Early Giithaa sculptures
bmisra at FAS.HARVARD.EDU
Mon Dec 28 20:44:01 UTC 1998
Should it not be fair that you post the site that you cite from?
There are too many of these cursory observations.
Happy New Year..
On Mon, 28 Dec 1998, Ashish Chandra wrote:
> I found this piece at a website. It tries to date the Bhagavat Gita.
> It is possible to date the bhagavadgItA, and the mahAbhArata that it is
> part of, to a time before the advent of Buddhism. Considering that there is
> a specific reference to the brahma-sUtra in the 'gItA, in verse XIII-5 of
> the latter work, it is possible to date the brahma-sUtra also to a time
> before Buddhism. In fact, bodhAyana, a scholar dated to 400 B.C., refers to
> the bhagavadgItA and mahAbhArata. In his commentary upon the brahma-sUtra,
> rAmAnuja refers to a varttika (explanatory text) by bodhAyana in which the
> latter shows familiarity with both the mImAmsa-sUtra and the brahma-sUtra,
> and in fact considers them to be two parts of a complete exposition.
> Unfortunately, no copies of this varttika survive to the present day, and
> it is also not quoted from by any other scholar. However, it may be
> presumed that the text did exist in rAmAnuja's time, and combined with the
> known familiarity of bodhAyana with the bhagavadgIta, goes to show that the
> brahma-sUtra was definitely already accepted as a canonical text by his
> I don't know the nature of bodhAyana's familiarity with the BG as I have
> not read Ramanuja's Gita Bhashya. But those who have are welcome to comment
> on whether or not bodhAyana is seen to be thoroughly familiar with BG.
More information about the INDOLOGY