Weber, opposes more vehemently than Prof. Max Muller Hindu and Buddhist
chronology. Evidently if an Indophile he is not a Buddhophile, and
General Cunningham, however independent otherwise in his archeological
researches, agrees with him more than would seem strictly prudent in
view of possible future discoveries.* We have then to refute in our
turn this great Oxford professor's speculations.
---------
* Notwithstanding Prof. M. Muller's regrettable efforts to invalidate
every Buddhist evidence, he seems to have ill-succeeded in proving his
case, if we can judge from the openly expressed opinion of his own
German confreres. In the portion headed "Tradition as to Buddha's Age"
(pp. 283-288) in his "Hist. of Ind. Lit.," Prof. Weber very aptly
remarks, "Nothing like positive certainty, therefore, is for the present
attainable. Nor have the subsequent discussions of this topic by Max
Muller (1859) ('Hist. A.S.L.' p. 264 ff), by Westergaard (1860), 'Ueber
Buddha's Todesjahr,' and by 'Kern Over de Jaartelling der Zuidel
Buddhisten' so far yielded any definite results.
Pages:
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501