e fourth religious order." Further
on he observes that "it is a popular error to ascribe to him 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."

From the foregoing observations it will be seen that Sankara's date
cannot be determined by the time of the commencement of the Buddhist
persecution, even if it were possible to ascertain the said period.

Mr. Barth seems to have discovered some connection between the
philosophical systems of Sankara, Ramanuja and Anandathirtha, and the
Arabian merchants who came to India in the first centuries of the
Hejira, and he is no doubt fully entitled to any credit that may be
given him for the originality of his discovery. This mysterious and
occult connection between Adwaita philosophy and Arabian commerce is
pointed out in p. 212 of his book, and it may have some bearing on the
present question, if it is anything more than a figment of his fancy.
The only reason given by him in support of his theory is, however, in my
humble opinion, worthless. The Hindus had a Prominent example of a
grand religious movement under the guidance of a single teacher in the
life of Buddha, and it was not necessary for them to imitate the
adventures of the Arabian prophet. There is but one other passage in
Mr. Barth's book which has some reference to Sankara's date. In page
207 he writes as follows:--"The Siva, for instance, who is invoked at
the commencement of the drama of Sakuntala, who is at once God, priest
and offering, and whose body is the universe, is a Vedantic idea. This
testimony appears to be forgotten when it is maintained, as is sometimes
done, that the whole sectarian Vedantism commences with Sankara." But
this testimony appears to be equally forgotten when it is maintained, as
is sometimes done by Orientalists like Mr. Barth, that Sankara lived in
some century after the author of Sakuntala.

From the foregoing remarks it will be apparent that Mr. Barth's opinion
regarding Sankara's date is very unsatisfactory. As Mr. Wilson seems to
have examined the subject with some care and attention, we must now
advert to his opinion and see how far it is based on proper evidence.
In attempting to fix Amara Sinha's date (which attempt ultimately ended
in a miserable failure), he had to ascertain the period when Sankara
lived. Consequently his remarks concerning the said period appear in