Holding on to the attachment for giving up action, Arjuna asked the same question that he had posed in the beginning of Chapter 3: “Which of the two is beneficial for me – renouncing action (karma sannyāsa) or acting in connection with Krishna (yoga)?” (BG 5.1) Krishna unequivocally resolves this dilemma by reiterating that karma yoga (or action yoga) is better than quitting action altogether (BG 5.2).

It is noteworthy that although Arjuna asks Krishna to help him choose between karma sannyāsa and yoga, Krishna in his response compares karma sannyāsa and karma yoga. This implies we can take the term yoga in the Bhagavad Gita to generally mean karma yoga, unless the context dictates otherwise. Also, note that the two possible paths of self-discipline in question can be referred to as the path of analysis (sāṅkhya-yoga) and the path of practice (karma yoga).

Krishna herein gives four reasons why action yoga is recommended over giving up action itself.

1. One who is matured in performing action yoga neither hates nor desires the fruits of action and therefore considered always renounced (nitya-sannyāsī). Therefore, one need not give up work to practice renunciation. (BG 5.3)
2. Both the path of analysis (sāṅkhya-yoga) and the path of practice (karma yoga) entail renunciation, but action yoga is more practical and yields the same result as the path of analysis (or sāṅkhya-yoga). (BG 5.4–5)
3. The path of renunciation of action (karma sannyāsa) is miserable because of lacking practical engagement (ayogataḥ). (BG 5.6)
4. The path of practice, studded with practical engagements (yoga-yukta), on the other hand, brings success very quickly. (BG 5.6)

Combining the above with the two reasons (force of psychophysical nature and setting a good example) that Krishna gave in Chapter 3, we now have six reasons to understand why action yoga is recommended instead of renunciation of action.