This work attempts to show that the message of the Bhagavad-gita – the sacred scripture of Hinduism – is inherently satanic, and that the Bhagavad-gita is "Hindu terrorism". The criticism largely progresses from the simplest, or the most basic one, to the profoundest, or philosophically the most advanced one. And, at the end, it summarises the satanic Gita – i.e. the satanic aspect of the Gita – in four verses. This work is meant to be nothing but an honest, academic attempt at bringing out a criticism of the Bhagavad-gita. And although, through this work, I have been highly critical of the Bhagavad-gita, I have pleasure admitting honestly that the Gita does appear to have a profound metaphysic and a spiritually motivating philosophy of life. In fact, it prominently shares similarities with my theories & philosophy, especially the UQV (Ultimate Questioner’s Vanity) theory.

 
The main satanic aspects of the Gita are described below:
 
The message of the Bhagavad-gita is inherently satanic. To begin with the simplest of criticism, in chapter 9: verse 32  of the Gita, Krishna says that even women, vaisyas [merchants], sudras [low-level workers], or any people of sinful birth go to the supreme abode, if they take his shelter. In 9:33, he says that then what to say about righteous brahmanas , devotees, and saintly kings! This means that women – alongside vaisyas, sudras, and people of sinful birth – are considered to be of lower birth/type than righteous brahmanas, devotes, and saintly kings, and that Krishna does not consider women to be in the category of “righteous brahmanas”. So women are either unrighteous brahmanas or not brahmanas at all. Now, 4:13 and 18:41 altogether mention that Krishna has created brahmanas, ksatriyas [warriors], vaisyas, and sudras as four divisions (of mankind). 18:47 & 18:48 collectively make it clear that the Gita asks everyone from a division to do work only assigned for their division. In 4:7 & 4:8, Krishna tells Arjuna that whenever religion declines and irreligion predominates, he – at that time – manifests himself. For deliverance of the pious and annihilation of miscreants, and for reestablishment of religion, he, i.e. Krishna himself, appears millennium after millennium. So, women who do the works of brahmanas – e.g. the work of a professional teacher – would, in any way,
 

Note: As mentioned previously, women, according to the Gita, are either unrighteous brahmanas or not brahmanas at all. If they are unrighteous brahmanas, they are unrighteous anyway, and if they are not brahmanas at all, the women who do the works of brahmanas – e.g. the work of a professional teacher – would be unrighteous.

be considered as unrighteous, irreligious, and miscreants by the Gita, and are, therefore, threatened to death. Even the Gita would think it religious to annihilate the irreligious – all of those whose beliefs and practices do not conform to the message of the Gita, which would include atheists, agnostics, free thinkers, other religious people like Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc.
 

Note: To conclude, to this point, “The Bhagavad-gita is Hindu terrorism, and Krishna is a terrorist.” (The Bhagavad-gita is Hindu terrorism. However, that does not necessarily mean that those who advocate or attempt to spread the Gita are terrorists, since they may not be aware of the terrorism entailed in it. Krishna is a terrorist though, for he is “supposed to be” (omniscient) God, and as such, through the Gita – his eternal message – he has directly (or indirectly) threatened the modern way of life, considering most of the modern people as miscreants, the ones to be annihilated.) 

Moreover, the message of the Gita is violent. In 2:31 to 2:38, 4:42, and 11:33 & 11:34, Arjuna is advised to fight the irreligious people with violent means. If Krishna himself is God
 

Note: In 10:3, Krishna claims himself to be the “Ultimate Lord”.

and almighty,
 

Note: Or, at least, highly powerful, as he claims himself to be at many places in the Gita, including 10:8, 10:39, and 9:10.

 
he must be able to induce the irreligious people to righteous thoughts and deeds with pacific means. Instead of doing so, he wishes bloodshed.
 

Note: In 11:32, Krishna mentions that he has come to this world to destroy all people (i.e. millions of people in the battlefield), except few. Only twelve warriors, including Krishna & Arjuna, survived the war.

 
In 4:8, Krishna claims that for annihilation of miscreants, he, himself, appears millennium after millennium. Krishna mentions “miscreants”, not “misdeeds”. Further, in 11:33 & 11:34, Krishna says that he has prearranged the deaths of Arjuna’s irreligious enemies. If deaths can be prearranged, almost anything – if not absolutely anything – can be prearranged,
 

Note: Considering the seeming role Krishna is supposed to have played in the (Kurukshetra) war – the role of Arjuna’s charioteer – and the claim that millions of soldiers died in the war, it is not difficult to see how much force and power Krishna has over nature and human affairs. And with such power in hand – the sort of which he anyway claims to have at many places in the Gita, and which is close to omnipotence, if not exactly omnipotence – it can be said that he can prearrange practically anything.

 
and if that is the case, why Krishna doesn’t prearrange all good in the first place? Doesn’t Krishna – the governing principle of the material manifestation, as he claims himself to be in 7:30 – do this for his own despicable enjoyment?
 

Note: In 9:30, Krishna tells Arjuna that even the worst miscreant is to be considered saintly if he is engaged in devotional service to him (i.e. Krishna). If Krishna were truly noble, he would say, “I like & admire those who are virtuous, even if they disregard Me.”, won’t he? Krishna seems to be far more concerned with “people loving him” than “ethics” or “morality”. In 10:3, Krishna says that anyone who knows him as the uncreated and as the ultimate Lord of all worlds is freed from every sin. Krishna seems to be an “egomaniac”, doesn’t he?

 
If he were really good and noble, he would only create numerous pleasant (mental) states of self-realisation – the thing that he hails throughout the Gita, including 3:17 & 4:35 – and not any of suffering.
 

Note: In 9:23, Krishna says that he meets the requirements of and protects those who always worship him with absolute devotion. In 16:19, he says that he continuously puts the envious and the mischievous – the lowest of all men – into the sea of material existence, into a variety of demonic lives. In 16:20, he says that such people, by having repeated births into the demonic sort of life, can never achieve him. They end up into the most disgusting form of existence. In 10:10, Krishna says that the ones who are always devoted in serving him lovingly, he gives them real intelligence through which they can come to him. In 10:11, he says that as a matter of special mercy, he – residing in their hearts – dispels the darkness of ignorance with the lamp of knowledge. Why is Krishna – residing in everyone’s heart, as he claims in 15:15 – not merciful “enough” to everyone, to dispel their darkness of ignorance with real intelligence, so that they can come to him?
In 10:4 & 10:5, Krishna says that all different qualities of living entities – such as happiness as well as unhappiness, fear, delusion, failure, etc. – certainly come about from him.

 
Isn’t, therefore, Lord Krishna – being responsible for unfathomable violence and suffering – satanic?
 

Note: The core or the ultimate message of the Gita, like majority of other religious systems, appears to be this: Come to God, condemning the ephemeral, material world. The essence of that message is Karma-yoga, for everything is Karma, even Dhyana or Bhakti. [If one predominantly has qualities of a ksatriya, he should do the work prescribed for ksatriyas. But if one has, or has developed, qualities predominantly of a Sanyasi, he should be a Sanyasi – that should be his Karma: whatever he may then do as a Sanyasi. See 6:3, in which Krishna says that for a beginner-yogi, work is the means; and for an advanced-yogi, Sanyas – giving up all material activities – is the means.] In other words, all Yogas are actually Karma-yoga or the forms of Karma-yoga. 
Now, there are two ways of looking at Karma-yoga:  
1. A way of practicing detachment from the material world and coming to Krishna, with love. Thus, Karma-yoga is a loving, devotional service to Krishna.  
2. Krishna wants the material world to function properly, as he says in 3:23 & 3:24, for example. So, like Him, man too should perform his prescribed duties, as a loving, devotional service to Krishna.  
Whichever way we look at Karma-yoga, the essence of Karma-yoga, or in other words, the practical approach to Karma, remains the same – one’s Karma is supposed to be one’s loving, devotional service to Krishna. 
Now, a question is raised: Why does Krishna want the existence and functioning of the material world when it is – and as he himself says in 8:15 & 9:33 – full of misery and suffering? The answer to this would be either because Krishna enjoys watching earthly beings suffer or he has an immense vanity – conceit and desire for admiration of his personal attainments or attractions – to be quenched gradually. Anyway his enjoyment would be despicable, considering the cost paid by earthly living beings through there enormous suffering. The same “sort” of objection could be raised though against God in other religions, e.g. the Christian God, but the point here is that it can be raised against Krishna, and it diminishes the supposed moral greatness of the Gita. (In other words, Krishna attempts to sound like a good guy, but he wants the inherently miserable material world to function for no good reason.) 
If Krishna had let Arjuna and the Pandavas retire from the war and the Kauravas have the kingdom, may be there would have been a continual predominance of irreligion. However, millions of warriors died in the war, devastating a huge number of families and effectively letting irreligion predominate anyway (as also pointed out by Arjuna, from 1:37 to 1:43). Now, supposedly the Gita was sung and the war was fought to give mankind the message of the Gita (the science of yoga: see 4:1, 4:2, 4:3, 4:7, 4:8, & 11:32), but Krishna – through his immense powers – could surely have given his message to further generations in some other, far less violent, ways. And anyway, the message has clearly ever failed to produce the expected or desired impact on mankind. The war was thus not worth to be fought for delivering the message of the Gita.
Either “Krishna as God” is an absurd idea – and thus the Gita is the word of man, and not of God – or God is absurd, inconsistent, and largely & fundamentally “satanic”. I believe, the former is true, and God – in my viewpoint, as described in my UQV (Ultimate Questioner’s Vanity) theory (see http://works.bepress.com/kedar_joshi/3/) – is the ultimate (philosophical) questioner, who has created only one philosopher man, in the best – or, perhaps, a best – of all possible worlds with reference to the/a true philosopher. 
[Krishna wants man to be a karma-yogi. But is Krishna himself a karma-yogi? If man’s karma-yoga is his unconditional, absolute allegiance to Krishna, Krishna’s karma-yoga would be his unconditional, absolute allegiance to morality. Krishna clearly lacks such allegiance and therefore he is not a karma-yogi.]

 
Lastly, the Gita is full of contradictions,
 

Note: For example, in 3:22, Krishna says that though he wants nothing, he does his prescribed duties. In 3:24, Krishna – for giving reason he does his prescribed duties – says that if he does not do his prescribed duties all worlds will be ruined and he will be the cause of producing unwanted population, which, as a result, will wreck all living beings. So, Krishna does not “want” to wreck all living beings. Therefore, Krishna “wants” something, which is in contradiction with 3:22.

inconsistencies,
 

Note: In 9:29, Krishna says that he hates nobody and nobody is dear to him. In 12:17, he says that one who never rejoices, never hates, never grieves, never desires, and who gives up auspicious as well as inauspicious things – such devotee is dear to him. And similarly, he describes the types of persons dear to him, from 12:13 to 12:20.

absurdities,
 

Note: In 4:7, Krishna says that whenever religion declines and irreligion predominates, he – at that time – manifests himself. In 4:8, he says that for deliverance of the pious and annihilation of miscreants, and for reestablishment of religion, he, himself, appears millennium after millennium. Now, quite obviously there has been predominance of irreligion – irreligion according to the message of the Gita – for a very, very long time, and Krishna seems to have failed in delivering his promise

and flawed philosophies
 

Note: In 16:6, Krishna says that there are two types of created living entities in the world: divine and demonic. In 16:1, 16:2, & 16:3 – describing the qualities of the divine ones – he says that they – the divine ones – are marked by fearlessness, charity, self-control, study of the Vedas, non-violence, simplicity, cleanliness, politeness, modesty, compassion for all living beings, etc. In 16:8 – describing the qualities of the demonic ones – he says that they – the demonic ones – are marked by atheism. In 16:4, he says that the demonic ones are marked by arrogance, conceit, anger, harshness, etc. Now, quite evidently, many atheists, including scientists, philosophers, humanists, and people who do not believe in or study Vedas, are actually marked by some of the qualities that Krishna says only the divine ones have – for example, charity, politeness, and compassion for all living beings.  
In 4:13, Krishna says that he has created four divisions (of mankind), in accordance with the three modes of material nature – the mode of goodness, the mode of passion, and the mode of ignorance – and the work related to them. In 18:41, he says that brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas, and sudras – the four divisions (of mankind) – are distinguished by the qualities generated by their own nature with respect to the material modes. In 18:42, he says that brahmanas work out of natural qualities: peacefulness, self-control, austerity, purity, tolerance, honesty, knowledge, wisdom, and religiousness. In 18:43, he says that ksatriyas work out of natural qualities: heroism, power, determination, resourcefulness, courage in battle, generosity, and leadership. Now, obviously, some men may have qualities of both brahmanas and ksatriyas – for example, Arjuna. So, which of the four divisions (of mankind) – divisions that Krishna claims to have created – such people would really belong to? Also, some people may have some of the qualities of ksatriyas – such as power, determination, resourcefulness, and leadership – but may not really have some other – such as generosity – for example, Duryodhana, who is supposed to be Arjuna’s archenemy, present in the battlefield. 
This problem arises because not everybody has qualities of one particular mode, e.g. the mode of goodness, but rather many people (or, perhaps, most of the people) have combinations of different modes. However, the idea of combination does not seem to be entertained in the Gita. (See 17:2 to 17:4, especially 17:4, and 18:7 to 18:39, especially 18:23 to 18:28.) As such, it is not clear how the four divisions of mankind – brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas, and sudras – can possibly come out of the three modes of material nature. How can four varieties arise from three modes without combination? (By “Guna”, the Gita seems to mean only “the three modes of material nature”; See 2:45, 7:13-14, 13:20, & 18:19, for example.)

– its disregard for suffering,
 

Note: As expressed through 2:11, 2:14, 2:30, 2:57, etc.

its concept of Atman,
 

Note: If there were such a thing called Atman (i.e. soul), the consciousness of seeing blue colour, for instance, would make incomplete sense on its own, where, in fact, it does apparently make complete sense on its own. In other words, it seems that nothing other than the consciousness of seeing blue colour is required for its existence. And the same should be true about any other form of consciousness, including the consciousness of I’m seeing the blue colour.

 
Krishna being a sinner, and yet claiming to be holy & divine, and all that. And some of the verses are conspicuously and hilariously false & stupid – e.g. 3:14, which states that rains are produced because yajna is performed.

 
The Summary of the Satanic Gita -
 
The satanic Gita – i.e. the satanic aspect of the Gita – can be summarised in four verses: 4:8, 16:19, 16:20, & 9:33 (with the real satanic part of the verse highlighted, if required). These verses, in my opinion, constitute the essence of its satanic message.

“For deliverance of the pious and annihilation of miscreants, and for reestablishment of religion, I appear, millennium after millennium.” (4:8)
 
“I continuously put the envious and the mischievous – the lowest of all men – into the sea of material existence, into a variety of demonic lives.” (16:19)
 
“Such people, by having repeated births into the demonic sort of life, can never achieve Me. They end up into the most disgusting form of existence.” (16:20)
 
“Then what to say about righteous brahmanas, devotees, and saintly kings! Since you have come to this temporary, miserable world, serve Me lovingly.” (9:33)
 

If Krishna, thus, were at all to be taken seriously, he could not really be regarded as a good, kind, just, and noble Lord, but would rather, to a very large extent, be worthy of condemnation as evil.
 

Note: The Bhagavad-gita’s karma-yoga therefore means man’s unconditional, absolute allegiance to uncompromising, pretentious evil.