Gita 02.33 – Honorable position brings obligation of tangible contribution

Audio Link : https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/gita-02-33-honorable-position-brings-obligation-of-tangible-contribution/

atha cet tvam imaṁ dharmyaṁ
saṅgrāmaṁ na kariṣyasi
tataḥ sva-dharmaṁ kīrtiṁ ca
hitvā pāpam avāpsyasi (Bg 2.33)

Word-for-word:
atha — therefore; cet — if; tvam — you; imam — this; dharmyam — as a religious duty; saṅgrāmam — fighting; na — do not; kariṣyasi — perform; tataḥ — then; sva-dharmam — your religious duty; kīrtim — reputation; ca — also; hitvā — losing; pāpam — sinful reaction; avāpsyasi — will gain.

Translation:
If, however, you do not perform your religious duty of fighting, then you will certainly incur sins for neglecting your duties and thus lose your reputation as a fighter.

Explanation:
Kṛṣṇa now points out to Arjuna the flip side of his choice. In the previous verse, He stated that a kṣatriya should be happy to fight according to dharma. Now, He says:
atha cet tvam imaṁ dharmyaṁ saṅgrāmaṁ na kariṣyasi: If, however, you decide not to perform your religious duty of fighting,
tataḥ sva-dharmaṁ kīrtiṁ ca: you will lose the opportunity to act as an honorable kṣatriya and forfeit your fame as a fighter,
hitvā pāpam avāpsyasi: you will accumulate severe sinful reactions.

This harkens back to several verses. Firstly, it closely resembles Bhagavad-gītā 2.2—there, too, Kṛṣṇa warned about infamy:
kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ viṣame samupasthitam
anārya-juṣṭam asvargyam akīrti-karam arjuna
In that verse, the term ‘akīrti-karam’—you will lose fame—was used. Similarly, here, ‘kīrtiṁ hitvā’ conveys the same idea: “You will lose fame.”

Additionally, ‘pāpam avāpsyasi’ refers back to verse 1.36, where Arjuna had argued:
pāpam evāśrayed asmān hatvaitān ātatāyinaḥ
tasmān nārhā vayaṁ hantuṁ dhārtarāṣṭrān sa-bāndhavān
sva-janaṁ hi kathaṁ hatvā sukhinaḥ syāma mādhava

Essentially, Arjuna had previously argued that if he fought and killed the Dhārtarāṣṭrās, he would incur great sinful reactions. Now, Kṛṣṇa is turning that argument on its head, stating that if Arjuna ‘does not’ fight, he will incur sinful reactions.

This is because refusing to fight would be an unrighteous act. It would be adharmic, as a kṣatriya’s duty is to fight. By neglecting his kṣatriya dharma, Arjuna would not only fail to accumulate piety but would also invite sin. The nature of dharma is such that it is not merely the ‘performance’ of duty that brings merit; the ‘non-performance’ of one’s prescribed duty—especially when it is expected—constitutes impiety.

For example, there is a concept called ‘crime by negligence’. If a doctor knows that a patient is sick and can be cured by a specific medicine but fails to administer it, that too is considered a crime. The doctor might argue, “I didn’t give poison; I didn’t directly harm the patient,” but the harm was caused not by an action the doctor ‘did’, but by an action the doctor ‘failed to do’.

Thus, negligence can be just as culpable as a wrongful act. In the same way, neglecting one’s dharma—especially when it is expected—can lead to serious consequences.

Suppose a terrorist is on a rampage, and the police choose not to act. That, too, is considered a crime. Inaction in such situations can be just as blameworthy as the crime itself.

This principle applies to warfare as well, especially in modern conflicts. For instance, when the Second World War was nearing its end and the German army had been pushed back, the portrayal of the warring sides became clear-cut: Germany and the Axis powers were depicted as villains, while the Allied powers were seen as heroic. Certainly, the Axis powers—Germany, Italy, and Japan—committed many brutal acts, with Hitler being responsible for the Holocaust. However, in reality, even the Allies engaged in acts of brutality at times.

After many German cities fell, the Allied soldiers went on a rampage—looting property, violating women, and committing various brutal acts. The heads of state, army generals, and commanders turned a blind eye to these atrocities. This, too, was a ‘crime by negligence’—their inaction allowed such crimes to continue unchecked.

Similarly, during the Holocaust, many Germans claimed they did not participate in the atrocities. However, they also did nothing to stop them. Those in government positions, in particular, were often culpable because they failed to resist or take action against the crimes being committed.

Similarly, here Kṛṣṇa is telling Arjuna: Not doing your dharma will give you pāpa. If you neglect your duty, you will incur sinful reactions.

The entire system of dharma is designed so that everyone fulfills their responsibilities. By doing so, individuals progress on the path of spiritual evolution while also maintaining harmony and order in society. This is the expertise of varṇāśrama—it ensures that people advance toward both material well-being and spiritual success.

The problem arises when people do not follow their dharma. If Arjuna, as a kṣatriya, neglects his duty, he will incur sinful reactions.

Kṛṣṇa is reminding him that, as a warrior, there is no duty greater than fighting for a righteous cause—a point He has already emphasized earlier. This principle also has a converse: ‘to whom much is given, much is expected’.

Just as an athlete chosen to represent India at the Olympics may think, “I earned this opportunity through my practice and performance.” While that may be true, being entrusted with such an opportunity also comes with responsibility—one must perform.

If the athlete fails to do so—whether through carelessness, neglect, or fear—the opportunity will be lost. Moreover, backing out at that level is far more consequential than someone withdrawing from a local club match. The greater the responsibility, the greater the expectation.

A kṣatriya is accorded enormous honor in society and is regarded, in a sense, as a representative of God on earth. The king is even called Naradeva, meaning “God in human form.”

Although Arjuna is not a king himself, he is a member of the royal family and the dear brother of King Yudhiṣṭhira. For someone in such a position, honor is not meant for personal gratification. Rather, it is bestowed so that one can make a tangible contribution to society.

If one accepts the honorable position of a kṣatriya but fails to make a meaningful contribution by performing one’s duty—especially when it is difficult—then that negligence becomes culpable, leading to pāpa.

It is similar to a judge who holds a high position, receives a good salary, and is addressed as ‘Your Honor’. While the judge enjoys great respect, that respect comes with a significant responsibility—to hear cases thoroughly and deliver just decisions.

If a judge fails to hear crucial evidence, neglects to consider important details, or—worse—does not even show up in court, the issue is not just about what the judge ‘has done’, but what the judge ‘has failed to do’. This negligence makes the judge culpable.

Similarly, for Arjuna, abandoning his duty as a kṣatriya would not be a neutral act—it would carry serious consequences, leading to pāpa.

Here, Kṛṣṇa is telling Arjuna that this is a rare and valuable opportunity—one that most kṣatriyas would eagerly welcome. Their eagerness would be well-founded because this war opens the door to heaven.

However, those who fail to recognize or accept this opportunity will suffer—not in an arbitrary way, but through the consequences of neglecting their duty.

Thus, Arjuna’s greatest fear—that he will incur sinful reactions—will not come true if ‘he fights’. Rather, it will become a reality ‘if he refuses to fight’. This is the subtext of the verse: O Arjuna, you must fight.

In this way, Kṛṣṇa expertly turns Arjuna’s own argument against him—especially his concern about pāpa—completely reversing its direction.

Thank you.