365bet娱乐

58
He believes that Devala had these two works before him. He arrives
3 at the conclusion that Devala was a Sankhyacarya, of a period,
quite earlier than that of Isvarak峁涐梗峁嘺. He was much earlier than
the date of the Mahabharata war
4 (2) Referring to the above view of Pandit膮 Udayavira Shastri
of placing Devala, in a period, "much earlier before second century
B.C.娄 Dr.T.G.Mainkar 5 regards it to be "a view, which appears
as hardly convincing". He further adds, "Devala & Isvarakrsna appear.
to have flourished in time quite close to each other's & it would
be too much to regard as many centuries, having elapsed between
the two, on the strength of the remark from Mathara". He also
remarks, "Not only the list as seen in the Matharavrtti, is rather
curious, but the word 'prabhrti' even when taken with the absence
of Isvarakrsna, indeed cannot suggest any wide chronological gap".
6 (3) Dr. Hara Dutt Sharma & (4) Dr. Vrajamohana Chaturvedi
opine that Mathara's quotation can only establish Devala's
priority to isvarakrsna & nothing else.
1 i
i
7 }
It is clear that all the above scholars agree upon
the point that Devala was earlier than Isvarakrsna (about 200 A.D.
8 Mm. P. V.Kane鲁, however, is of the opinion that Devaladharma-
s奴tra was not only earlier than Sankaracarya, but was also
regarded as early as (if not earlier than), the sutras based
purely on logic or the Atomic Theory".
10 For the solution of the problem of date of Devala, some
external & internal evidences are given below :
1 A