King Asoka and Buddhism - Urban Dharma

of Jalauka’s name in other records on Mauryan Aśoka does notseem to have deterred any of the scholars, perhaps with theexception of Romila Thapar. In her case, she takes great painsto equate Jalauka to Kuṇāla (the name of Emperor Aśoka’sson in Northern Buddhist tradition) by explaining Jalauka as aconfusion caused by a typographical error in Brahmi script. 13The readiness with which Kalhaṇa’s accounts were reliedupon by even the most astute of Aśokan scholars calls for anexplanation.As far as Aurel Stein was concerned, he did subject Rājataraṅgiṇīto a strictly critical examination. Although his statementquoted above sounds pretty conclusive, he was adequatelycautious. He questioned Kalhaṇa’s chronology whichdates Aśoka around 1182 B.C. (i.e. at least eight centuries beforethe established date and curiously six centuries before theBuddha). 14 He also expresses doubt on Śacināra and Śakuni,Aśoka’s alleged ancestors. 15 Stein’s observations, which laterscholars had unfortunately glossed over, undoubtedly deserveto be restated:It seems evident that Kashmirian tradition has preserved no recollectionof Aśoka’s true historical position as a great monarchruling over the whole of Northern India. But by retaining hisname at least in the list of Kashmirian kings it affords us a welcomeindication that the sovereign sway of the historical Aśokawas acknowledged also in that distant region…. It is impossiblefor us to indicate what historical elements, if any, there are, inthe Kashmirian tradition regarding Jalauka. The name of thisalleged son of Aśoka cannot otherwise be traced in our availablesources; and the account given of his reign in the Chroniclebears in its main part a manifestly legendary character. 16The credibility so surprisingly assigned by Indian scholars tothe flimsy and, to our mind, indisputably shaky information187