1

Which is the oldest text that mentions gita other than Mahabharata and purans?

Do shastraes(books) mentions gita excluding religion one.

0
5

Professor Kashi Nath Upadhyaya in his "Early Buddhism and Bhagavadgita" page 16-19 says

Evidences for the existence of the MB after the 1st century A.D. are too numerous and too well known to be recounted here. We may, therefore, begin with the testimony of the works of Asvaghosa, a Mahayana Buddhist of the 1st century A.D. In his ‘Buddhacarita’ as well as ‘Saundaiananda’ he evidently makes use of the episodes of the MB. Again in his *Bajra Suci’, some verses of the ‘Sraddha Mahatmya’ portion of the Harivamsa as well of other portions of the MB are quoted. This indicates that by his time the MB with its appendix, Harivamsha must have been well known. Still earlier references are to be found in the ‘Grhya-Sutra’ of Asvalayana as well as in the Dharma-Sutra and Grhya-Sutra of Baudhayana. Asvalayana makes clear mention of the Bharata as well as the in his Grhya-Sutra 3.4.4. In Baudhayana’s Dharma Sutra 2.2.26 a verse occurs which is found in the MB Adi.78.10. His Grhya Sutra (1.22.8 ) clearly mentions the name of the ‘Visnu-sahasra-nama’ which is a portion of the MB and further in Sutra 2.22.9, an important verse of the Gita 9.26 is clearly quoted. The date assigned to Baudhayana by Dr. Buhler is not later than 400 B.C. By this time the MB seems to have been popular along with Gita, the verses of which are quoted by Baudhayana in high reverence.From the clear mention of the two names, the Bharata and the Mahabharata in the Grhya Sutra of Asvalayana, it is reasonable to infer that the MB was developed from the Bharata, perhaps, not long before Asvalayana, for after a considerable lapse of time, the name Bharata was almost forgotten. As the Gita is not considered as a later addition of the MB , it is reasonable to believe that it might have been composed sometime between the 5th and the 4th century B.G. We shall, however, further examine this question and see whether this date is confirmed on other independent grounds

He continues on page 19,

We have the evidence of Banabhatta, the writer of Kadambari who lived in the court of King Harsavardhana in the middle of the 7th century A.D . Kadambari alludes to the Gita along with the MB through one of its well known equivoques as follows — ‘Mahabharatamivananta- Gilakarnanananditanaram.’ In it the royal palace has been compared to the Mahabharata and it is said that the people of the palace were delighted by hearing innumerable songs just as Arjuna was delighted at hearing the Gita.The high sanctity attached to the MB and the Gita by the time of Banabhatta is further evidenced by the episode of the queen Vilasavati who used to go to the temple of Mahakala where the daily recitation of the MB was going on. This evidently indicates that the Gita and the MB were looked upon as sacred scriptures of very high esteem, but for which their recitation in the temple could not have been narrated by Banabhatta. This shows that by the time of Banabhatta, the Gita must have been several centuries old. In the works of Kalidasa we have remarkable allusions to the Bhagavadgita. To mention a few of them, we may first point to ‘Raghuvamsam’ canto X.67, where the gods addressing Visnu say “There is nothing for you to acquire which has not been acquired The one motive m your birth and work is the good of the worlds ’ .Now the idea as well as the expression of the first line is strongly reminiscent of the Gita (3.22) The words ‘birth and work’ (Janma & Karma) occurring in the second line here are also precisely the same as employed in the Gita (4.9) and the idea of the 'good of the worlds', is also identical with the idea expressed in the Gita (3.20 — 24). Again the line of ‘Kumarsambhavam’ canto 4.67 where the seven rishis say to the Himalaya Mountain “Well hast thou been called Visnu in a firmly fixed form”, cannot fail to remind of the Gita (10.25) where Krsna identifies himself with the firmly fixed Himalayas. The term ‘firmly fixed’ (Sthavara) is remarkably the same in both the places. The well known commentator of Kalidasa, namely, Mallmatha also thinks that Kalidasa, while speaking of the Himalayas in such terms, must have had m his mind the above mentioned line of the Gita. The date of Kalidasa is not fairly well established as the middle of the 5th century AD.

5
  • 1
    Thanks for the answer – Dark Knight Apr 10 at 13:22
  • 1
    Your most welcome @DarkKnight 🤗 – Sethu Srivatsa Koduru Apr 10 at 13:28
  • 1
    Good answer. Does the book say that Gita was composed during 5th and the 4th century B.C and not during Mahabharata war? Further, is Grhya-Sutra of Baudhayana older than brahma sutras? @Sethu Srivatsa Koduru – GIRIBLR Apr 10 at 13:32
  • 1
    Yes sir @GIRIBLR That point also I wanted to cover hence added dates. I dont know if Grhya Sutra is older than Bramha Sutras. Google says "The oldest is the sutra attributed to Baudhayana, possibly compiled around 800 BCE to 500 BCE." – Sethu Srivatsa Koduru Apr 10 at 13:34
  • 1
    Grhya Sutra must be later than Mahabharata and Bramha Sutras sir. Swami Vireswarananda in section "The Author and Date of the Sutras" of wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras/d/doc62756.html proves that Bramha Sutra must be 5000 yrs Old – Sethu Srivatsa Koduru Apr 10 at 13:36
1

I would say the earliest text that refers to Bhagavad Gita is the Brahma Sutras. Though the sutras do not explicitly refer to Bhagavad Gita, both Adi Shankara and Ramanuja acharya mention that the word smriti in the sutras refer to Bhagavad Gita. See 4.2.21, 2.3.45, 1.3.23, 1.3.38, 3.2.17 etc. There are many more. Please see the translation.

4
  • 1
    Ancient/medieval commentators arbitrarily assigned meanings to common words (akasha means brahman, prana means brahman etc) and then there is the the crown jewel of weird interpretation ("atat tvam asi"). This is not an answer @giriblr – S K Apr 10 at 12:21
  • I have quoted adi shankara and ramanuja. You may consider them as ancient and medieval commentators. I consider them as great acharyas. If they feel that the brahma sutra verse that refers to smriti refers to bhagavad gita, then they must be taken seriously. – GIRIBLR Apr 10 at 13:22
  • 1
    the three authority figures - Sankara,Ramanuja,Madhwa say mutually contradictory things. Worshiping authority leads nowhere - you need to think everything out for yourself @giriblr – S K Apr 10 at 13:28
  • For Brahma Sutras 2. 3. 45 and 4. 2. 21, all the commentators (Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhwa) quote the same text of the Gita, If you think they are all wrong, it is your wish. @SK – GIRIBLR Apr 10 at 13:52

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .