The Gita was manufactured to counter Buddhist revolution against Brahminism 

Two other questions are sure to be asked in relation to my thesis. Those are the Dogmas for which the Bhagat Gita offers this philosophical defense? Why did it become necessary for the Bhagat Gita to defend these Dogmas? To begin with the first question, the dogmas which the Gita defends are the dogmas of counter-revolution as put forth in the Bible of counter- revolution, namely Jaimini’s Paramahamsa (p.361-362). Mr. Tilak is largely to be blamed for this trick of patriotic Indians. The result has been that these false meanings have misled people into believing that the Bhagat Gita is an independent self-contained book and has no relation to the literature that has preceded it. It was to save them for the attack of Buddhism that the Bhagat Gita came into being. Buddha preached non-violence. Buddha preached against Chaturanga (p.363). The Kshatriya may kill without sinning because the Vedas say that it is his duty to kill. To say that killing is no killing because what is killed is the body and not the soul is an unheard-of defense of murder. This is one of the doctrines which make some people say that the doctrines make one’s hair stand on their end. If Krishna were to appear as a lawyer acting for a client who is being tried for murder and pleaded the defense set out by him in the Bhagat Gita there is not the slightest doubt that he would be sent to the lunatic asylum. Similarly childish is the defense of the Bhagat Gita of the dogma of chaturanga. Krishna defends it on the basis of the Guna theory of the Sankhya. But Krishna does not seem to have realized what a fool he has made of himself. In the chaturanga there are four Varnas. But the gun’s according to the Samkhya’s are only three. Without the help of the Bhagat Gita the counter revolution would have died out. If the counter-revolution lives even today, it is entirely due to the plausibility of the philosophic defense which it received from the Bhagat Gita (p.364). The first injunction is contained in Chapter III verse 26. In this Krishna says: that a wise man should not by counter propaganda create a doubt in the mind of an ignorant person who is follower of Karma Kand which of course includes the observance of the rules of Chaturanga. In other words, you must not agitate or excite people to rise in rebellion against the theory of Karma kand and all that it includes. Krishna says that everyone does the duty prescribed for his Varna and no other and warns those who worship him and are his devotees that they will not obtain salvation. In short, a Shudra however great he may be as a devotee will not get salvation if he has transgressed the duty of the Shudra (p.365). What are the probabilities? Indeed, so far as I can see there is nothing against it. In examining this question, I propose first to advance direct evidence from the Gita itself showing that it has been composed after Jaimini’s Purva Mimamsa and after Buddhism (p.366). Weber had on the authority of Winternitz assigned 500 ADS to the composition of the Brahma Sutras (p.367). Gita is full of Buddhist ideas (p.369). The similarity between the two is not merely in ideas but also in language. Can anyone who knows anything of the Gospel of Buddha deny that the Bhagat Gita has not in these stanzas reproduced word for word the main doctrines of Buddhism?