opposed to the conclusion arrived at by Mr. Wilson, and it
does not appear on what grounds their testimony is discredited by him.
Mr. Wilson is clearly wrong in stating that an antiquity of 1,600 years
is attributed to Sankara by the Sringeri Matham. We have already
referred to the account of the Sringeri Matham, and it is precisely
similar to the account given by the Kudali Brahmins. We have ascertained
that it is so from the agent of the Sringeri Matham at Madras, who has
recently published the list of teachers preserved at the said Matham
with the dates assigned to them. And further, we are unable to see which
"common tradition" makes Sankara "about 1,200 years old." As far as our
knowledge goes there is no such common tradition in India. The majority
of people in Southern India have, up to this time, been relying on the
Sringeri account, and in Northern India there seems to be no common
tradition. We have but a mass of contradictory accounts.
It is indeed surprising that an Orientalist of Mr. Wilson's pretensions
should confound the poet named Sankara and mentioned in Bhoja Prabandha
with the great Adwaitee teacher. No Hindu would ever commit such a
ridiculous mistake. We are astonished to find some of these European
Orientalists quoting now and then some of the statements contained in
such books as Bhoja Prabandha, Katha Sarit Sagara, Raja-tarangini and
Panchatantra, as if they were historical works. In some other part of
his preface Mr. Wilson himself says that this Bhoja Prabandha is
altogether untrustworthy, as some of the statements contained therein
did not harmonize with his theory about Amarasimha's date; but now he
misquotes its statements for the purpose of supporting his conclusion
regarding Sankara's date. Surely, consistency is not one of the
prominent characteristics of the writings of the majority of European
Orientalists. The person mentioned in Bhoja Prabandha is always spoken
of under the name of Sankara Kavi (poet), and he is nowhere called
Sankaracharya (teacher), and the Adwaitee teacher is never mentioned in
any Hindu work under the appellation of Sankara Kavi.
It is unnecessary for us to say anything about the Madhwa traditions or
the opinion of the Vaishnava Brahmins of Madurah regarding Sankara's
date. It is, in our humble opinion, hopeless to expect anything but
falsehood regarding Sankara's history and his philosophy from the
Madhwas and the Vaishnavas. They are always very
|