In his most controversial chapter, Desai moves from historical analysis to contemporary critique. Having argued that the Gita was written by humans in specific historical contexts, he asks: what happens when a historically conditioned text is treated as timeless wisdom? Some aspects of the Gita, he argues, may be unsuitable for modern India.
This chapter provoked the strongest reactions to Desai’s book. Some critics found his critique of a revered scripture offensive; others appreciated his willingness to apply critical thinking to sacred texts. Desai himself acknowledges this is the most subjective part of his analysis.
Desai’s primary concern is the Gita’s teaching of svadharma, “one’s own duty” determined by birth. Krishna tells Arjuna that it is better to perform one’s own dharma imperfectly than another’s dharma perfectly. While this teaching has a philosophical dimension (be authentic to yourself), it also has a social dimension: stay in your caste role.
“Better is one’s own dharma, though imperfectly performed, than the dharma of another well performed. Better is death in one’s own dharma; the dharma of another is fraught with peril.” (3.35)
This teaching, Desai argues, has been used to justify caste hierarchy: Brahmins should do Brahmin work, Shudras should do Shudra work, and no one should aspire beyond their birth station. The promise of liberation through devotion doesn’t change one’s present caste duties.
Desai echoes B.R. Ambedkar’s earlier criticism: the Gita provides philosophical justification for the caste system. Its teaching of detached action allows upper castes to perform oppressive duties without guilt (they’re just following their dharma), while its promise of future liberation encourages lower castes to accept present suffering.
The Gita’s setting is a battlefield, and Krishna ultimately convinces Arjuna to fight and kill. Desai asks: what are the implications of a sacred text that sanctions violence?
Tilak read the Gita as justifying revolutionary violence; Gandhi read it as teaching non-violence. Both readings are possible because the text is ambiguous. But its literal setting endorses killing when dharma demands it. This has been used to justify violence throughout Indian history.
The Gita’s teaching of detachment, while philosophically sophisticated, can lead to indifference toward suffering:
These implications, Desai suggests, may have contributed to India’s historical tolerance of extreme poverty and caste oppression.
Defenders of the Gita argue:
Desai contrasts the Gita’s teachings with the values modern India claims to uphold:
Desai does not argue that the Gita should be rejected or forgotten. He argues that it should be read critically, as a historical document reflecting its times, not as a timeless guide for modern life. Its genuine insights (detachment from ego, importance of duty, paths to transcendence) can be appreciated while acknowledging its problematic elements.
A secular reading of the Gita, Desai suggests, would:
This chapter generated significant controversy. Critics argued that Desai was:
Supporters appreciated his willingness to apply critical analysis to revered texts, noting that similar critique is applied to religious texts in other traditions.