Violence in the Bhagavad Gita: Understanding the Kurukshetra War and Ahimsa
Why Krishna tells Arjuna to fight and how this relates to the principle of non-violence
The Context: Why Was There a War?
Understanding the Gita's position on violence requires knowing the backstory. The Kurukshetra war didn't arise from ambition or conquest - it was the last resort after years of injustice and failed peace efforts.
The Kauravas' Crimes
Dharma in the Bhagavad Gita represents one's sacred duty, moral law, and righteous path. Krishna explains that dharma includes personal duties (svadharma), universal ethics, and cosmic order. Following one's dharma, even imperfectly, is superior to perfectly performing another's duty.
тАФ Bhagavad Gita
Karma in the Bhagavad Gita means action performed with mindful intention. Lord Krishna teaches that karma encompasses all physical, mental, and verbal actions, and their inevitable consequences. True karma yoga involves performing duties without attachment to results, dedicating all actions to the Divine.
тАФ Bhagavad Gita
- Attempted to burn the Pandavas alive in a house of lac
- Cheated them of their kingdom through rigged dice game
- Publicly humiliated Draupadi, attempting to disrobe her
- Refused to return even five villages after 13 years of exile
- Rejected every peace proposal, including Krishna's personal embassy
Peace Efforts
The Pandavas tried every peaceful avenue. They accepted exile despite being cheated. They offered to accept just five villages to avoid war. Krishna himself went as peace ambassador. Only when Duryodhana declared "I will not give them land even equal to the point of a needle" did war become inevitable.
The Moral Situation
At Kurukshetra, Arjuna isn't facing a choice between war and peace. Peace has been refused. The choice is between fighting to restore dharma or withdrawing and allowing tyranny to triumph unchallenged. Passivity isn't neutrality - it's complicity in ongoing injustice.
Key Verses on Fighting and Duty
рд╕реНрд╡рдзрд░реНрдордордкрд┐ рдЪрд╛рд╡реЗрдХреНрд╖реНрдп рди рд╡рд┐рдХрдореНрдкрд┐рддреБрдорд░реНрд╣рд╕рд┐ред
рдзрд░реНрдореНрдпрд╛рджреНрдзрд┐ рдпреБрджреНрдзрд╛рдЪреНрдЫреНрд░реЗрдпреЛрд╜рдиреНрдпрддреНрдХреНрд╖рддреНрд░рд┐рдпрд╕реНрдп рди рд╡рд┐рджреНрдпрддреЗрее
"Considering your own dharma as well, you should not waver. For a Kshatriya, there is nothing more auspicious than a righteous war."
Krishna emphasizes that for Arjuna specifically - a warrior by nature and training - fighting to protect dharma IS his duty. This isn't a universal command for everyone to fight, but a role-specific responsibility.
"Happy are the Kshatriyas, O Partha, who find such a war that comes unsought, an open door to heaven."
"If, however, you do not fight this righteous war, then abandoning your own duty and fame, you shall incur sin."
The surprising teaching is that NOT fighting - in this context - would be the sin. Why? Because Arjuna has both the capacity and duty to protect those being oppressed. His withdrawal would abandon the vulnerable to their oppressors.
Ahimsa and Its Nuanced Application
How does the Gita reconcile telling Arjuna to fight with the principle of ahimsa (non-violence)? Several points help clarify:
1. Ahimsa as a General Principle
The Gita lists ahimsa among divine qualities (16.2) and qualities of knowledge (13.8). Non-violence is genuinely valued. But principles have contextual applications - medical surgery involves cutting, yet we don't call surgeons violent.
2. Violence vs. Necessary Force
There's a distinction between violence (harm from ego, desire, anger) and necessary force (protective action from duty). A police officer restraining a criminal isn't equivalent to a criminal attacking a victim, though both involve force.
3. Ahimsa Doesn't Mean Passivity
Allowing harm through inaction isn't ahimsa - it's cowardice or indifference. True non-violence includes protecting the vulnerable. Gandhi, deeply influenced by the Gita, distinguished between non-violence of the strong (choosing not to harm) and non-violence of the weak (being unable to resist).
4. Context Determines Application
The Gita doesn't provide absolute rules but principles requiring wise application. In most situations, ahimsa means avoiding harm. In extreme situations where aggressors refuse all peaceful resolution, protecting the innocent may require confronting the aggressors.
The Deeper Teaching: Beyond Physical Battle
Many commentators note that the Kurukshetra battle also represents an internal struggle. The battlefield is the human heart; the enemies are our own negative tendencies.
"You are the Supreme Lord. The bow slips from my hand, and my skin burns. I am unable to stand, and my mind is reeling."
Arjuna's symptoms are those of an internal crisis, not just battlefield fear. The "war" we must each fight is against:
- Desire (kama): The enemy that clouds judgment
- Anger (krodha): Born from frustrated desire
- Greed (lobha): Attachment to possessions and outcomes
- Delusion (moha): Mistaking the temporary for permanent
- Pride (mada): The ego's claim to be the doer
- Envy (matsarya): Comparison and competition
Against these internal enemies, the Gita absolutely recommends relentless combat. Verse 3.37 identifies desire as "the great enemy" to be conquered. This spiritual warfare is always appropriate.
Conditions for Righteous Use of Force
Drawing from the Gita and broader dharmic tradition, we can identify conditions that would justify protective force:
1. Just Cause
The purpose must be protecting the innocent, resisting aggression, or restoring legitimate rights - not conquest, revenge, or profit.
2. Last Resort
All peaceful alternatives must be genuinely exhausted. The Pandavas' years of peace efforts demonstrate this principle.
3. Right Intention
Action must come from duty (dharma), not desire for power or hatred of enemies. Nishkama karma - acting without attachment to fruits.
4. Proper Authority
Force should be exercised through legitimate channels, not individual vigilantism. Arjuna acts as commander of a legitimate army.
5. Proportionality
Force used should be proportionate to the threat - no excessive violence beyond what's necessary.
6. Discrimination
Distinction between combatants and non-combatants. The Mahabharata war had rules protecting the uninvolved.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the Gita justify any war?
No. The Gita justifies THIS war under THESE specific conditions. The principles - just cause, last resort, right intention - must be met. Wars of conquest, aggression, or revenge would not be justified. Each situation must be evaluated on its own merits using these criteria. The Gita is not a blank check for violence.
How could a loving God tell someone to kill?
Krishna's instruction is contextual. He also teaches love, compassion, and seeing the divine in all beings. In this specific situation, allowing tyranny to continue unchallenged would cause greater harm. The "killing" Krishna commands is defensive action by a warrior against aggressors who refused all peaceful resolution. It's similar to how we might support police action against violent criminals while still valuing human life.
What about Gandhi's non-violence? He was influenced by the Gita.
Gandhi interpreted the Gita's battle as primarily metaphorical - the inner struggle against one's lower nature. For external conflicts, he advocated non-violent resistance as the most effective method in his context (colonial India). However, Gandhi distinguished between non-violence of the strong (choosing not to harm) and cowardice. He said violent resistance was preferable to cowardly submission. The Gita's principles can support both non-violent resistance and, in extreme situations, protective force.
If the soul can't be killed, does violence not matter?
The Gita's teaching that the soul is eternal (2.19-20) provides philosophical context but doesn't make violence trivial. Physical harm still matters; suffering is real; karma from violence exists. The teaching helps Arjuna act without existential terror, not without appropriate gravity. A doctor who knows death isn't final still tries to save lives. The eternal perspective complements, not replaces, ethical concern.
How should I apply this to my life?
Most people aren't warriors facing battlefields. The application is: (1) Fight the inner battle against negative tendencies relentlessly; (2) Stand against injustice when you encounter it; (3) Exhaust peaceful options before considering force; (4) Act from duty and compassion, not ego and anger; (5) Accept that sometimes protecting what's right requires confrontation; (6) Don't use "spirituality" as an excuse for cowardice or passivity.
Isn't it hypocritical to teach love and also war?
The Gita teaches that love and protection can require difficult action. A parent protects their child from danger - this might involve physical intervention. Love for the oppressed can require confronting oppressors. The hypocrite is one who claims to value dharma but won't defend it when challenged. True ahimsa includes the courage to protect, not just the gentleness to not initiate harm.