Talk:Shatapatha Brahmana

India Unassessed

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Age of the ŚB

"The ŚB is notable as one of the oldest prose (non-metrical) Sanskrit texts altogether."

Who said this? Prose texts such as the Aitareya Brahmana and the Pancavimsa Brahmana are considered older by most. If anything, the ŚB is one of the youngest of the "true" Brahmanas (i.e. excluding the Gopatha). There is also a classical controversy going back to a varttika of Katyayana according to which the ŚB is not to be refered to with the -ina.h ending associated with other Brahmanas (as per Panini). IOW, the ŚB was not considered clearly as old as others in its class, and all the Brahmanas happen to be prose. This is discussed in Eggeling's introduction to his translation. I suggest removing this sentence, as unfounded. rudra 07:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keith, (in the introduction to his translation of the) Aitareya Aranyaka, p.38, writes: "by common consent, the Satapatha is one of the youngest of the great Brahmanas"; and footnotes: "Cf. Macdonell, Sanskrit Literature, pp. 203, 217. The Jaiminiya may be younger, cf. its use of aadi, Whitney, P.A.O.S, May 1883, p.xii." rudra 17:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this would explain my frequent surprise to find full-fledged Vedanta in an "early" Brahmana... assigning it to the 8th to 6th c. BC seems reasonable. --dab (𒁳) 07:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"""Linguistically, it belongs to the Brahmana period of Vedic Sanskrit, dated to the first half of the 1st millennium BCE (Iron Age India)."""""

What is the proof ? Do you mean to say SB is post Arthasastra and Buddha ? Wikipedia should not be used to project some wayward thoughts into making it a fact of history. Srikant Talegari's books have debunked most of the myths about dating Vedic texts. So this should follow the recent accepted facts.