A History of Indian Literature v2.c21.4

v2.c21.4

543 ff.; Early History, 4th ed., 49 f.) agreed with him, though he is also compelled to say: "I do not believe that the date can be fixed with anything like certainty." *Jayaswal's* readings and calculations have, however, been shown to be untenable, by R. C. *Majumdar* (Ind. Ant. 47, 1918, 223 f.; 48, 1919, 187 ff.; cf. R. P. *Chanda*, Ind. Ant. 48, 214 ff.; K. G. *Sankara Aiyar*, Ind. Ant. 49, 1920, 43 ff.). A. B. *Keith*, too (Buddhist Philosophy, p. 32) refutes *Jayaswal's* argumentation, but even he declares the usual dating 487-477 to be uncertain, and says that "the case against the traditional date is insufficient to justify its rejection out and out."[^1) When we take into consideration that there is sufficient evidence to show that Buddha was a contemporary of kings Bimbisāra and Ajātaśatru, whom we can place with a fair amount of certainty in the 6th and 5th centuries B. C., then we are at least justified in saying that the best working hypothesis is to place the life of Buddha into this period too.[^2)