________________
XIV
Bhāgavata and the Bhagavad-gitā 551 and the Bodhāyana-Pitr-medha-sūtra, at the beginning of the third praśna, quotes another passage of the Gītā!. Incidentally it may also be mentioned that the style of the Gitā is very archaic; it is itself called an Upanişad, and there are many passages in it which are found in the Isa (īsa, 5, cf. the Bhagavad-gitā, XIII. 15 and VI. 29), Vundaka (Mund. II. I. 2, cf. the Gitā, XIII. 15), Kāțhaka (11. 15, 11. 18 and 19 and 11. 7, cf. the Gītā, viII. II; 11. 20 and 29) and other Upanişads. We are thus led to assign to the Gitā a very early date, and, since there is no definite evidence to show that it was post-Buddhistic, and since also the Gitā does not contain the slightest reference to anything Buddhistic, I venture to suggest that it is pre-Buddhistic, however unfashionable such a view may appear. An examination of the Gītā from the point of view of language also shows that it is archaic and largely un-Pāṇinean. Thus from the root yudh we have yudhya (vili. 7) for yudhyasva; yat, which is ātmane-pada in Pāṇinean Sanskrit, is used in parasmai-pada also, as in vi. 36, VII. 3, IX. 14 and XV. 11; ram is also used in parasmai-pada in x.9. The roots kārks, vraj, viś and ing are used in Pāṇinean Sanskrit in parasmai-pada, but in the Gitā they are all used in ātmane-pada as well—kānks in 1. 31, vraj in 11. 54, vis in xxiii. 55 and ing in vi. 19 and xiv. 23. Again, the verb ud-vij, which is generally used in ātmane-pada, is used in parasmai-pada in v. 20; nivasişyasi is used in xu. 8 for nivatsyasi, mā śucah for mā socih in xvi. 5; and the usage of prasavisyadhvam in III. 10 is quite ungrammatical. So yamaḥ samyamatām in X. 29 should be yamah samyacchatām, he sakheti in xi. 41 is an instance of wrong sandhi, priyāyārhasi in xi. 44 is used for priyāyāh arhasi, senānīnām in x. 24 is used for senānyāma. These linguistic irregularities, though they may not themselves be regarded as determining anything definitely, may yet be regarded 1 Bodhāyana-Gyhya-seşa-sútra:
tad aha bhagavan, patram puspam phalam toyam yo me bhakty a prayacchati
tad aham bhakty-upahrtam aśnāmi prayatātmanah. Also Bodhāyana-Pitr-medha-sūtra: yatasya vai manusyasya dhruvam maranam
iti vijānīyāt tasmāj jāte na prahrsyen mirte ca na visideta. Compare the Gitā, jātasya hi dhruvo mrtyuh, etc.
N.B. These references are all taken from Tilak's Bhagavad-gitā-rahasya pp. 574, etc.
2 For enumeration of more errors of this character see Mr V. K. Rajwade's article in the Bhandarkar commemoration volume, from which these have been collected.
