So , the Gita and Bharata are my favorite topics . I believe without a doubt that Mahabharata is a biased historical accounting < biased towards the victors of course > of battle(s) that took place in Kurukshetra over land and cattle . https://twitter.com/gauravsabnis/status/1304425460865077251

The cadet branch with strong alliances < read Yadus> wrested control from the main branch which had the better claim and poets patronized by the cadet branch created the Bharata as an embellished historical accounting .

A later descendant of the said Cadet branch or Yadavas probably didn’t have strong alliances or rationale for certain decisions he wanted to make and therefore decided to go by the “ divine right to rule” or “by the tenets of religious privileges accorded to me” approach .

Therefore a tenuous connection was established between Krishna , a historical person that existed and Vishnu , a divine entity that was worshipped by the privileged masses that mattered . I like to believe that the Gita is this tenuous connection.

It is fascinating and irritating that People continue to patronize the Gita as a religious tenet without realizing the fact that it was created in the first place to help some one take an autocratic decision based on a tenuous connection to a divine entity

May be , the history lessons we are provided growing up are dumbed down for this reason - to stop us from drawing this connection. IMHO , the Gita : Hinduism connect is the same as the connect between Henry Viii : Protestant faith .

The papacy wouldn’t grant him a divorce < thanks to Charles V> and the ever resourceful Henry created his own faith and crowned himself the head of the same .

I would read the Gita the same way I would read the Kalingathu Parani < the latter is more alliterative , btw> , as a work of literature / fiction and leave it at that .

And @gauravsabnis , thank you for taking me down the memory lane of the numerous arguments I’ve had with people regarding this :)