2023-02-23 18:48:19 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
15
By way of comment, it has been rightly noted by Telang¹ that
'Bāṇa and Mayūra, and Daṇḍin, who is mentioned with them,
are now hardly known as philosophers.' Bühler is not content
with so mild a criticism. Madhava's work,' he says, 'is devoid
of all historical value. It is nothing but a mass of legends heaped
one upon the other for the glorification of the great master. To
give only one instance of its inaccuracies, Samkara is made to
refute Bāṇa and Mayūra, the two well-known poets of the seventh
century.' Still, granting that we are dealing with legend, as of
course we must be, since Samkara flourished a hundred years
and more after the close of Harṣa's reign, it is yet possible to
regard the defeat of Bāṇa and Mayūra as a fact around which
legendary matter has been grouped. It can at least be said that
there may have been a literary contest of some kind, in which
Bāṇa and Mayūra were worsted by somebody. I admit that this
is hardly a satisfactory datum from a historical standpoint, yet
the fact is possible none the less. But apart from such specula-
tive uncertainties, the story is of value as showing the esteem in
which Mayura and Bāṇa were held by the writers of generations
that succeeded them; for the author Madhava was doubtless acute
enough to realize that the greater the fame of those whom his
hero Samkara was made to conquer, the greater would be the
glory of that hero. Therefore, in selecting Mayūra to pose as a
victim of Samkara's eloquence, Madhava has paid our poet a
delicate but obvious compliment.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1K. T. Telang, The Date of the Nyayakusumāñjali, in IA, vol. 1 (1872),
p. 299; cf., however, Telang, The Date of Sankaracharya, in IA, vol. 13
(1884), p. 101-102.
2 G. Bühler, Additional Remarks on the Age of the Naishadhiya, in
JBRAS, vol. II (1875), p. 283.
It is generally accepted that Samkara flourished at the beginning of
the ninth century A.D.; cf. especially K. B. Pathak, The Date of Samka-
racharya, in IA, vol. 11 (1882), p. 175, and the same author in Bhartrhari
and Kumarila, in JBRAS, vol. 18 (1890-1894), p. 233. His conclusions
place Samkara between 750 and 838 A.D. K. T. Telang, however, con-
tends that Samkara should be placed toward the end of the sixth century
A.D.; cf. The Date of Sankaracharya, in IA, vol. 13 (1884), p. 103. See
also Duff, Chronology, p. 69, and Krishnamacharya, Sanskrit Literature,
p. 119. Some additional notes on the subject of Samkara's date are given
by D. R. Bhandarkar, in IA, vol. 41 (1912), p. 200.
By way of comment, it has been rightly noted by Telang¹ that
'Bāṇa and Mayūra, and Daṇḍin, who is mentioned with them,
are now hardly known as philosophers.' Bühler is not content
with so mild a criticism. Madhava's work,' he says, 'is devoid
of all historical value. It is nothing but a mass of legends heaped
one upon the other for the glorification of the great master. To
give only one instance of its inaccuracies, Samkara is made to
refute Bāṇa and Mayūra, the two well-known poets of the seventh
century.' Still, granting that we are dealing with legend, as of
course we must be, since Samkara flourished a hundred years
and more after the close of Harṣa's reign, it is yet possible to
regard the defeat of Bāṇa and Mayūra as a fact around which
legendary matter has been grouped. It can at least be said that
there may have been a literary contest of some kind, in which
Bāṇa and Mayūra were worsted by somebody. I admit that this
is hardly a satisfactory datum from a historical standpoint, yet
the fact is possible none the less. But apart from such specula-
tive uncertainties, the story is of value as showing the esteem in
which Mayura and Bāṇa were held by the writers of generations
that succeeded them; for the author Madhava was doubtless acute
enough to realize that the greater the fame of those whom his
hero Samkara was made to conquer, the greater would be the
glory of that hero. Therefore, in selecting Mayūra to pose as a
victim of Samkara's eloquence, Madhava has paid our poet a
delicate but obvious compliment.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1K. T. Telang, The Date of the Nyayakusumāñjali, in IA, vol. 1 (1872),
p. 299; cf., however, Telang, The Date of Sankaracharya, in IA, vol. 13
(1884), p. 101-102.
2 G. Bühler, Additional Remarks on the Age of the Naishadhiya, in
JBRAS, vol. II (1875), p. 283.
It is generally accepted that Samkara flourished at the beginning of
the ninth century A.D.; cf. especially K. B. Pathak, The Date of Samka-
racharya, in IA, vol. 11 (1882), p. 175, and the same author in Bhartrhari
and Kumarila, in JBRAS, vol. 18 (1890-1894), p. 233. His conclusions
place Samkara between 750 and 838 A.D. K. T. Telang, however, con-
tends that Samkara should be placed toward the end of the sixth century
A.D.; cf. The Date of Sankaracharya, in IA, vol. 13 (1884), p. 103. See
also Duff, Chronology, p. 69, and Krishnamacharya, Sanskrit Literature,
p. 119. Some additional notes on the subject of Samkara's date are given
by D. R. Bhandarkar, in IA, vol. 41 (1912), p. 200.