The Distinctiveness of the Philosophical Method in the Gita

Editor’s note: The following article is an exploration of the philosophical method deployed in the Bhagavad Gita, a study in intellectual inquiry to address the dilemmas of the human condition. It is an interesting take on the Indian philosophical tradition of dialogue over didactics. As we will see, this method does not prescribe an existing philosophical framework to the seeker; rather challenges the intellect, prods to question and critique, and even disputes the established tradition. Furthermore, one can find parallels with the Socratic tradition and the distinctiveness thereof, even as the text remains an unparalleled philosophical treatise.

The Social Studies Initiative is a non-sectarian platform. This piece is solely an effort to understand the philosophical underpinnings as the discipline of Philosophy forms an integral part of the initiative.

Krishna, in his discourse to Arjuna, was not merely urging him to stay and fight the Mahabharata war; he was dispelling Arjuna's doubts and guiding his troubled mind. Yet, intriguingly, this profound dialogue was better comprehended by the broader spectrum of Indian philosophical traditions than by Arjuna himself. At the time, numerous philosophies in India sought to unravel the nature of Brahman in their own unique ways. But amidst this multiplicity, a pivotal question arises: how does one discern which philosophy to embrace? Which path is truly correct?

The Bhagavad Gita did not introduce an entirely new philosophy, yet it emerged as a distinctive and inimitable philosophical treatise. The reason lies in Krishna's approach. He does not impose any doctrine on Arjuna; instead, he responds to Arjuna's inquiries. Krishna refrains from prescribing a specific philosophy, as doing so would have reduced the Gita to a mere directive—a few lines at most. If Arjuna had asked what to do, and Krishna had responded with a single philosophical mandate, the essence of the Gita would have been lost. Krishna understood that Arjuna's anguish could not be resolved through adherence to any one pre-existing philosophy.

Moreover, Krishna does not dismiss the value of existing philosophical systems or suggest that Arjuna can conveniently choose any of them. Nor does he claim to offer an entirely new ideology capable of erasing all doubts. Why? Because Arjuna’s confusion was not born of ignorance. On the contrary, Arjuna possessed profound knowledge—so much so that he could pose incisive and nuanced questions. The Gita emerged as Krishna’s response to these questions, which could only arise from someone of considerable wisdom and insight. Ignorance can be dispelled by teaching any philosophy, but addressing the doubts of an enlightened mind requires a far deeper engagement.

Arjuna’s turmoil stemmed from the moral conflict of waging war against his own kin, a dilemma rooted in his sense of dharma and the fear of incurring sin. Krishna’s role, therefore, was to “awaken the awakened.” Unlike an ignorant person who might accept any simple answer, Arjuna’s intellect and moral clarity demanded a profound dialogue. This is why Krishna does not advocate for Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, Gyan Yoga, or any singular path as the sole solution. He recognizes that Arjuna’s grief arises from knowledge itself, not from its absence.

Throughout their exchange, Arjuna challenges Krishna at every turn. Although Arjuna acknowledges Krishna as divine, he does not accept Krishna's words without question. This iterative process of question and response critiques the philosophies of the time while simultaneously validating them through Krishna’s answers. If Krishna’s arguments had contained even the slightest flaw, intellectuals of that era—or even Arjuna himself—could have dismantled the entire discourse. Yet Krishna’s teachings withstand scrutiny, resonating across time and philosophical traditions.

Krishna’s teachings also challenge societal notions of asceticism and renunciation. He does not ask Arjuna to abandon the world, don saffron robes, and retreat to the forest as a sanyasi. Instead, he demonstrates that one can live within the material world, performing their duties with detachment, and still achieve spiritual enlightenment. This redefinition of yoga—where the external appearance of renunciation is irrelevant—profoundly impacted Indian thought. Krishna and Arjuna, despite their roles as a king-like figure and a warrior engaged in battle, embody the yogic ideal, proving that true knowledge transcends outward forms.

The Gita’s dialogic method, where Arjuna’s probing questions shape Krishna’s teachings, mirrors the critical inquiry of Greek philosophical traditions, such as the Socratic dialogues. However, there is a key distinction: while Socrates and his interlocutors often sought to establish new philosophical frameworks, Krishna’s approach synthesizes existing philosophies, guiding Arjuna to navigate them harmoniously. This synthesis gives rise to a unique and integrated philosophy, which continues to inspire and endure.

In essence, the Bhagavad Gita is not merely a philosophical discourse but a profound exploration of the human condition, tailored to transcend individual dilemmas and harmonize diverse intellectual traditions. It is both timeless and unsurpassed in its capacity to address the most complex challenges of the human spirit.