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.
Another point to note in this connexion is the reference to the Sâma-veda as the best of the Vedas (see p. 88). That is a fact which seems to be capable of yielding some chronological information. For the estimation in which that Veda has been held appears to have varied at different times. Thus, in the Aitareya-brahmavza!, the glory of the Sâman is declared to be higher than that of the Azz. In the Khândogya-upanishad ? the Sâman is said to be the essence of the Rik, which Sankara interprets by saying that the Sâman is more weighty. In the Prasna-upanishad à, too, the implication of the passage V, 5 (in which the Saman is stated as the guide to the Brahmaloka, while the Yagus is said to guide to the lunar world, and the X7£ to the human world) is to the same effect. And we may also mention as on the same side the Nṛisimha Tâpini-upanishad and the Vedic passage cited in the commentary of Sankara on the closing sentence of the first khaṇḍa of that Upanishad*. On the other side, we have the statement in Manu that the sound of the Sâma-veda is unholy ; and the consequent direction that where the sound of it is heard, the Azk and Yagus should not be recited*. We have also the passages from some of the Purâṇas noted by Dr. Muir in his excellent work, Original Sanskrit Texts, which point in the same direction*. And we have further the direction in the Apastamba Dharma-sûtra, that the Saman hymns should not be recited where the other Vedas are being recited’, as well as the grouping of the sound of the Saman with various classes of objectionable and unholy noises, such as those of dogs and asses. It is pretty evident that the view of Apastamba is based on the same theory as that of Manu. Now in looking at the two classes of authorities thus marshalled, it is plain that the Gita ranges itself with those which are unquestionably the more ancient.
! Haug's edition, p. 68.
* Bibl. Ind. ed., p. 12. * Bibl. Ind. ed., p. 221 seq.
* Bibl. Ind. ed., p. 11. 5 Chapter IV, stanzas 123, 124. ® Vol. iii (2nd ed. p-Irseq. Cf. Goldstiicker’s Remains, I, 4, 28, 266; II, 67.
7 Apastamba (Biihler’s ed. ) 1, 3,17, 18 (pp. 38, 39 in this series); see fcthes on this point Mr. Burnell’s Devatâdhyâya-brâhmaṇa, Introd., pp. viii, ix, and notes.
Another point worth noting here is the reference to the Sâma-veda as the best of the Vedas (see p. 88). This fact appears to offer some chronological information, since the esteem in which that Veda was held seems to have varied over time. In the Aitareya-brâhmaṇa, for instance, the glory of the Sâman is declared to surpass that of the Ṛik. In the Khândogya-upanishad the Sâman is said to be the essence of the Ṛik, which Sankara interprets as meaning that the Sâman is more weighty. The Prasna-upanishad, too, points in the same direction: the passage V, 5, which names the Sâman as the guide to the Brahmaloka while assigning the Yajus to the lunar world and the Ṛik to the human world, carries the same implication. We may also cite, on the same side, the Nṛisimha Tâpini-upanishad and the Vedic passage quoted in Sankara's commentary on the closing sentence of the first khaṇḍa of that Upanishad. On the other side stands the statement in Manu that the sound of the Sâma-veda is unholy, and the consequent direction that wherever it is heard the Ṛik and Yajus should not be recited. There are also the passages from some of the Purâṇas noted by Dr. Muir in his excellent work, Original Sanskrit Texts, which point in the same direction. Further, the Apastamba Dharma-sûtra directs that Saman hymns should not be recited where the other Vedas are being recited, and it groups the sound of the Saman with various kinds of objectionable and unholy noise, such as the sounds of dogs and asses. It is plain enough that Apastamba's view rests on the same theory as Manu's. When we set these two bodies of authority beside each other, it is clear that the Gita aligns itself with those that are unquestionably the more ancient.
! Haug's edition, p. 68.
* Bibl. Ind. ed., p. 12. * Bibl. Ind. ed., p. 221 seq.
* Bibl. Ind. ed., p. 11. 5 Chapter IV, stanzas 123, 124. ® Vol. iii (2nd ed. p. 1 seq. Cf. Goldstücker's Remains, I, 4, 28, 266; II, 67.
7 Apastamba (Bühler's ed.) 1, 3, 17, 18 (pp. 38, 39 in this series); see on this point Mr. Burnell's Devatâdhyâya-brâhmaṇa, Introd., pp. viii, ix, and notes.