Such being the case, it is indeed very surprising that the orthodox Hindus should have kept quiet for nearly ten centuries without retaliating on their enemies.  The political ascendency gained by the Buddhists during the reign of Asoka did not last very long; and the Hindus had the support of very powerful kings before and after the commencement of the Christian era.  Moreover, the author says, in p. 132 of his book, that Buddhism was in a state of decay in the seventh century.  It is hardly to be expected that the reaction against the Buddhists would commence when their religion was already in a state of decay.  No great religious teacher or reformer would waste his time and energy in demolishing a religion already in ruins.  But what evidence is there to show that Sankara was ever engaged in this task?  If the main object of his preaching was to evoke a reaction against Buddhism, he would no doubt have left us some writings specially intended to criticize its doctrines and expose its defects.  On the other hand, he does not even allude to Buddhism in his independent works.

Though he was a voluminous writer, with the exception of a few remarks on the theory advocated by some Buddhists regarding the nature of perception, contained in his Commentary on the Brahma-Sutras, there is not a single passage in the whole range of his writings regarding the Buddhists or their doctrines; and the insertion of even these few remarks in his Commentary was rendered necessary by the allusions contained in the Sutras which he was interpreting.  As, in our humble opinion, these Brahma-Sutras were composed by Vyasa himself (and not by an imaginary Vyasa of the fifth century after Christ, evolved by Mr. Weber’s fancy), the allusions therein contained relate to the Buddhism which existed to the date of Gautama Buddha.  From these few remarks it will be clear to our readers that Sankaracharya had nothing to do with Buddhist persecution.  We may here quote a few passages from Mr. Wilson’s Preface to the first edition of his Sanskrit Dictionary in support of our remarks.  He writes as follows regarding Sankara’s connection with the persecution of the Buddhists:—­“Although the popular belief attributes the origin of the Bauddha persecution to Sankaracharya, yet in this case we have some reason to distrust its accuracy.  Opposed to it we have the mild character of the reformer, who is described as uniformly gentle and tolerant; and, speaking from my own limited reading in Vedanta works, and the more satisfactory testimony of Ram Mohun Roy, which he permits me to adduce, it does not appear that any traces of his being instrumental to any persecution are to be found in his own writings, all which are extant, and the object of which is by no means the correction of the Bauddha or any other schism, but the refutation of all other doctrines besides his own, and the reformation or re-establishment of the 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.”