A History of Sanskrit Literature c29.s4.1

c29.s4.1

It is clear that the Prākrit grammars² which we have were written under the direct influence of Sanskrit grammars. The tradition which ascribes to Pāṇini a Prākrit grammar is doubtless a mere invention to honour Prākrit, and the further contention that Katyāyana produced the *Prākṛtaprakāça*³ of Vararuci is equally absurd. That grammar handles Māhārāṣṭrī very fully, in nine chapters, then gives one each to Paiçācī, Māgadhī, and Çaurasenī, treating Māhārāṣṭrī as the highest form, but finding Sanskrit as the original of all Prākrits. The forms of these Prākrits are clearly later than those of Açvaghoṣa and reflect perhaps the works of the third century A. D. at earliest. What is certain is that Vararuci, if we give this name to the author, was commented on by Bhāmaha, the writer on poetics (*c.* 700). The relative age of Vararuci and Caṇḍa, author of the *Prākṛtalakṣaṇa*⁴ is disputed; unhappily that work has come down in the two recensions, and, even if one is older than Vararuci, the other is younger, while its original views on many important points, as to retention of inter-vocalic consonants, depend on dubious readings; it may give us a stage not otherwise represented of Ārṣa or Ardhamāgadhī, the Prākrit of the Jains, it gives one Sūtra only each to Apabhraṁça, Paiçācikī, and Māgadhikā. As we have seen, another testimony as to a Prākrit is given by the chapter on Prākrits in the *Nāṭyaçāstra*.