The Antiquities of Orissa v1.c6.61

v1.c6.61

⁴² Professer Wilson is of opinion that “it is a popular error to ascribe to Śaṅkara, the work of persecution : he does not appear at all occupied in that odious task, nor is he engaged in particular controversy with any of the Bauddhas : the more prominent objects of his opposition are the Mīmāṁsakas as represented by Maṇḍana Miśra, with whom he holds a long and rather acrimonious discussion, and the Naiyāyikas, and Sāṅkhyas ; and the vulgar sects of Vaiṣṇavas and Śaivas are alike the objects of his opposition ; he is especially hostile to the latter, and particularly to the Kāpālikas, a class of Śaiva worshippers, who again are his most active enemies, and on one occasion assail his existence. “He comes in personal contact with the Bauddhas, indeed, according to our authority, in but two instances : the first is a short conference with an Ārhata, who advocates the Mādhyamika doctrines, or those of a Bauddha sect, and which is held in the Bāhlika country, a region identified by name and geographical position with the modern Balkh ; and the second happens in Kāśmīr, where amongst the many sects who oppose Śaṅkara’s access to the temple of Sarasvatī, a short time before his death, the Bauddhas make their appearance. Besides the positive conclusion presented by these circumstances that Śaṅkara was not engaged actively in any personal conflict with the followers of the Bauddha schism, we derive from them a very probable conjecture as to the situation of the Bauddhas in the time at which Mādhava flourished, and as he places them no nearer than Kāśmīr and Khorasan, it appears likely that some period prior to his date was the epoch at which the Bauddha faith was compelled to retire from its native seat towards those northern regions in which it still prevails”. *Essays*, III. 193.