History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.224

v7.c90.224

*Bhāgavatapurāṇa.* None of the early works such as the Mit., Aparārka, Kalpataru, the Smṛticandrikā draw upon this. The Dānasāgara knew it, but, as the Bhāgavata did not contain a disquisition on dānas, the author passed it over. Its date is very controversial, ranging from the 5th century A. D. to the 10th. Dr. Pusalkar (in 'Studies in Epics and Purāṇas' 1953, pp. 214–216) brings together most of the papers on this subject; Shri S. S. Sastri in ABORI vol 14 pp. 241–249 on 'the two Bhāgavatas' claims that the Devībhāgavatapurāṇa is earlier than the Bhāgavata, while H in JOR (Madras) vol. 21 (pp. 48–79) takes the opposite view, viz. that the Devībhāgavata is much younger than the Bhāgavata. In 'Date of the Bhāgavata-purāṇa' by B. N. Krishnamūrti Sharma in ABORI. vol 14 pp 182–218 it is argued that the Bhāgavata is as old as the 5th century A. D. and he cites in support certain passages from the Mokṣadharma of the Mahābhārata (Kumbhakonam edition), but the critical edition from Poona treats those passages as apocryphal. Prof. Das-Gupta in the 4th volume of his 'Indian Philosophy' deals with this Purāṇa, but his views are criticized in JBRS vol. 36 pp. 9–50. Vide H. in NIA vol. I pp. 522–528. The Padma part VI. (chapter 189–194) contains a *Māhātmya* of Bhāgavatapurāṇa in 518 verses. The author of the Purāna is said to be a native of the Tamil country by Mr. M. R. Majumdar in IHQ vol. 8. pp. 49-53. The present writer thinks that it is a late Purāna, since even in the Moksakānda (of Kalpataru) it is not cited, while about 300 verses are cited from the Visnupurāna in that kānda alone. Vide note 1604 below. No reliable and cogent evidence has been adduced to prove that the current Bhāgavata can be placed earlier than the 9th century A. D.