This expedition occurred long before
Rama's time, and there is nothing to connect it with Menander.
Goldstucker's inference is based upon the assumption that there was no
other Yavana expedition against Ayodhya known to Patanjali, and it will
be easily seen from Harivamsa (written by Vyasa) that the said
assumption is unwarranted. Consequently the whole theory constructed by
Goldstucker on this weak foundation falls to the ground. No valid
inferences can be drawn from the mere names of kings contained in
Mahabhashya, even if they are traced to Patanjali himself, as there
would be several kings in the same dynasty bearing the same name. From
the foregoing remarks it will be clear that we cannot fix, as Weber has
done, B.C. 140 as the maximum limit of antiquity that can be assigned to
Patanjali. It is now necessary to see whether any other such limit has
been ascertained by Orientalists. As Panini's date still remains
undetermined, the limit cannot be fixed with reference to his date. But
it is assumed by some Orientalists that Panini must have lived at some
time subsequent to Alexander's invasion, from the fact that Panini
explains in his Grammar the formation of the word Yavanani.
Pages:
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416