Who Wrote the Gita?

Table of Contents

Introduction

The Bhagavad Gita, often called just “the Gita”, is one of the most quoted Hindu texts. It is part of the Indian epic Mahabharata and is presented as a 700-verse dialogue between the warrior Arjuna and Krishna, who is depicted as both a divine being and Arjuna’s charioteer.

The Gita is praised by many as a book of wisdom. But when we pause and ask the simple question, who wrote it?, we enter a sea of uncertainty, contradictions, and exaggerations. Unlike other works where authorship is clear, the Gita has no single writer. It was passed down orally, inserted into the Mahabharata much later, and reshaped by priests and philosophers for their own benefit.

And the funniest part? This “greatest philosophy of life” supposedly happened in the middle of the world’s greatest war, where thousands of soldiers stood ready to kill or be killed, and yet Krishna had the time to give Arjuna a long lecture about the soul, karma, yoga, and caste duty. Imagine an entire army waiting on a battlefield while two men have a spiritual TED talk! The very setting raises questions about whether this was history or pure invention.

The Problem of Authorship

Vyasa and the Mahabharata

Tradition says the Mahabharata was written by the sage Vyasa. But modern scholars agree that it was not composed by one person at one time. It grew over many centuries, with layers and additions added by different poets and priests.

The Gita, specifically, is believed to be a later addition. Linguistic analysis shows its Sanskrit style is different from the main body of the Mahabharata. This suggests that it was not part of the original story but inserted later to give a philosophical or religious justification to war and duty.

No Historical Proof

There is no evidence that Krishna ever gave this speech.
There are no records outside the Mahabharata mentioning the Gita.
Even within India, ancient Buddhist and Jain texts don’t talk about the Gita, showing that it was probably not widely known until later.

This makes the Gita more like a literary invention than a record of real history.

The Funny Battlefield Setting

The Gita’s setting is one of its most unbelievable features. The Mahabharata describes the Kurukshetra war as a massive, world-shaking event, millions of soldiers, elephants, horses, and chariots lined up. Trumpets are blown, warriors are ready, and tension fills the air.

And then, suddenly, Arjuna loses courage and tells Krishna: “I don’t want to fight my relatives.”

Instead of a quick response, Krishna launches into a 700-verse lecture. He explains the immortality of the soul, karma, yoga, devotion, and duty. Imagine a battlefield where two men stop everything to have a classroom session while armies wait patiently with weapons in hand.

Would any real army stand still during such a long speech? No. In reality, a warrior hesitating in the middle of a battle would either flee or be killed. This shows that the Gita is not history but staged drama, written later to deliver philosophy in a dramatic setting.

The idea of delivering metaphysics during the chaos of war is not only illogical, it’s almost comical.

Contradictions in the Gita

The Gita is filled with contradictions that make it hard to treat as divine truth.

1. Who Is Supreme?

At some points, Krishna claims he is the Supreme God. At other points, he speaks of worshipping higher powers or the eternal Brahman. If he is truly God, why the confusion about other deities?

2. Detachment vs. Devotion

Krishna tells Arjuna to be detached from worldly outcomes (karma yoga). But then he insists on devotion to Krishna himself (bhakti yoga). How can one be detached and yet attached at the same time?

3. Nonviolence vs. War

The Gita teaches that one should rise above violence and ego. Yet Krishna’s entire message is designed to push Arjuna into fighting a violent war. How can a book that promotes killing your own family members in battle be considered a moral guide?

The Role of Caste in the Gita

One of the Gita’s most troubling features is its endorsement of caste hierarchy.

Krishna on Duty

Krishna tells Arjuna that everyone must perform their svadharma (duty) according to their caste. For Arjuna, as a warrior, this means fighting, even if it means killing loved ones.

Problems with This Teaching

It justifies inequality: Brahmins (priests) are placed above others.
It suppresses freedom: People are told they must follow caste duty, not personal choice.
It glorifies war: Killing becomes “duty” if done by a warrior caste.

Instead of promoting equality, the Gita strengthens a rigid social order that kept Brahmins powerful and justified violence.

Borrowings and Influences

The Gita is not a unique text. It borrows heavily from earlier Indian philosophies:

Upanishads: The ideas of the eternal soul (atman) and ultimate reality (Brahman) come from the Upanishads.
Sankhya Philosophy: The distinction between matter (prakriti) and spirit (purusha) is taken from Sankhya.
Yoga: The methods of self-discipline are borrowed from existing yoga practices.

This shows that the Gita was not revealed as new truth but was a collection of existing ideas, stitched together in dialogue form.

Lack of Morality in the Gita

A divine scripture should give timeless morality. Yet the Gita falls short:

Encouraging Killing: Arjuna is told to kill without guilt because the soul cannot die. This logic can justify endless violence.
Blind Obedience: Krishna demands surrender and devotion to himself, not to truth or justice.
Justifying Caste: People are locked into birth-based duties. This system oppressed millions for centuries.
Excusing War: Instead of promoting peace, the Gita glorifies war as a sacred duty.

If morality is about justice, compassion, and equality, the Gita does not reflect it.

Why the Gita Is Not Reliable

Unknown Author: No one knows who wrote it. It was likely composed centuries after the supposed events.
Illogical Setting: No real battlefield could host a 700-verse philosophy lecture.
Contradictions: It shifts between nonviolence and violence, detachment and devotion.
Borrowed Ideas: It recycles earlier Indian philosophies rather than presenting new revelations.
Caste Justification: It entrenches inequality instead of promoting equality.
Lack of Evidence: There is no historical proof of Krishna, Arjuna, or the Gita’s battlefield conversation.

Conclusion

The Bhagavad Gita is often called the “song of God,” but its origins are human, not divine. It was inserted into the Mahabharata long after the war stories were composed, probably by Brahmin scholars who wanted to mix philosophy with religion to strengthen their control.

The funniest and most unbelievable part is its setting: the idea that during the “world’s greatest war,” one side would pause while Krishna delivers a long metaphysical speech to Arjuna. No real war works like that. It’s clear the Gita is staged literature, not history.

With contradictions, caste bias, and a lack of evidence, the Gita cannot be considered divine guidance. At best, it is a philosophical essay wrapped in myth. At worst, it is a tool used to justify war, inequality, and priestly control.

In the end, the question “Who wrote the Gita?” has no answer, because no one did in a single moment. It was invented, modified, and expanded by humans. And the battlefield setting, instead of making it divine, only makes it funny, illogical, and fake.