A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, so far as it illustrates the Primitive Religion of the Brahmans c8.s2.110

c8.s2.110

If we accept this statement of Shaḍguruśishya,—and it certainly seems to agree in the main with what we might have guessed from the character of the works, ascribed respectively to Śaunaka, Āśvalāyana and Kātyāyana,—we should have to admit at least five generations of teachers and pupils: first Śaunaka; after him Āśvalāyana, in whose favour Śaunaka is said to have destroyed one of his works; thirdly, Kātyāyana, who studied the works both of Śaunaka and Āśvalāyana; fourthly Patanjali, who wrote a commentary on one of Kātyāyana’s works; and lastly Vyāsa, who commented on a work of Patanjali. It does not follow that Kātyāyana was a pupil of Āśvalāyana, or that Patanjali lived immediately after Kātyāyana, but the smallest interval which we can admit between every two of these names is that between teacher and pupil, an interval as large as that between father and son, or rather larger. The question now arises: Can the date of any one of these authors be fixed chronologically?