and which was not far tothe west of S?ras?na, used this Sanskritized Sauras?n? astheir vernacular ; but this by no means meant that it wasnot also current elsewhere, although this semi-genteellanguage, in the mouths of people who had never in theirlives been near Takka, thus acquired the name of T?kki.

Amongst the people who spoke T?kki, other than theT?kkas and the professional classes just mentioned, theDr?vidas are mentioned as especially affecting it. Whywas their preference so marked ? This question leads usto the consideration of another very similar language alsospoken in southern India?the D?ksin?tya, describedante on pp. 493 ff. This is not classed as a Vibh?s?, but asa variety of M?gadhi Prakrit. As a fact, it bears to thatPrakrit very much the same relation that T?kki bears toSauras?ni. The only real points of difference are that itdoes not occasionally drop into Apabhraihsa, and that itis not a Vibh?s?, because it is used in poetry, not in thedrama. It is not a character-dialect, and, instead ofusing Apabhraih?a forms, it ekes out its vocabulary withthe help of southern words, while at the same time, likeT?kki, it is largely influenced by Sanskrit. We thushave two Aryan languages spoken in southern India?one based on M?gadhi, and used in poetry, and the otherbased on Sauras?ni, and used as a favourite linguafranca. Both were there foreign languages, one ofpolite literature and the other of travellers. All thistime Sanskrit was the learned language of the educatedand of literature, and Dravidians, when speaking anAryan language, would naturally endeavour to approachit as nearly as possible. It is for this reason that we findthem, as M?rkanij?yas authority says, specially honouring



28/30

THE PRAKRIT VlBHASAS 515T?kki. It was a comparatively high form of Prakrit, andwas much mixed with Sanskrit words.We can now return to the meaning of the word" Vibh?s? ". WTe have seen that, as a technical term ofgrammar, it meant " option ", and this, to a certain extent,indicates the meaning of the word as applied to dialects.A Vibh?s? is an optional form of a standard dialect usedfor certain purposes. It is " optional " because, whilecertain peculiarities are laid down for each, thesepeculiarities are not necessarily always in evidence, and,except in a few special cases, the standard forms mayalways be used in their place. Each Vibh?s? is more orless a mixed form of speech, in which the extent of themixture fluctuates. As Prthv?dhara says, it is a language11of manifold sorts". It is unnecessary to give particularinstances. Anyone who reads through M?rkandeya'saccount will acknowledge that this is the generalcharacter.

But this by no means exhausts the ideas connoted bythe word. The preposition vi has many meanings. Oneof these, when it is prefixed to a noun, is impropriety,as in vi-janman-, of base birth. The same idea is alsopresent in the word vi-bhdsd. It is expressly declared tobe a hind, or base, language. This meaning of Vibh?s?is not given in any of the dictionaries, Indian or

European, that I have consulted, but I have no hesitationin considering that, like that of option, it also underliesthe use of the word.1Further, a Vibh?s? is not a literary dialect. It is

presented only in plays, and there only in connexionwith particular characters. It is, in short, a characterdialect of the stage?corresponding to the mangled1 Another meaning of vi has been suggested to me, which may alsoinfluence the connotation of the word as indicating a form of Prakrit.Vi-bh?sd may mean "a minor bhd&d", in accordance with the use ofbhdva and vibhdva in rhetoric.



29/30

516 THE PRAKRIT VIBHASASlanguage used on our stage by, say, a drunken man,a peasant, or a foreigner. When the French hero of" Ici on parle Fran?ais " says, " Sare, I vill box your eye ",he is talking Vibh?s?. It is not a dialect in the strictsense of the term, for it is not the local form of speechused in any particular part of the country, but is more ofan argot, without being exactly slang.A Vibh?s? differs from Apabhraihsa in not beinga literary language. The boundary between the two isfluctuating. For instance, we have seen that Har iacanchawould class T?kki as an Apabhraihsa. His argumentseems to be that T?kki has the character of Apabhram?a[compare the nominative singular in u], and that tomaintain that it is a Vibh?s? because it appears only inplays is irrelevant, for Apabhram?a is also used in plays.Probably, at the back of his mind was the fact that,although in the drama T?kki is a character - dialect,outside the theatre it was widely used as a lingua franca^and therefore should be classed as a form of Apabhram?a.

Markand?ya so far agrees with Hari?candra as to admitthe existence also of a Takka Apabhram?a, just as headmits that of Audhra, ?bhira, and Dr?vida forms ofApabhraihsa. As I have shown elsewhere (JRAS. 1913,pp. 875 ff.), these names do not indicate the vernacularsof the countries referred to. They indicate merely theslight changes occurring in the language of speakers ofstandard Apabhraih?a who happen to be living in thosecouutries. They are not character - dialects, like theVibh?s?s, but local deviations from a standard, similar,as I have said, to the Dec?an variety of Hind?st?ni.Hence, though the names may be the same, it does notfollow that they are identical with the correspondingVibh?s?s.

Finally, Vibh?s?s fail into two classes. One iscomposed of S?k?ri, C?nd?li, S?bari, Audhri, and ?bh?r?.These are all degradations?levellings down?of M?gadhi,



30/30

THE PRAKRIT VlBHASAS 517or of Sauras?n?, or of both. They are spoken byuneducated persons, who are represented as despicable,or else as of some despised caste. The other divisionconsists of T?kki (including Dr?vidi). So far from thisbeing a degraded form of speech, it represents a levellingup. Its speakers are sein i-educated people, who aretrying to "talk fine". If they occasionally drop intovulgar idioms, it is due to their want of education, notto their intention.

To sum up. A Vibh?s? is a corrupt form of one ormore standard Prakrit dialects, which is used only instage-plays, and is there allotted to special characters.The corruption may be either down-grade or up-grade,and may consist in solecisms, or in a mixture of dialects,but in every case it is represented on the stage asa corruption personal to the speaker, and nothing more.

prakrit vibhasas

Documents