The Bhagavadgîtâ, with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ — SBE Vol. 8 (trans. K. T. Telang, 1882)
The translator’s English as printed (K. T. Telang). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
These facts show that, in the case of the Sanatsugatiya, the materials for a trustworthy historical account of the work are not of a very satisfactory character. The materials for ascertaining its date and position in Sanskrit literature are, indeed, so scanty, that poor as we have seen the materials for the Bhagavadgita to be, they must be called superlatively rich as compared with those we have now to deal with. As regards external evidence on the points now alluded to, the first and almost the last fact falling under that head, is the fact of the work being quoted from and commented upon by Sañkarâkârya. In his commentary on the Svetâsvatara-upanishad?, Sankara cites the passage about the flamingo at p. 189, introducing it with the words, ‘And in the Sanatsugata also.’ In the same* commentary some other passages from the Sanatsugatiya are also quoted, but without naming the work except as a Smṛiti, and mixing up together verses from different parts of the work.
This is really all the external evidence, that I am aware of, touching the date of the Sanatsugâtiya. There is, however, one other point, which it is desirable to notice, though not, perhaps, so much because it is of any very great value in itself, as because it may hereafter become useful, should further research into the Mahabharata and other works yield the requisite information. There are, then, eight stanzas in the thirty-sixth, thirty-seventh, thirty-ninth, and fortieth chapters of the Udyoga Parvan of the Mahabha-
1 See note I, p. 137. PMP, 283.
* P. 252. See, too, Sâriraka Bhashya, p. 828,
These facts show that, in the case of the Sanatsujâtîya, the materials for a trustworthy historical account of the work are not very satisfactory. The materials for establishing its date and position in Sanskrit literature are so scanty that, poor as we have seen the materials for the Bhagavadgita to be, those must be called superlatively rich compared with what we have to deal with here. As regards external evidence on these points, the first and almost the last fact falling under that head is that the work is quoted from and commented upon by Sañkarâkârya. In his commentary on the Svetâsvatara-upanishad², Sankara cites the passage about the flamingo at p. 189, introducing it with the words, 'And in the Sanatsujâta also.' In the same* commentary some other passages from the Sanatsujâtîya are also quoted, but without naming the work except as a Smṛiti, and mixing together verses from different parts of the work.
This is really all the external evidence I am aware of that bears on the date of the Sanatsujâtîya. There is, however, one other point worth noting—not so much for any great value it has in itself as because it may prove useful later, should further research into the Mahabharata and other works turn up the necessary information. There are, then, eight stanzas in the thirty-sixth, thirty-seventh, thirty-ninth, and fortieth chapters of the Udyoga Parvan of the Mahabha-
1 See note I, p. 137. PMP, 283.
* P. 252. See, too, Sâriraka Bhashya, p. 828.