Why Is the Bhagavad Gita So Upsetting At First? (Gita Talk 3)

Is it any wonder that many readers stop right there and say, “I don’t need this. I’m going to find something more uplifting to read”?

This week we are discussing Chapters 1-2, thru p. 60.

Reading for next week is Chapters 3-4, thru p. 80.

Many people who love the Bhagavad Gita were frustrated or turned off when they first tried to read it.

One reason is often the translation. Some versions are very hard to read—stilted, unnatural English, and lots of Sanskrit terms that have you jumping down to the footnotes every other word.

Another problem can be the commentary, which is sometimes harder to understand than the text itself and can get very technical.

This, of course, is fine and appropriate for someone approaching the Gita from a scholarly perspective.  But it can be a serious obstacle for many readers, especially new readers.

The Mitchell version overcomes these obstacles. It reads easily and naturally, with no footnotes at all. And the commentary is thoroughly enlightening.

But it still has a third common problem which comes from the content itself. Within a few pages of starting the Gita, the reader is told:

–Women who are allowed to marry outside their caste are “corrupt”. (D)

–If the caste system is violated, society will collapse and those responsible will suffer in hell. (D)

–Men who refuse to fight will be disgraced forever as unmanly cowards. (D)

–Reincarnation will be our reward or punishment for our actions. (M)

–God thinks it’s a great idea to cajole the hero into fighting a bloody war against his relatives. (M)

–We should be indifferent when someone dies. (E)

–There is no real distinction between good and evil. (E)

–We should cut ourselves off from all sensual desires and pleasures. (E)

Is it any wonder that many readers stop right there and say, “I don’t need this. I’m going to find something more uplifting to read”? It certainly doesn’t live up to the promise of “Falling Head-Over-Heels-In-Love With The Universe”.

It takes a little effort and insight to be able to handle these and other jarring issues that come up in the text. Eventually, for each unacceptable or repugnant idea, you have three choices:

1) Decide to simply ignore it. (Mitchell is right up front about this in a way few other translations are. On page 209 he writes, “the Gita contains passages that are culture-bound and should be disregarded by readers who are serious about its deeper teachings”, and he goes on to list the specific stanzas this applies to.)

2) Turn it into a metaphor. For example, war can be seen as a metaphor for whatever big challenges we face in life.

3) Further explain the troublesome idea in a way that it eventually turns out to make sense.

Each of you will have a different way to work this out. There is no correct way.  For example, some people believe in literal reincarnation and some do not.

The Gita hits us hard with a lot of these problem passages right up front. The effort to overcome them will be richly rewarded. (I’ve coded my own personal decisions on the issues above with “D” for “Disregard”, “M” for “turn into a Metaphor”, and “E” for “makes sense when Explained”. But that’s just me.)

You’ll be encouraged to know that Arjuna, at the beginning of chapter 3, pretty much says to Krishna, “Are you crazy or something”. He has some of the the same problems we do!

Now, before this turns into a lecture instead of a discussion:

–Tell us what you think about the first two chapters.

–What did you love? What did you hate?

–Does this relate to your life yet? If so, how? What questions would you like to ask?

–What insights can you bring us from other versions you might have read?

We would like to hear from all of you, even if it’s just to let us know you’re out there!

Reading for next week is Chapters 3-4, thru p. 80.

Please help spread the word about Gita Talk by clicking
on the social media icons at the top and bottom of this page.


Previous Blogs In This Series (latest first):

It’s Showtime. Please Start Talking All At Once! (Gita Talk 2)

Falling Head-Over-Heels In Love with the Universe. (Gita Talk 1)

Ten (mostly funny) reasons to read the Bhagavad Gita.

Ongoing Resources:

Gita in a Nutshell: Big Ideas & Best Quotations

The Original Sixteen Session Gita Talk

Yoga Demystified (free eBook)


Join Gita Talk Facebook Group for weekly notices
and to meet fellow participants.

64 replies on “Why Is the Bhagavad Gita So Upsetting At First? (Gita Talk 3)”

The same could be said of the Christian or Jewish Scriptures, or the Koran, that much is culturally-bound, metaphorical or needs to be explained. Why then are so many so scornful of these while working so hard to appreciate the Gita? I am genuinely puzzled here. Thank you.

I think for some people, it is not easy to look past these things, especially if they have experienced it in some form in their own lives, or those of their loved ones-that is just my opinion. Many many people have many negative things to say about the other scriptures you mentioned-and many of those people are of those religions related to them. I think as human beings it is in our nature to never be genuinely happy off the bat with something we are presented with. Defensiveness is a coping mechanism, and sometimes makes things more personal and easier to understand maybe even relatable. I am not so sure it is a bad thing that people discuss these disputes not just from a learning perspective but because it makes the Gita reachable-like it is not this blemish free text we are all unworthy of.

H, Nicole. Speaking for myself only, I have spent many more years of my life with the Catholic and Jewish scriptures than I have with the Gita (so far), so I'm with you. There is great wisdom in all of them, as well as great difficulties. (see Exodus: The Rest of the Story—What Do You Think They Did After They Were Freed?)

You'll be pleased to know, if you don't already, that the Gita itself takes a universalist point of view–that all spiritualities in their purest forms lead the the same spiritual place. We will be discussing that when we get there, but if you want to look ahead, see Yoga is Universal Truth, Embracing All Gods and All Paths (GN #14)

Thanks for your comment.


"As unnecessary as a well is to a village on the banks of a river so unnecessary are all scriptures to someone who has seen the truth" pg 29 After spending many years reading many various sacred texts from different religions one eventually sees the simple truth of themselves and no longer needs to cling to the written word of others for you have become your truth.

Hi Nicole. I ditto Bob's point in the universality of the Gita. According to the great Indian philosopher and statesman Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the teaching of the Bhagavad Gita represents the whole of religion “in its universality, without limit of time or space, embracing within its synthesis the whole gamut of the human spirit.” The precise religion of yoga in the Gita is reflected in the Bhagavata religion, which, as Radhakrishnan suggests, is “the religion of monotheism (ekantika).” The Isvara of the Gita is fully cognate with the God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims.

I tend to dismiss that which clearly is culture-bound to a certain extent. I recently read a blog post by Christina Sell where she mentioned how one of the classic teachers in her teacher training teaching reminded the students that it is not their job to fight the teachings but get inside them. I though that was brilliant, and so I am trying to keep that in mind here.

What I enjoyed about these chapters was the explanation of the yoga of skillful action, and the kurmasana metaphor (tortoise) to explain essentially pratyahara (YS II.29)- sense withdrawal.

Nice parallel Emily. I, too, am fond of the teaching “Yoga is the very dexterity of work” (2:50). In his Yoga Sutras (4:7), Pantanjali similarly explains that this kind of action is unmixed and hence free from the duality inherent in the actions of people. Iyengar takes this Sutra to be the dexterous “skill in action” of the yogis referred to in the Gita (2:50). I have found some interesting parallels to this concept in the teachings of Jesus, particularly in the Gospel of Thomas.

I think the examples of controversy listed here are good ones. For me, I own 5 other copies beside the MItchell version of the Gita. I was so frustrated by the time I got my hands on it, I read maybe through the introduction-that promised just like the other versions all of these wonderful things, and was immediately discouraged so I walked away. That was probably the best thing I could have done. Personally I didn't have trouble with the controversy. In fact, to me, I could apply many of the controversies to our life right now. For example, yes you can choose to disregard "women who are allowed to marry outside their caste are corrupt"-but even now, thousands of years later while women are allowed to marry whomever they choose (in some places) just because they are "allowed" doesnt mean they arent persecuted for it (inter-racial, pretty woman, etc). "Men who choose not to fight will be disgraced forever as unmanly cowards" The men who ran from the draft during Vietnam were thrown in jail or forced to fight if caught, not to mention the social issues between young men if they back down from a fight–my point is that these contentions are things we are faced with outside of the Gita, and for me were not a turn off.
What did turn me off, was that when I first tried to read the Gita I was expecting to, within the first chapter, have some sort of greater knowledge about my life and how to live it. Using the various metaphors for what the Gita really is (i.e. the battlefield is life, the comparisons to the Gita and the human body) I was trying to understand it in a way that wasn't very personal. It was only after I walked away and consciously decided to make the Gita my own personal experience when picking it back up, that I enjoyed it and was able to understand what I thought to be the meaning of it. That new perception coupled with the last Gita talk series was really an amazing turning point in my life, and now it happens to be one of my favorite books, I keep it on my bedside table. Sometimes walking away and taking a break is a blessing, for whatever reason.

Perhaps I am viewing this too simplistically, but what I love about the first two chapters, which I have read several times, along with 2 readings of the introduction, is the encouragement to ACT. Do something. In the case of Arjuna it is fighting, but it can be viewed as an metaphor for positive action or change or even for belief itself. And that is how I feel it relates to my life.

I didn’t find these chapters upsetting. I would rather either ignore or look for the deeper meaning. This is not the first time I have been introduced to the idea that there is not much difference between good and evil, and I am hoping that will be further expanded upon.

"…if you do not participate in this battle against evil, you will incur sin."
– is this a validation for war? isn't every warrior or soldier fighting for what they believe is their evil? how can he say if one doesnt participate, it is a sin? this confused me greatly UNTIL bob mentioned that you can use it as a metaphor. once i thought of this, my eyes opened. if i relate it to battling my own demons, and furthermore tie it in to the ego/greed argument, it all changed for me. the quote about sense objects and attachment leading to utter waste has been a major recent struggle of mine. i can relate this to my yoga practice and meditation- i am constantly battling my ego on (and off) my mat and i DO feel if i dont push through, or warrior through, it would be a sin, or utter waste of my life to continue on. i know when i grow old, i want to look back and say i fought like a warrior against my "evil" ego…however, this is so much harder than i realize.

krishna goes on to talk about not engaging in action for the sake of reward. i fear this is all i know. i believe this is the way i, and my generation, has been raised. in a perfect world, i wish i didnt care about money, beauty or attention- but at least one of these evils tempts me daily- a maxed out credit card, a visit to the tanning salon, a comment on facebook- how do i let go of these attachments if theyre all i know? how do i fight through as a warrior?

I agree that it is so hard to act without attachment to outcome— it is the nature of being human, i think. My take here to is that the bravest thing we can do is act from this space of allowing & detachment. =)

Hi, Amanda. The big breakthrough for me was when I realized the Gita is not telling us not to strive for results, but not to be too attached to the results. These are two very different things.

Obviously Arjuna is going to go out and try to win that battle. Krishna is urging him to do so. And we should all go out and try to achieve whatever we want to achieve.

But just don't be so attached to winning or losing that it's all that matters. The action itself, and in fact, just BEING HERE, is far more important than the results.

I've been watching a lot of U.S. Open tennis this week. If Krishna were advising one of the players, he would not say, "Forget about trying to win this tournament, don't bother striving to achieve your dreams."

In contrast he would say, "Knock yourself out trying to win this tournament, just don't value yourself or your life based on the results."

You can see that the Bhagavad Gita is the ancient source of all modern sports psychology, and all modern notions of mental health.


BOB!! You took the word right out of my mouth–or fingers? It was when I decided that I need not worry that results from reading the Gita would manifest, I was finally able to let go of the chains that bound me to my misconception. "JUST BEING HERE' may sound like such a simple thing to do from the outside, but trying-or not trying to just be is not such a simple thing at all.

I think I am now remembering why I point down that first copy of the BG all those years ago and why my teacher training reading was so perfunctory. and I was thrilled to read the title of this because I had that "why am I reading this" reaction.

I love how it talks about not being attached to results I get that… a lot. but yeah otherwise I was still struggling and found myself just wanting to skip ahead and see if I could get to the inspiring stuff ;0

I have heard a lot about teacher training and reading the Gita. How big of a part would you say the reading and understanding of the Gita has played and continues to play into the role of being an instructor-Do you use it in class, or give examples to students? If so, how? Just wondering if approaching it from a different angle may help.

And I did skip ahead…a lot, then doubled back as well….

I was first introduced to the Gita through my yoga teacher who was an SRF monk. Now that I am a yoga teacher I use the Gita as one of many sources of alternative thoughts to the ones my students have walked into class with. It is important in class to be able to give your students new thoughts to replace the thinking that may not have been working out for them thus far.

I have yet to attend a Yoga class, I practice at home, my schedule as a stay at home mother of three thus far has not given me the time to do so. I always assumed that class was strictly asanas, but it sounds like I am mistaken. What do you do in your class beside asanas?

It’s good to dip into the Gita again in a different translation. I have several translations handy, and I compared them to Mitchell's version of key verses in chapter 2. There are some interesting differences, like (v. 17) he uses "presence" when others use That, the One, or Spirit. In v. 40, he uses "great sorrow" when most others use "great fear." Different nuances. There is one I think bears attention though: the word "indifference," as in v. 38 (a very important verse). It gives me pause because indifference suggests a kind of attitude that can easily turn into apathy or lack of interest and concern. Over the years I have seen many people mess up their lives by adopting a mood of non-concern thinking that’s what non-attachment is. I think they are two very different things. One is an attitude, the other is a deep state of being. As Bob said, Krishna would not advise a warrior to go to battle with a ho hum attitude about how things might turn out. Other translations use terms like "Be in peace in gain or loss…" "Having evenmindedness in gain or loss…" "Having attained equanimity in gain or loss…" These point to yogic preparation prior to performing action, i.e., developing an inner state of being, not just adopting an attitude during the action. I hope this doesn't sound like academic nitpicking. Some word choices can make a difference in the lessons one draws from these great teachings.

Thanks, Phil. I don't think this is nitpicking at all. In fact I think that the translation as a whole, especially with the very pointed inclusion of Gandhi's essay at the end, completely supports your interpretation–passion in action and purpose, but eventual equanimity in results.

Whether viewing this battle as real or metaphorical, I found Krishna's teaching a bit contradictory. I like the call to action because I believe on many levels (especially on my job) the only wrong decision is indecision. However, his preachings (for lack of a better word) about non-attachment, in my very humble opinion, contradict what he says when he is trying to push Arjuna into action:
"But if you refuse the call to a righteous war, and shrink from what duty and honor dictate, you will bring down ruin on your head. Decent men, for all time, will talk about your disgrace, and disgrace, for a man of honor, is a fate far worse than death."
Attachment to the outcome?? Just sayin…

I did like what Krishna said about religion and scripture: "Foolish men talk of religion in cheap, sentimental words, leaning in the scriptures: 'God speaks here, and here alone.'..As unnecessary as a well is to a village on the bank of a river, so unnecessary are all scriptures to someone who has seen the truth." (yes, the second part of my quote has already been discussed a few times) – this just spoke volumes to me in my occasional confusion on my spiritual path.

Anyway, I am probably only making sense to my self, but there is so much to be learned in the BG. I am finding a lot of comfort and wisdom already. I just have to chalk some of the disturbing parts up to cultural and temporal differences and look beyond them to the essence of the lesson.

Yes, the old fashioned cultural remarks and the call to war can be a bit of a turn off in the opening chapters but then I come to the following stanza:

On this path no effort is wasted,
no gain is ever reversed;
even a little of this practice
will shelter you from great sorrow

And I let out a sigh of relief, a smile comes to my face, and I remember the great awesomeness of the text I'm about to read.

From Facebook:

Aminda: I just watched a video about "the shadow effect" and it was interesting because Deepak Chopra quoted the gita many times and I don't know if it would have been as meaningful without this little group 🙂 It's crazy how complete the gita really is..

Bob Weisenberg: Hi, Aminda. Chopra has chosen to market himself more broadly, but almost everything he teaches comes directly from the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads, even his Tweets. Most recent Tweet: "Detachment means being passionate about your work but dispassionate about its rewards."

[PART ONE:] Surveying this second run-through of the Gita was breathtaking. Trying to figure out a good point of entry had me scratching my head for some time today. In the end, I decided to pick up on Bob's list of items that are upsetting to many readers. I think this is really important and I would like to hone in on the caste system and the overt comment on how the corruption of women leads to the “intermingling of castes” (1:40-41). In my view there is a lot more going on than meets the eye at first. The authors of the Gita are finding a subtle way of criticizing what the caste system had become in India at the time of composition. First, notice how these verses are attributed to the confused Arjuna, and not to Krishna. Here we need to pay attention to what the author(s) of the Gita are actually doing. Here it is Arjuna who is reflecting Indian culture of the first century BCE. This is not the same as the culture of the much more ancient Indus Valley Civilization and the more ancient yoga that thrived there and preceded the Vedas. The Gita’s author(s) will have Krishna address that in Chapter 4.

[PART TWO:] Second, notice how Arjuna’s discussion about the intermingling of casts proceeds from the previous two verses (1:39-40) where is Arjuna is addressing his concern about “evil due to decay of families” and his fear articulated in the previous two verses (1:36-37) that killing his own kinsmen will lead to “sin.” Thus the context of Arjuna’s comment on the intermingling of casts is clearly the intermingling of his own kinsmen with the opposing forces of the house of the Kauravas. Here we should pause to see what the author(s) of the Gita are up to: they have Arjuna using the preservation of the caste system as it existed at that time (first century BCE) as an argument against fighting his kinsmen. [I have much more about this on my website but this is enough for now.] Chapter Two ends with Arjuna’s sorrow over this situation as he casts away his bow and arrows (1:47). Krishna has not yet answered these concerns; that is the subject of Chapter Two.

[PART THREE:] It’s interesting the Bob tagged this item with a D for “disregard” for that is exactly what Krishna does in Chapter Two to Arjuna’s concern about intermingling. Krishna’s response clearly decouples Arjuna’s reference to the intermingling on castes from the decision about whether or not to fight. Krishna not only says nothing about intermingling castes but also instead makes crystal clear that the decision to fight or not to fight should be made upon its own merits. Krishan berates Arjuna’s dejection as “disgraceful” and “mean faint-heartnedness” (2:2-3). When Krishna, much later in Chapter Two, does mention the caste system, he is quick to point out that Arjuna is lucky for, being a Kshatriya, he is duty bound to fight (2:31-32). Krishna is not defending the currently existing caste system; rather, he rejects it as a basis for not fighting and further excoriates Arjuna for not realizing that, unlike the other casts, the kshatriyas are lucky when it comes to fighting (2:31-32). Krishna turns Arjuna’s logic—that to fight his own kinsman is a sin—upside down and argues that by not fighting Arjuna incurs sin (2:33 and 2:38).

[PART FOUR:] Much of what the author(s) are really driving at has nothing to do with literal war. The war in the Bhagavad Gita is a metaphorical war and I will make a separate post to discuss that point for there is much more that needs to be said about that. Furthermore, the author(s) of the Gita are careful NOT to have Krishna endorse Arjuna’s argument against the intermingling of castes. When they do get around to having Krishna discuss the caste system in Chapter Four, the taboo against intermingling is noticeably missing. The Gita’s author(s) instead have Krishna refer back to the actions of seekers in the ancient caste system and have Krishna instruct Arjuna to “perform action, as did the ancients in olden times.” (4:15)

[PART FIVE:] Later I will address in more detail about how the caste system degenerated from one in which there was social mobility between castes into one where social mobility had disappeared and how yoga changed with this development into a more utilitarian practice in India. On the yoga side, the short version goes like this. The authors of the Gita have Krishna refer to a more ancient form of yoga than existed during the first century BCE. Krishna claims that the true meaning of the yoga he introduced to mankind at the beginning of civilization has been lost:
2Thus handed down in regular succession, the royal sages knew it. This Yoga, by long lapse of time, declined in this world, O burner of foes [Arjuna]. 3I have this day told thee that same ancient Yoga, (for) thou [Arjuna] art My devotee, and My friend, and this secret is profound indeed. (4:2-3)
The author(s) of the Bhagavad Gita claims to know about this “secret” archaic form of yoga. The inference is clear: the yoga of Indian scriptures has deteriorated and is not as “profound” as this “ancient yoga.”

[PART SIX:] In fact, in the Bhagavad Gita (6:46), Krishna explicitly describes yogis as “superior” to those who practice asceticism and have obtained wisdom from Hindu religious scriptures, and he recommends, “Therefore, be thou a Yogi, O Arjuna!” At one point (2:26), Krishna tells Arjuna that for a man who possesses knowledge of the Self, “the Vedas are of so much use as a reservoir is when there is a flood everywhere,” and he later (11:47) explains that his “own yoga power” cannot be learned from the Vedas. [END]

[PART ONE:] Scholars have long been divided over whether the Gita should be read literally or metaphorically. For me personally, the first two chapters are strong evidence for a metaphorical interpretation. As the Bhagavad Gita opens, the opposing forces in the battle are arrayed against each other on the dharmakshetrta—the field of religious duty. This alone suggests that the author(s) of the Gita has spiritual, not literal, warfare in mind.

FIRST TWO CHAPTERS PART TWO:] When Arjuna sees sees many of his own friends, family, and even famous people among the forces of the Kauravas, he puts down his bow and loses his will to fight. For anyone not versed in the ancient and highly revered Kshatriyan code of war, this hesitation makes sense and, in fact, seems quite humane and even noble in the West. But the Kshatriyan code of war is very prominent in the legends and folklore of India, and it is so important to the Kshatriyas that a prospective candidate is not considered a trained Kshatriyan until he knows how to follow this code. And the problem of Arjuna and the Gita is this: one of the most fundamental articles of the Kshatriyancode of war holds that even if one’s kinsman fights against you, you must not hesitate to defeat him.

[FIRST TWO CHAPTERS PART THREE:] As we move into Chapter Two Krishna counsels and assuages the worries of the great Pandava prince about fighting his own kin in the looming climactic battle. In order to encourage and convince Arjuna that he must uphold the path of dharma—righteous duty—through warfare, Krishna curiously expounds upon the various paths of yoga. I say curiously because the first dictum of yoga is ahimsa—nonviolence. In other words, both Krishna and Arjuna are acting in very unusual ways. I take the view that this fact, by itself, recommends an allegorical interpretation. I find this to be the case all the more so because of the Gita’s many positive, even glowing, references to ahimsa (nonviolence).

[FIRST TWO CHAPTERS PART FOUR:] I think it is important to emphasize why there is even a debate about the Bhagavad Gita as allegory in the first place. It springs not from Krishna’s advice to Arjuna to do his duty as a warrior; rather, it springs from the fact that Krishna bases his advice upon the ancient practice of yoga, whose very first imperative is ahimsa—nonviolence. That fact makes no literal sense, and reconciling the first dictum of yoga with a literal interpretation of the Gita has been the cause of much, and most often laboriously detailed, discussion.

[FIRST TWO CHAPTERS PART FIVE:] As Mahatma Gandhi realized in 1888, the meaning of the war in the Bhagavad Gitais an “internal duel” that is still going on today:
Divine and demoniacal impulses were fighting in this body, and God was watching the fight from a distance. Please do not believe that this is the history of a battle which took place on a little field near Hastinapur. The war is still going on. This [the Gita’s first verse] is the verse we should keep in mind in order to understand the meaning of the phrase dharamakshetra, field of duty.[14]
Thus, the Battle of Kurukshetra on the battlefield of dharmakshetra seems to indicate that the author(s) of the Gita is talking about a religious or spiritual war instead of an actual historical battle. [END]

DOES THIS RELATE TO MY LIFE?_[PART ONE:] I see Arjuna’s struggle as my struggle. The admixture is not use one of castes. I see the house of the Kauruvas as the house of my ego and the house of the Pandavas as the house of my spirit. This admixture directly parallels Jesus’ parable of The Planted Weeds (Thomas 57) in which weeds have been mixed in the “good seed” of the protagonist. Like the war depicted in the Gita, Jesus also describes a war between two houses: the house of the demon/ego (Asurikas in the Gita) and the house of the spirit. _

[RELATES TO MY LIFE PART TWO:] I know that my struggle for spiritual growth is constantly undermined by my ego: “The turbulent senses, O son of Kunti (Arjuna), do violently snatch away even the mind of a wise man striving for perfection” (2:60); “Blessings on the person who knows at what point the robbers (flaws of the ego) are going to enter” (Thomas 103). And I know that the answer in the Gita (and Jesus) is the only one: to take refuge in God and ask for help: “Say decidedly what is good for me. I am thy disciple. Instruct me who have taken refuge in Thee” (2:7) In Isvara pranidana I am succored and restored: “My thoughts are now composed and I am restored to my nature” (11:51). [END]

Bhagavad Gita is the Great Science. Some People misunderstood Bhagavad Gita and blame regarding reference to Castes, but this is not true. Check the truth below:

As per Bhagavad Gita chapter 4 sloka 13: (4.13) – Caste is based on Occupation(work) and Qualities but not based on Birth. If oneself is in Vaisyas or Sudra caste then he can enhance his qualities and Occupation and then become Ksatriya or Brahmana. check below:
Check the Qualities and Occupation(work) to fit in a particular caste:
Bhagavad Gita 18.42: Peacefulness, self-control, austerity, purity, tolerance, honesty, wisdom, knowledge, and religiousness–these are the qualities by which the brahmanas work.
Bhagavad Gita 18.43: Heroism, power, determination, resourcefulness, courage in battle, generosity, and leadership are the qualities of work for the ksatriyas.
Bhagavad Gita 18.43: Farming, cow protection and business are the qualities of work for the vaisyas, and for the sudras there is labor and service to others.

If anyone wants to be Ksatriya or Brahmana then he can Giveup the qualities of Sudra and Vaisya and get the qualities of Ksatriya or Brahmana and become Ksatriya or Brahmana. This mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita itself (4.13 and chapter 18). But Every Human being and every Caste has to be given Respect.

Once Again: Caste is not based on Birth its based on Occupation and Qualities. One should not think oneself as permanent Sudra or Vaisya caste. Always try to reach the top Qualities and work and be on the top. Everyone is the Individual Soul and everyone is Spiritual.
(A person working as Politician or Leader cannot claim himself as Farmer if the politician is born in the Farmers(vaisya) Family or if his Father is Farmer, as Famer is Vaisya and Good Politician or Good Leader is Ksatriya)
Anyone can take the Help of Supreme Lord Krishna and get the top Qualities and good Occupation and then become Ksatriya or Brahmana. Bhagavad Gita is the Great Science to understand the Soul, Mind, intellect, Body, Universe, controller and Eternal Truth.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s