Gita 03.01 – The Gita’s complex multi-level message is intellectually challenging and fulfilling
arjuna uvāca
jyāyasī cet karmaṇas te
matā buddhir janārdana
tat kiṁ karmaṇi ghore māṁ
niyojayasi keśava
Word-for-word
arjunaḥ uvāca — Arjuna said; jyāyasī — better; cet — if; karmaṇaḥ — than fruitive action; te — by You; matā — is considered; buddhiḥ — intelligence; janārdana — O Kṛṣṇa; tat — therefore; kim — why; karmaṇi — in action; ghore — ghastly; mām — me; niyojayasi — You are engaging; keśava — O Kṛṣṇa.
Translation
Arjuna said: O Janārdana, O Keśava, why do You want to engage me in this ghastly warfare, if You think that intelligence is better than fruitive work?
Explanation
This is the first verse of the third chapter, where Arjuna is inquiring about the specific course of action he should follow.
Krishna has just finished answering Arjuna’s question about the characteristics of a self-realized person in verses 55 to 72. Arjuna’s underlying concern, however, was whether such a self-realized person engages in fighting or not. Interestingly, in those verses (55–72), Krishna never once uses the word “fight.” In fact, He repeatedly uses the word shanti—peace.
In verses 70 and 71, shanti appears twice, and it also appears earlier in verse 66. Krishna is clearly speaking of shanti in the sense of deep, inner spiritual peace—not political or external peace. Still, there is no direct call to fight in these verses.
On the one hand, Krishna speaks of attaining peace. This leaves Arjuna confused—what exactly does Krishna want him to do?
So Arjuna raises a question: “If You think that intelligence (buddhi) is better than action (karma), then why are You engaging me in this terrible activity?” Arjuna uses two names for Krishna in this verse and expresses his confusion: “O Krishna, if Your opinion favors the path of knowledge over action, why are You urging me toward such dreadful karma?”
In the previous section, Krishna repeatedly used the word buddhi—intelligence—and also spoke of buddhi-yoga. Typically, when buddhi is associated with jnana-marga, the path of knowledge, it implies a tendency toward renunciation of action. So Arjuna is questioning this apparent contradiction, “If You say that buddhi is better than karma, then why are You engaging me in ghora karma—terrible action?” Now, what exactly is this ghora karma?
Back in verse 2.49, Krishna said, “Keep avaram karma—inferior or inauspicious work—far away.” So, a question arises: Krishna previously said to give up inauspicious work and instead follow the path of buddhi. What does that mean? Actually, in that context, Krishna was advising to give up karma-kāṇḍa—ritualistic action performed for material gain—and instead take up karma-yoga. Avaram karma refers to karma-kāṇḍa, because it keeps one trapped in the cycle of birth and death. It may lead to heaven temporarily, but eventually, one returns to earthly existence and the cycle continues.
On the other hand, buddhi-yoga leads one toward liberation, as Krishna will later state in verse 2.51—that by practicing it, one becomes free from bondage and attains supreme liberation. Krishna is instructing Arjuna to give up karma-kāṇḍa and instead practice karma-yoga. However, Arjuna is currently seeing things in a very binary way—he thinks there are only two options: action, which for him means fighting the war, and inaction, which he associates with knowledge or renunciation.
In Arjuna’s view, if one is situated in buddhi (spiritual intelligence), then one should avoid all activity. And if he chooses karma, then for him this wil be ghora karma—terrible action—like fighting against one’s own relatives, which he believes will lead to entanglement and suffering.
But Krishna is actually presenting a more nuanced understanding—there are more than just these two choices. In fact, He is pointing out that there are multiple categories of action. Among them, Krishna has already referred to vikarma—forbidden or improper action—which is another distinct category. So, Arjuna’s binary thinking is incomplete; Krishna is offering a broader, deeper analysis of the paths available. Krishna has spoken about various types of action: karma-kāṇḍa and karma-yoga. Below karma-kāṇḍa is vikarma—forbidden action—and above karma-yoga is jñāna-yoga. Now, whether jñāna-yoga is strictly above karma-yoga or not can be discussed later. But broadly, we can say there are four categories of action:
1. Jñāna-yoga
2. Karma-yoga
3. Karma-kāṇḍa
4. Vikarma
Arjuna, however, has conflated these distinct categories. Conflated means to mix up things that are actually different. He has lumped karma-yoga, karma-kāṇḍa, and vikarma into a single category, and he refers to all of them as ghora karma—terrible action.
So in his mind, what he perceives as only two choices—action or inaction—actually includes multiple distinct paths. He mistakenly thinks that all forms of action are entangling, without recognizing the differences among them. Krishna is advising Arjuna to take up the second option—karma-yoga—and reject the third—karma-kāṇḍa.
However, Arjuna is mistakenly thinking his only options are between jñāna-yoga (option 1) and vikarma (option 4). He doesn’t recognize that options 2, 3, and 4 are different; instead, he lumps them all together under karma, and labels them as ghora karma—terrible action. So, Arjuna essentially says: “Krishna, you said that buddhi (which Arjuna interprets as jñāna-yoga) is better than karma (which he sees as vikarma, i.e., the violence of fighting and killing my relatives). Then why are you asking me to perform this ghora karma after recommending the path of buddhi?”
This is reflected in his question: tat kim karmaṇi ghore māṁ niyojayasi, meaning, “Then why are you engaging me in terrible action?” This situation highlights the complexity of the Gita’s message. Because it speaks on multiple levels, even someone as intelligent as Arjuna becomes confused by the nuances. What to speak of us? Even Arjuna, who lived in a deeply spiritual culture and had heard philosophical teachings many times before, still became confused. So, it’s not surprising if we also find ourselves confused by the message of the Gita—even after the first, second, or multiple readings. However, if we persevere—if we continue to study, seek clarity, and ask questions to the right guides (those who have studied the Gita deeply and realized its truths)—then gradually, understanding will dawn and we can go deeper into its meaning.
The complexity of the Gita’s dialogue is a testament to the seriousness of its subject matter. The Gita is not just issuing commandments like “Do this” or “Don’t do that.” While such directives may be present, the Gita is far more than that. Now, I mean no disrespect to the biblical commandments by using the phrase “throwing commandments.” My point is simply that the Bhagavad Gita presents a more reasoned and nuanced philosophical dialogue, with layered subtleties, compared to the style of dialogue often found in other world scriptures. For example, the Quran is a unidirectional revelation from Allah, delivered through Gabriel to Prophet Muhammad, and it does not follow a question-and-answer format. Similarly, the Bible is primarily a narrative—either of the actions of God’s people or, in the New Testament, the parables and teachings of Jesus.
In contrast, the Gita stands out as a deep, dynamic exchange between Arjuna and Krishna, involving questions, doubts, counterpoints, and clarifications, making it a unique and thoughtful spiritual discourse. Nowhere else do we find such a serious and deep philosophical discussion as in the Bhagavad Gita. This philosophical depth can greatly satisfy those of us who are intellectually inclined, allowing us to dive deeply into the Gita’s message and become spiritually fulfilled through that exploration.
Even for those who may not be intellectually inclined, studying the Gita can still be a meaningful service. We may approach it with devotion, and then move on to other aspects of spiritual life where we find greater personal inspiration or relish. The important point is that the Gita offers abundant opportunities to engage our intelligence in understanding Krishna’s profound, multilayered, and deeply fulfilling teachings.
Thank you.
Leave A Comment