7. Buddha's birth is placed (on p. 141) in the year 643 B.C.. Is this
date given by the Adepts as undoubtedly correct? Have they any view as
to the new inscriptions of Asoka (as given by General A. Cunningham,
"Corpus Inscriptionum Indicanum," vol. I. pp. 20-23), on the strength of
which Buddha's Nirvana is placed by Barth ("Religions of India," p.
106), &c., about 476 B.C., and his birth therefore at about 556 B.C.?
It would be exceedingly interesting if the Adepts would give a sketch
however brief of the history of India in those centuries with authentic
dates.
8. Sankaracharya's date is variously given by Orientalists, but always
after Christ. Barth, for instance, places him about 788 A.D. In
"Esoteric Buddhism" he is made to succeed Buddha almost immediately (p.
149). Can this discrepancy be explained? Has not Sankaracharya been
usually classed as Vishnuite in his teaching? And similarly has not
Gaudapada been accounted a Sivite? and placed much later than "Esoteric
Buddhism" (p.147) places him? We would willingly pursue this line of
inquiry, but think it best to wait and see to what extent the Adepts may
be willing to clear up some of the problems in Indian religious history
on which, as it would seem, they must surely possess knowledge which
might be communicated to lay students without indiscretion.
Pages:
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320