He is also precise about the name, which matters because both forms circulate: "The full name of the work is Bhagavadgîtâ. In common parlance, we often abbreviate the name into Gita, and in Sanskrit literature the name occurs in both" forms. Searching this archive for either will find it; the volume itself is titled with the full form.
The Bhagavadgîtâ, with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ — SBE Vol. 8 (trans. K. T. Telang, 1882)
Open to all
page 2
The translator’s English as printed (K. T. Telang). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
The full name of the work is Bhagavadgita. In common parlance, we often abbreviate the name into Gita, and in Sanskrit literature the name occurs in both forms. In the works of Śaṅkarâkârya, quotations from the Gita are introduced, sometimes with the words ‘In the Gita,’ or ‘In the Bhagavadgita, and sometimes with words which may be rendered ‘In the Gitds,’ the plural form being used ?. In the colophons to the MSS. of the work, the form current, apparently throughout India, is, ‘ In the Upanishads sung (Gitas) by the Deity.’ Śaṅkarâkârya, indeed, sometimes calls it the Îśvara Gita 2, which, I believe, is the specific title of a different work altogether. The signification, however, of the two names is identical, namely, the song sung by the Deity, or, as Wilkins translates it, the Divine Lay.
This Divine Lay forms part of the Bhishma Parvan of the Mahabharata—one of the two well-known national epics of India. The Gita gives its name to a subdivision of the Bhishma Parvan, which is called the Bhagavadgita Parvan, and which includes, in addition to the eighteen chapters of which the Gita consists, twelve other chapters. Upon this the question has naturally arisen, Is the Gita a genuine portion of the Mahabharata, or is it a later addition? The question is one of considerable difficulty. But I cannot help saying, that the manner in which it has been generally dealt with is not altogether satisfactory to my mind. Before going any further into that question, however, it is desirable to state some of the facts on which the decision must be based. It appears, then, that the royal family of Hastinapura was divided into two branches; the one called the Kauravas, and the other the Pâṇḍavas. The former wished to keep the latter out of the share of the kingdom claimed by them; and so, after many attempts at an amicable arrangement had proved fruitless, it was determined to decide the differences between the two parties by the arbitrament of arms. Each party accordingly collected its adherents, and the hostile armies met on the ‘holy field of Kurukshetra,’ mentioned in the opening lines of our poem. At this juncture, Kṛishṇa Dvaipayana, alias Vyasa, a relative of both parties and endowed with more than human powers, presents himself before Dhvctarashéra, the father of the Kauravas, who is stated to be altogether blind. Vyasa asks Dhrvétardsh¢ra whether it is his wish to look with his own eyes on the course of the battle; and on Dhrttarash¢ra’s expressing his reluctance, Vyasa deputes one Safigaya to relate to Dhṛitarâshṭra¢ra all the events of the battle, giving to Sa%gaya, by means of his own superhuman powers, all necessary aids for performing the duty. Then the battle begins, and after a ten days’ struggle, the first great general of the Kauravas, namely Bhishma, falls?.* At this point Sañgaya comes up to Dhṛitarâshṭra, and announces to him the sad result, which is of course a great blow to his party. Dhvctarash¢ra then makes numerous enquiries of Sañgaya regarding the course of the conflict, all of which Sañgaya duly answers. And among his earliest answers is the account of the conversation between Kṛishṇa and Arguna at the commencement of the battle, which constitutes the Bhagavadgitéa. After relating to Dhritardsh¢ra that ‘wonderful and holy dialogue,’ and after giving an account of what occurred in the intervals of the conversation, Sañgaya proceeds to narrate the actual events of the battle.
1 Ex. gr. Sârîraka Bhâshya, vol. ii, p. 840. It is also often cited as a Smṛiti, ibid. vol. i, p. 152.
2 See inter alia Sârîraka Bhâshya, vol. i, p. 455, vol. ii, p. 687, and Colebrooke’s Essays, vol. i, p. 355 (Madras); Lassen’s edition of the Gîtâ, XXXV.
page 2
The full name of the work is Bhagavadgita. In common usage we often shorten it to Gita, and Sanskrit literature uses both forms. In the works of Śaṅkarâkârya, quotations from the Gita are introduced sometimes with the words "In the Gita" or "In the Bhagavadgita," and sometimes with a phrase that may be rendered "In the Gitas," the plural form being used 2. In the colophons to the manuscripts of the work, the form current apparently throughout India is "In the Upanishads sung (Gitas) by the Deity." Śaṅkarâkârya sometimes calls it the Îśvara Gita 2, which I believe is the specific title of an entirely different work. The meaning of the two names is nevertheless the same: the song sung by the Deity, or, as Wilkins translates it, the Divine Lay.
This Divine Lay forms part of the Bhishma Parvan of the Mahabharata—one of the two well-known national epics of India. The Gita gives its name to a subdivision of the Bhishma Parvan called the Bhagavadgita Parvan, which includes, in addition to the eighteen chapters of which the Gita consists, twelve other chapters. This has naturally raised the question: is the Gita a genuine portion of the Mahabharata, or a later addition? The question is a difficult one, and I cannot help saying that the way it has generally been handled is not altogether satisfactory to my mind. Before going any further into it, however, we should set out some of the facts on which any decision must rest. The royal family of Hastinapura, then, was divided into two branches: the Kauravas and the Pâṇḍavas. The former wished to exclude the latter from the share of the kingdom they claimed, and so, after many attempts at an amicable settlement had come to nothing, it was decided to resolve the dispute between the two parties by force of arms. Each side accordingly gathered its supporters, and the rival armies met on the 'holy field of Kurukshetra,' mentioned in the opening lines of our poem. At this moment Kṛishṇa Dvaipayana, also known as Vyasa—a relative of both parties and endowed with more than human powers—presents himself before Dhvctarashéra, the father of the Kauravas, who is said to be entirely blind. Vyasa asks Dhrvétardsh¢ra whether he wishes to watch the course of the battle with his own eyes; and when Dhrttarash¢ra expresses his reluctance, Vyasa deputes one Safigaya to relate all the events of the battle to Dhṛitarâshṭra¢ra, granting Sa%gaya, through his own superhuman powers, every faculty needed to perform that duty. Then the battle begins, and after ten days of fighting the first great general of the Kauravas, Bhishma, falls².* At this point Sañjaya goes to Dhṛitarâshṭra and announces the sad outcome, which is naturally a severe blow to his party. Dhvctarash¢ra then puts numerous questions to Sañjaya about the course of the conflict, all of which Sañjaya duly answers. Among his earliest answers is the account of the conversation between Kṛishṇa and Arjuna at the start of the battle, which constitutes the Bhagavadgitéa. Having related that 'wonderful and holy dialogue' to Dhritardsh¢ra, and having described what took place in the intervals of the conversation, Sañjaya goes on to narrate the actual events of the battle.
1 E.g. Sârîraka Bhâshya, vol. ii, p. 840. It is also frequently cited as a Smṛiti, ibid. vol. i, p. 152.
2 See, among others, Sârîraka Bhâshya, vol. i, p. 455, vol. ii, p. 687, and Colebrooke's Essays, vol. i, p. 355 (Madras); Lassen's edition of the Gîtâ, XXXV.