A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, so far as it illustrates the Primitive Religion of the Brahmans c8.s3.188

c8.s3.188

It is possible that the inquiries into the ancient literature of Buddhism, particularly in China, may bring to light some new dates, and help us in unravelling the chronological traditions of the Brahmans of India. The services already rendered to Sanskrit archæology by the publications of M. Stanislas Julien are of the highest value, and they hold out the promise of a still larger harvest; but for the present we must be satisfied with what we possess, and we must guard most carefully against rash conclusions, derived from evidence that would break down under the slightest pressure. Even without the support which it was attempted to derive from Hiouen-thsang, Kâtyâyana's date is as safe as any date is likely to be in ancient Oriental chronology; and the connection between Kâtyâyana and his predecessors and successors, supported as it is not only by tradition but by the character of their works which we still possess, supplies the strongest confirmation of our chronological calculations. As to other works of the Sûtra period, there are no doubt many, the date of which cannot be fixed by any external evidence. Tradition is completely silent as to the age of many of their authors. With regard to them we must trust, at least for the present, to the similarity of their style and character with the writings of those authors whose age has been fixed. It is possible that the works of earlier authors quoted by Yâska and Pânini and others might still come to light, if any systematic search for ancient MSS. was made in different parts of India. Many works are quoted by Sâyaṇa, Devarâja, Ujjvaladatta, and other modern writers, which are not to be found in any European Library. Some of them may still be recovered.¹ We must not, however, expect too much. Vast as the ancient literature of India has been, we must bear in mind that part of it existed in oral tradition only, and was never consigned to writing. In India, where before the time of Pânini we have no evidence of any written literature, it by no means follows that, because an early Rishi is quoted in support of a theory, whether philosophical or grammatical, there ever existed a work written by him with pen and ink. His doctrines were handed down from generation to generation; but, once erased from the tablets of memory, they could never be recovered.