-5

enter image description here

The 11th century Mahabharata manuscript preserved in Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute Pune does not seem to contain this Bhagavad Gita. There are also apparently many versions of MBH and the text may have been evolving.

The oldest evidence of Bhagavad Gita is only from 1492 (pic above) and kept in England.

So is BG only a work from 1492? - Almost 2000 years after Panini laid down the rules of Sanskrit grammar?

Why didn't the older MBH versions have this work?

7
  • 2
    Just because the oldest version of a text available now dates to a certain year doesn't means that the same text didn't exist prior to that date. Adi Shankara (died in 820) & Ramanuja (died in 1137) composed commentaries on the Gita, which is enough refutation of your views. Besides, absence of the Gita in some manuscripts of Mahabharata can br attributed to factors like loss of pages & facts like the Gita being in greater circulation as an independent text (like nowadays), hence it not being required by the scribe to be copied again.
    – অনু
    Commented Jul 30 at 18:37
  • @অনু Which century is the oldest manuscript of the commentaries by Ramanuja & Shankar from? Surely it can't be before 1492 - it must be a recently written book being fraudulently told as a 12th century work! Just like Arthashastra. Prove me wrong - show me a commentary that is actually carbon dated to anytime before 1492................ also since BG was not part of MBH and there were many versions it only proves it was a work in progress. There is no proof it was sold separately nor is there any reason to believe that since it did not exist
    – JaiHo
    Commented Jul 30 at 18:51
  • 1
    Vyasa taught different parts of the Mahabharata to his shishyas. After 50 years of research, a critical edition of the Mahabharata is already released by bori in 1966 which includes the Gita (refer to Bibek Debroy's list of parvas in his translation of the Mahabharata). If you have evidence, you can reach out to bori explaining how the Gita is interpolated. There's already sufficient evidence on this topic: hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/45032/34973 Periyazhwar, a 7th century poet makes a direct reference to Krishna as a teacher who taught on the battlefield and saved the Pandavas.
    – Harihara
    Commented Jul 31 at 0:55
  • 1
    Using some book to support an argument is not sufficient. On the other side, Acharyas from various schools and recent Indologists have spent a lifetime in research and accepted that the Bhishma Parva's Bhagavad Gita has remained almost the same with very minor change of words over the centuries and thus written commentaries on it for the welfare of mankind. Also, you do not speak anything about its subject matter and its alignment with the the Vedas and Upanishads. Hence, I'll conclude that this post is only a Vitaṇḍāvāda and not an inquiry arising from a desire to learn.
    – Harihara
    Commented Jul 31 at 1:36
  • 1
    Mahabharata (MBH) from Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) contains Bhagwad Gita (BG). See page 23 in sanskritdocuments.org/mirrors/mahabharata/mahabharata-bori.html -> Devanagari ६ भीष्मपर्वम्...How are you so sure that all manuscripts of BORI doesn't contain BG???
    – YDS
    Commented Jul 31 at 4:22

1 Answer 1

2

Without even getting into the issue of dating of Bhagwad Gita, the ridiculous assertions of the questioner (who seems is more interested in defaming Hinduism than asking questions) will he refuted.

There are dozens of commentaries on the Bhagwad Gita that are older than the 15th Century. Adi Shankara (8th Century) wrote a full commentary on Gita. Similarly Ramanujacharya (11th Century), Madhavacharya (13th Century) have written full commentaries on Gita. Abhinavagupta (10th Century) writes a full commentary on the Gita. Jnaneshwar (13th Century) authored the Jnaneshwari which is a commentary on the Bhagwad Gita. Gitarth Sangraha of Yamunacharya (10th Century) is another full commentary on the Gita. Nimbarka (12th Century) again wrote commentary on Gita. Kadambari by Banbhatta (7th Century) mentions both Gita and Mahabharata in a single Shloka.

Further, all the commentaries post Shankara (and including Shankara) are absolutely consistent with each other to every single Shloka on the Gita. This implies atleast by Shankara's Era (8th Century), there was a single version of Gita available widely from North to South India that was commented upon by all the philosophers. That is the version of the present Gita available with us dates back to atleast 8th Century CE.

PS. Manuscript dating is never used to identify the date of any literary work due to the loss of older manuscripts, purely due to the fact that preserving bark/paper is extremely difficult, especially in the hot and humid climatic conditions of India. Linguistic analysis of the Sanskrit used in Gita places it not later than 400 BCE. The mention of Gita and Mahabharata together in Kadambari of Banbhatta, which is a purely romantic novel work is enough to conclude that by the 7th Century, Gita as embedded in Mahabharata was an extremely popular text that even playwrights were well versed in.

19
  • 1
    @JaiHo - No legitimate Historian, not a single one has ever made such a claim. You have also proven absolutely nothing other than one manuscript which literally means nothing. Poor attempt at trolling. Commented Jul 31 at 1:42
  • 1
    @JaiHo - Name one legitimate historian who says that Gita is from the 15th century. Commented Jul 31 at 1:49
  • 1
    @JaiHo - I would rather trust actual historians than some random person on internet. Commented Jul 31 at 2:37
  • 1
    @JaiHo - Decades of research by numerous Historians proving the antiquity of Gita vs some guy on internet. Commented Jul 31 at 2:58
  • 3
    @JaiHo - Writings of Indian saints about Gita vs random troll in Internet 😂 Commented Jul 31 at 3:12

You must log in to answer this question.

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