Gita 3.21

Sadhak: "I'm not a leader or celebrity. Why does this verse apply to me? Nobody is watching or following my example."

Guru: "You'd be surprised. Do you have children, younger siblings, students, colleagues, friends who respect you? You're their śreṣṭha. Do you participate in any community—religious, professional, social? Your behavior influences its norms. Are you on social media? Your posts model attitudes for your network. Even strangers in public observe you. The circle of influence varies in size, but no one is without influence. The verse isn't only for kings and celebrities; it's for anyone whose actions are seen by others—which is everyone. Your sphere may be smaller than Arjuna's, but the principle is identical."

Sadhak: "But what if I don't want to be a role model? Can't I just live my own life without worrying about influencing others?"

Guru: "You can want that, but you can't achieve it. Influence is not optional; it's structural. As long as you're visible to anyone, you're influencing them. The choice isn't whether to influence but whether to do so consciously or unconsciously, constructively or destructively. Refusing to acknowledge your influence doesn't eliminate it—it just means you exercise it carelessly. Better to accept the responsibility and live accordingly. It's not a burden but an invitation to integrity: live as if your actions matter, because they do."

Sadhak: "The verse says people follow whatever the great person does—even if it's wrong? That seems dangerous."

Guru: "It is both descriptive and cautionary. Descriptively: yes, people follow leaders even into error. History is full of nations following destructive leaders, communities following corrupt gurus, children imitating flawed parents. This is human psychology, for better and worse. The caution is for leaders: knowing this, act with care! And for followers: don't follow blindly; evaluate whether the example aligns with dharma. The verse doesn't endorse mindless following; it observes the tendency and thereby warns both leaders (don't mislead) and followers (don't follow blindly)."

Sadhak: "What exactly does 'pramāṇa' (standard or evidence) mean here? Is it just behavior, or something more?"

Guru: "'Pramāṇa' is a rich term meaning valid evidence, authoritative standard, or measure of truth. When a śreṣṭha acts, their action becomes pramāṇa—proof that such action is acceptable, even recommended. If a respected teacher cuts corners, cutting corners becomes validated. If a revered elder remains calm under pressure, calmness becomes the norm. The śreṣṭha's behavior becomes a kind of implicit permission: 'If they do it, it must be okay.' This is why the powerful must be careful—their actions don't just affect outcomes; they establish what's considered valid."

Sadhak: "This seems to imply that leaders have more moral responsibility than ordinary people. Is that fair?"

Guru: "It's not about fairness but about reality. Greater influence creates greater responsibility—not as punishment but as fact. A parent's lie affects their child more than a stranger's lie would. A CEO's ethics shape company culture more than an entry-level employee's. This isn't unfair; it's the nature of influence. With visibility comes accountability. Those who seek leadership positions accept this implicitly. Even for those thrust into influence unwillingly—parents, for example—accepting the responsibility is part of maturing into the role."

Sadhak: "How does this apply to Arjuna specifically? He's about to kill people. Isn't that a terrible example?"

Guru: "Context matters. If Arjuna kills out of hatred or greed, yes—terrible example. But Arjuna is about to fight a dharmic war against tyranny, after exhausting peaceful alternatives. The example he sets is: when all else fails, righteousness must be defended, even at great personal cost. If he refuses, the example is: let injustice prevail rather than face difficult duty. Which pramāṇa serves the world better? Krishna is saying: the example of upholding dharma, even through war, is the standard the world needs. Arjuna's action, properly understood, teaches courage and righteousness."

Sadhak: "What about when leaders fail? When the examples around me are bad? Should I still follow?"

Guru: "Never follow blindly. The verse describes human tendency, not prescribes uncritical obedience. Elsewhere the Gita emphasizes discrimination (viveka). When leaders fail, you have the responsibility to recognize the failure and not replicate it. Become yourself the śreṣṭha who sets a better standard. If current leaders model corruption, your integrity becomes more important, not less—you become the counter-example. The verse is also a call: since people follow leaders, become the leader worth following."

Sadhak: "How do I know if I'm truly a 'śreṣṭha' for anyone? What if my self-assessment is wrong?"

Guru: "Assume you are. It's safer to overestimate your influence than to underestimate it. If you act as if your behavior matters, as if someone is learning from you, you'll behave better. And someone almost certainly is watching—children, colleagues, neighbors, strangers. The cost of assuming you have no influence is carelessness. The cost of assuming you have influence is integrity. Which mistake would you prefer to make? Live as if you're setting pramāṇa, because you probably are, and if you're not, no harm done—you've simply lived with integrity."

Sadhak: "This verse seems to put pressure on me to be perfect. What if I fail to set a good example?"

Guru: "You will fail sometimes—everyone does. The verse isn't demanding perfection but awareness. When you fail, that too can teach: how you recover, whether you acknowledge error, how you try again. A leader who admits mistakes and corrects course sets a better pramāṇa than one who never errs (impossible) or who hides errors (corrosive). Imperfection handled with integrity is itself a valuable example. Don't let fear of failure paralyze you; let awareness of influence motivate your best effort."