Derek wrote:

> A bit off-topic for the Pali list, but someone here may know the
> answer. I had always thought there were several methods for dating the lifetime of the Buddha.

Perhaps it is a bit off-topic, but I also would be interested in knowing the current state of the question. Derek mentions Shumann's discussion in "The Historical Buddha" (1982, pp. 10-13). The "Note on Chronology" on p. xii shows the author's openness to subtracting "115 years from the dates given for events in the life of the historical Buddha." Schumann traces this late dating to four articles in 'Persica' by P. Eggermont (between 1965 and 1979), later supported by Heinz Bechert (Indologia Taurinensia X, 1982).



There is also a good but dated 4-page discussion of the Buddha's chronology in R.C. Majumdar, "The History and Culture of the Indian People," Bombay 1951 (pp. 36 f.). He treats the difficulties of the various theories, and writes in a footnote:



"Cf. PHAI, 186, for a brief review of the different theories on the subject. Cf. also Geiger, Tr. of Mahavamsa, p. XII; EHI, pp. 49-50; CHI, I 171. Recently, Dr. E. J. Thomas has pointed out (B.C. Law, vol.2, 18-22) that according to the Sarvastivadins Asoka flourished one century after the Nirvana of Buddha, and this tradition may be traced even in the Sinhalese Chronicles. According to this date Nirvana falls in the 4th century B.C. and a Japanese scholar, quoted by Thomas, places this event in 386 B.C."



I am taking this info. from a photocopy, and don't have the key to the abbreviations. The book is in my local library if someone is really interested (may contact me on or offlist). Majumdar concludes his discussion: "Thus the date 544 B.C. for the Buddha's death, as testified to by the Sinhalese reckoning of the Nirvana era, cannot be pronounced to be definitely wrong."



-- In Vol. IV of K.R. Norman's Collected Papers (PTS) there is an article "Observations on the dates of the Jina and the Buddha." (I don't have access to it and don't know the date of the article.)



It would be nice if someone in the group had the time and interest to research this topic!



Rene

> As i understand, there is no scholarly consenus. I did read a rather

remarkeable statment recently by Richard Gombrich that he
had 'solved' the problem, but i have not been able to come across
the details of his argument. He says the parinibbana was at 404 BCE
(plus or minus about ten years), which he arrives at because it is
136 years before Asoka.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]