The Sanskrit Drama in its Origin, Development, Theory & Practice c9.s3.2

c9.s3.2

The Sanskrit contains some errors, which are obvious Prākṛitisms, and which it would be unjust to attribute to the author, or authors. Genuine departures from the norm are scanty; the use of ārttha for artha has a precise parallel in the nearly contemporaneous dialect of Mathurā; tuṣṇīm is frequent in Buddhist Sanskrit as well as etymologically correct; *krimi* is found also in the *Buddhacarita* where the reading *kṛmi* would spoil the metre; *pratigṛhīta* has many Sanskrit parallels.) In *pradveṣam* where the metre requires *pradoṣam* Buddhist influence is doubtless present, but *yeva* and *tāva* are probably merely errors of the scribe, to whom may be assigned such a monstrosity as *paçyemas* and *Somadattassa*. But *bhagavām* has the support of the practice of the *Mahāvastu* where stems in *mat* and *vat* end thus, and it explains the Sandhi *çṛṇvam puṣpā*. These are minimal variants; in the main the Sanskrit is excellent and the fragments shows traces of the able versification and style of Açvaghoṣa.)