Chapter 4 · Verse 13 of 42
The Yoga of Knowledge and Renunciation of Action
ज्ञानकर्मसन्न्यासयोग
Meaning
Supreme God Krishna spoke
I created the four varnas (social-occupational classes) according to people's traits and professions. Even though I am their Creator, know Me to be beyond change and unattached (akartā) to this {four-fold social order}. (4:13)
Sanskrit
श्रीभगवान् उवाच
चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागशः ।
तस्य कर्तारमपि मां विद्ध्यकर्तारमव्ययम्॥
Word-by-word
चातुर्-वर्ण्यम् मया सृष्टम्, गुण-कर्म-विभागशः,
तस्य कर्तारम् अपि, माम् विद्धि अकर्तारम्, अ-व्ययम्।
Commentary
The verse is often cited by clerical and spiritual leaders to emphasize that the fourfold system, having been established by God, is inviolable and shouldn’t be altered. But a closer examination of the verse offers a different perspective. Firstly, the division was rooted in individuals’ attributes and professional roles. There is no hint anywhere in this verse or elsewhere in the Gitā that God created it based on lineage or ancestry.
We will gradually observe how the Lord skillfully challenges the established practices of Orthodox Hinduism in a sophisticated manner without resorting to rudeness. In the second line of the verse, He introduces two intriguing concepts. Firstly, despite being the Creator ("Kartā") of the varna system, He asserts Himself as its "Akarta." When discussing "karma", "akarma", and "vikarma," we understood "akarma" to denote actions performed without attachment to them or their outcomes. Thus, the Lord indicates that He is not "attached" to the varna system that He created. We also know that He is not attached to any of His creations. So, why does He emphasize this immediately after stating He is its "Kartā"? It suggests that He would not mind if the varna system disappeared. Furthermore, He drops further hints that the varna system is indeed changeable by describing Himself as "Avyaya," or changeless and timeless. Why does He make this assertion immediately, right in the second line of the verse? What was the occasion or necessity? It implies that while He, the Creator, remains constant, His creation - the varna system - is subject to change. There is no alternative interpretation of the wording in the second line. In any case, it is universally acknowledged that change is inherent in God's creation. Change is the sole constant in Creation unless God explicitly wills otherwise. Therefore, if the varna system has evolved and is gradually fading away, it indicates that God has not ordained its permanence.
Throughout time, societal structures have undergone evolution, complicating the once straightforward divisions. In the dynamic modern society, individuals frequently transition between roles and professions, making rigid adherence to an archaic classification system impractical. If God had intended the system to be universal and unchangeable, it could not have been altered by humans, as said. However, we observe significant changes in the system, particularly since India's independence, and anticipate its gradual disappearance in the coming decades and centuries. This also prompts reflection on why God designed the system exclusively for India and not for other parts of the world.
The Bhagavad-Gitā’s portrayal of the fourfold system differs significantly from its real-world implementation. The Gitā consistently promotes universal equality, compassion, and fraternity among all people (12:13). In stark contrast, the historical application of the fourfold system in Sanātana Dharma has often marginalized the Shudras, placing them at a disadvantage within the hierarchy. The Gitā, in essence, opposes any form of discrimination or prejudice against any human group. There are not one or two but dozens of verses on “samata” (equality) and “samachittattva” (even-mindedness) in the Sacred Book.^1
Footnotes