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.
If the conclusions here indicated about the relative positions of the Gita and certain Vedic works are correct, we can fairly take the second century B.C. as a terminus before which the Gîtâ must have been composed. For the Upanishads are mentioned in the Mahabhashya of Patañgali, which we are probably safe in assigning to the middle of that century. The epoch of the older Upanishads, therefore, to which reference has been so frequently made here, may well be placed at some period prior to the beginning of the second century B.c. The Atharva-veda is likewise mentioned by Patañgali}, and as ‘ ninefold,’ too, be it remembered; so that if we are entitled to draw the conclusion which has been mentioned above from chapter IX, stanza 17, we come to the same period for the date of the Gita.
1 See also Sutta Nipâta, p. 115.
If the conclusions indicated here about the relative positions of the Gita and certain Vedic works are correct, we can fairly take the second century B.C. as a terminus before which the Gîtâ must have been composed. The Upanishads are mentioned in Patañjali's Mahabhashya, which we can probably safely assign to the middle of that century. The epoch of the older Upanishads, therefore, to which such frequent reference has been made here, may well be placed at some period before the beginning of the second century B.C. The Atharva-veda is likewise mentioned by Patañjali, and as 'ninefold' at that; so if we are entitled to draw from chapter IX, stanza 17, the conclusion mentioned above, we arrive at the same period for the date of the Gita.
1 See also Sutta Nipâta, p. 115.