Why readers and commentators miss the point of the Bhagavad-gita when they accuse Lord Krishna of wrongdoing.
By Chaitanya Charana Dasa
Some critics of the Bhagavad-gita accuse Krishna of being a warmonger unjustly inciting the pacifist Arjuna.
At first glance, the Bhagavad-gita might seem like a philosophical justification for war – Krishna speaking to Arjuna to convince him to fight. Because our modern psyche has been deeply scarred by violence rationalized using sacred texts, we may recoil from Krishna’s words. If we experience such a negative visceral reaction, we can help ourselves by understanding the circumstantial reasons for the war, which are described in the Mahabharata, the huge epic of which the Gita is a small but significant part.
The Mahabharata Context
The Pandavas were rightful heirs to the Kuru kingdom, or at least to half of it. Yet they were targeted repeatedly by their cousins, especially Duryodhana. He tried to assassinate them by poison and arson, impoverish them through a rigged gambling match, and humiliate them by publicly disrobing their wife. Though the Pandavas were unfairly exiled for thirteen years, they accepted that exile stoically. But even after that stipulated period, Duryodhana refused to give them their rightful half of the kingdom. When they sought to settle for just five villages, he not only derisively dismissed their peace proposal; he even tried to arrest their peace envoy, Krishna.
The Pandavas were left in no doubt about Duryodhana’s mentality. Let alone reforming, he showed no sign of even repenting – he was bent on continuing his devious ways to satisfy his hunger for power. If the Pandavas had allowed such a person to remain the king, they would have failed in their duty as kshatriyas, martial guardians of society. When they finally resolved to fight, it was out of duty, not out of greed or revenge.
Let’s go beyond understanding these circumstantial reasons for the war and take a closer look at the claim that Krishna spoke the Gita to goad a peace-loving Arjuna to fight. We’ll consider two specific components:
- Was Krishna a warmonger?
- Was Arjuna a pacifist?
Was Krishna a Warmonger?
If Krishna had been a warmonger, why would He have gone with a peace proposal to Duryodhana? And Krishna’s proposal wasn’t just for optics; in the Kuru assembly, He sought peace resourcefully.
First, Krishna presented His proposal to the king, Dhritarashtra, as etiquette required. When the king quickly admitted that he didn’t need any persuading (it was his son Duryodhana who was the obstacle), Krishna systematically explained to Duryodhana the rationale for peace. He outlined the many benefits for the Kurus of having an alliance with the powerful Pandavas, who after all belonged to the same dynasty. Then He outlined the futility, even the folly, of fighting the Pandavas. Just one of them, Arjuna, had defeated an army of the asuras and even an army of the gods – armies far more powerful than the Kaurava army.
Seeing Duryodhana still recalcitrant, Krishna made an incredibly accommodating offer: instead of half of the kingdom, just give the Pandavas five villages so that they could do their duty as kshatriyas, at least symbolically. Derisively dismissing Krishna’s proposal, Duryodhana retorted that he wouldn’t give them enough land to even put the tip of a needle in. On top of that, he tried to arrest Krishna, thus egregiously violating the most basic martial codes about how to treat peace messengers.
By his actions, Duryodhana unwittingly demonstrated for everyone to see that he was the real warmonger. The world wouldn’t have known peace as long as he was in power, driven by his greed for kingdom and his envy of the Pandavas. It was to free the world from such a vicious power-grabber that Krishna wanted Arjuna to do his duty of fighting. To illuminate Arjuna about his duty, Krishna spoke the Gita.
Put succinctly, Krishna spoke the Gita not because He was a warmonger, but because war was the only way to stop the real warmonger, Duryodhana.
Was Arjuna a Pacifist?
Was Arjuna a pacifist? Yes in the sense that he knew well the costs of war and therefore always sought first to resolve conflicts by peaceful means. No in the sense that he didn’t naively think that war should be avoided at all costs.
Arjuna’s disposition may be described best as a realist; he knew how the real world worked. Sometimes, power-hungry people or even downright evil people are bent on fighting for their nefarious purposes, and war is the only way to deal with them. In such situations, the cost of not fighting is far greater than the cost of fighting. The destruction, exploitation, and oppression they would unfurl if they gained power would be far worse than whatever sacrifice is required to resist and repel them. And one essential way to deal with such people is deterrence: to have the skills and resources to punish them forcefully if they dare to attack. As is often said in geopolitics, the best way to ensure peace is to always be ready for war.
To that end of preserving peace in society, Arjuna had been trained since his childhood in various martial skills. He belonged to a long, illustrious line of kshatriyas, and he was their worthy scion. By his talent and commitment, he had become a peerless archer. And during his life, he had unflinchingly fought whenever he had been convinced that the fight was for a justified and virtuous cause.
Then why had he flinched at Kurukshetra? Because on seeing his venerable elders ready to fight to death, he had become doubtful that the cost of fighting might be more than the cost of not fighting (2.5). Hence, his refusal to fight (2.9).
Arjuna was unwilling to fight not because he was a naive pacifist, but because his observations left him unsure whether fighting the Kurukshetra war was the right thing to do.
After having analyzed the nature of the two main speakers in the Gita, let’s now focus on the Gita’s content by considering four points:
- How the Gita goes far beyond the war-peace polarity
- What Krishna never mentions to Arjuna in the Gita
- What Arjuna’s last words tell us about the Gita
- What the Gita’s last verse reveals about its essential message
How the Gita Goes Far Beyond the War-Peace Polarity
Given that Krishna speaks the Gita on a battlefield, we would expect it to discuss quite a bit about the two binaries war and peace. Yet it’s remarkable how infrequently it refers to either.
References to war: After the first chapter description of the battlefield setting and Arjuna’s breakdown therein, once Krishna starts speaking philosophy in the second chapter (2.10) He makes only a few references to war throughout the Gita, such as 2.31–37, 3.30, 4.42, and 8.7. Among these, 3.30 and 4.42 are primarily about a metaphorical inner war to spiritualize one’s consciousness. Similarly, 8.7 is a directive to simultaneously cultivate inner devotional remembrance and practice outer dutiful diligence – fighting is mentioned because it happens to be Arjuna’s duty.
Apart from the eleventh chapter revelation of the universal form, which includes a description of the destruction that will unfold on the battlefield, the Gita from its ninth chapter on contains practically no reference to fighting. The only exception is an eighteenth-chapter reference to killing (18.17), whose focus is to illustrate the concept of doership, not call for war.
References to peace: There are only a few (such as 2.70, 2.71, 5.29, 12.12, 18.42, and 18.62), and they refer to inner peace. And the Gita has some references to nonviolence, or ahimsa: 10.5 (ahimsa samata tushtis), 13.8 (ahimsa kshantir arjavam), 16.2 (ahimsa satyam akrodhas), and 17.14 (brahmacharyam ahimsa cha shariram tapa ucyate).
The Gita’s focus: Overall, in the Gita Arjuna is not a proponent of peace or nonviolence, nor is Krishna a proponent of war or violence. Their discussion is essentially about transcendence and a transcendental vision to face life’s many circumstantial challenges. To explain the elements of this transcendental vision, Krishna speaks about many metaphysical subjects, including identity, duty, causality, harmony, mortality, spiritual reality, divinity, and equanimity (atma, dharma, karma, yoga, anta-kala, brahma, mama [Krishna’s first-person reference to divinity], and sama respectively). Weaving all these into a coherent and empowering worldview, Krishna equips Arjuna, and through him all Gita readers, to face life’s challenges with greater clarity and confidence.
What Krishna Never Mentions to Arjuna in the Gita
Approaching the subject from another perspective, if Krishna’s purpose had just been to get Arjuna to fight, he chose a laboriously long method for persuasion: doing a metaphysical overview of various paths for holistic living, such as karma-yoga, dhyana-yoga, jnana-yoga, and bhakti-yoga.
Instead, Krishna could have chosen a far easier way: just incite Arjuna by describing how the opposing Kauravas had ruthlessly and repeatedly persecuted his family. Even if Arjuna had a soft spot for Bhishma and Drona, Krishna could still have instigated Arjuna by highlighting that they too had remained passive while his wife Draupadi was dishonored right in front of their eyes.
Even an ordinary man would become aggressive if his wife were insulted publicly. What then to speak of a mighty kshatriya like Arjuna, who was more than capable of punishing anyone who dared disrespect his wife.
Yet it’s remarkable that Krishna doesn’t even mention Draupadi’s disrobing. What’s even more remarkable is that He doesn’t refer even once to any of the Kauravas’ atrocities. And what’s most remarkable is that far from inciting Arjuna, Krishna repeatedly tells him to avoid anger; he even declares that anger is a gate to hell (16.21).
Why does Krishna never mention the Kauravas’ atrocities in the Gita? Though He does mention these atrocities at other places in the Mahabharata, both before and after the Gita, why does He so conscientiously and conspicuously avoid mentioning them in the Gita itself? Because His purpose in speaking the Gita is not just to get Arjuna to fight; it is to instruct Arjuna, and through Arjuna all of humanity for all of posterity, in timeless principles of living. That’s why He primarily focuses on analyzing various paths for spiritual growth and then secondarily brings that analysis to bear on Arjuna’s martial predicament.
Only because Krishna stresses universal principles in the Gita has it had enduring appeal for millennia. And it has been cherished and relished even by saints and philosophers who never taught that the Gita teaches that fighting is the way to live.
What Arjuna’s Last Three Words Tell Us about the Gita
Arjuna’s last words in the Bhagavad-gita (18.73) are “I will do Your will” (karishye vacanam tava). What do they tell us about Krishna’s message?
The Gita begins with Arjuna in heart-wrenching distress. Significantly, he doesn’t restrict his question to his specific situation; he doesn’t ask, “Should I fight or not?” or even “What is my dharma?” Instead, he asks, “What is dharma?” (2.7) By phrasing his question in such a universal term, Arjuna paves the way for Krishna to share timeless wisdom. Reciprocating with Arjuna’s mood, Krishna doesn’t get into the ethics of the Kurukshetra battle. Instead, He addresses universal questions about the meaning and purpose of life, thereby providing all of us a compass for dealing with whatever dilemmas we may confront during our life journey.
Given that the Gita is spoken on a battlefield with both armies waiting for Arjuna to end his discussion with Krishna, it is significant that Arjuna doesn’t conclude, “I will fight.” Though he does fight after the Gita ends, his words highlight that he has understood the universality of the Gita’s message: it is not just a call to fight; it is a call to harmonize with the Divine. Arjuna’s last words reflect his enlightened self-understanding: he doesn’t see himself merely as a reluctant kshatriya who has resolved to do his protective duty; he sees himself as an eternal part of the Supreme Whole, Krishna (15.7), who has consciously committed to align himself with Krishna’s will. These twin truths – enlightened self-understanding and voluntary wholehearted harmonization with the Divine – constitute the Gita’s transcontextual message. Such are the Gita’s universal principles for living that have inspired millions for millennia and will continue to do so.
What the Gita’s Last Verse Reveals about Its Essential Message
In the concluding verse of the Bhagavad-gita, the narrator, Sanjaya, indirectly answers Dhritarashtra’s unspoken question in the Gita’s first verse. The blind king’s literal question, “What did the warriors at Kurukshetra do?” contains the actual concern “Who will win?” Sanjaya answers with a prophecy: “Wherever there is the supreme mystic – Krishna – and the archer Arjuna, there will be victory.”
While this statement foretells the specific victory of the Pandavas in the Kurukshetra war, it also has a universal message. Just as the Gita’s message has both specific relevance to its physical context and universal relevance to all contexts, so does its conclusion. Krishna began speaking His message when Arjuna had cast aside his bow in confusion and dejection (1.46). On hearing that message, Arjuna became ready to discharge his responsibility (18.73) and picked up his bow with conviction and determination.
Arjuna’s bow can be considered to represent our free will. Though we may never have to fight in a war against our relatives, our life’s complexities, perplexities, and adversities may still dishearten and paralyze us. Nonetheless, like Arjuna, if we hear Krishna’s message of love, we too can become energized to face life’s challenges resolutely. Krishna’s words will raise our vision from the negative movements of life events to the omnibenevolent intention of the Lord, who oversees and orchestrates those events. When we focus on striving to act in a mood of loving service to Him, we will find a way ahead through the darkest of distresses. Such is the illuminating and empowering result of the loving alignment of the human will with the divine will. Bringing about that alignment is the Gita’s essential purpose and our life’s most fulfilling achievement.
To conclude, the Gita’s essential message is neither about violence nor about silence in the face of violence; it is about transcendence – about facing life’s challenges empowered with a higher spiritual vision and purpose.
Chaitanya Charana Dasa serves full time at ISKCON Chowpatty, Mumbai. He is a BTG associate editor and the author of more than twenty-five books. He has two websites: gitadaily.com and thespiritualscientist.com (the source for BTG’s “Q&A”).
Source: https://btg.krishna.com/is-the-gita-a-book-of-violence/
Comments