This study examines the insightful philosophical parallels across three renowned sources —William Shakespeare’s play The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, published in the early 17th century CE, the Bhagavad Gita, written between the 2nd century BCE and 5th century CE, and the Katha Upanishad said to be from the 5th to 1st centuries BCE. The comparative analysis underlines the common moral themes in each of these works, such as charity, mortality, ethical integrity and existential wisdom of timeless importance. For example, Nachiketa’s thoughtful discussions with his father Vajasravasa in the Katha Upanishad, in which he discusses superficial generosity and endorses authentic charity, is powerfully echoed in Hamlet’s ethical dialogues on the virtue of generosity that transcends mere transactional actions. Shakespeare’s cautious blending of humour with thoughtful philosophy, especially in the gravedigger scene, closely aligns with ancient Indian philosophical ideas, by insisting on the certainty of death, human equality and the temporary nature of worldly pleasures. Hamlet’s existential soliloquies, mainly the iconic contemplation “To be or not to be,” resonates with Nachiketa’s questioning for existential truths and Lord Krishna’s preaching concerning the immortal soul in the Bhagavad Gita. Comparing Shakespeare’s literary ideas and the philosophical depth of the India’s ancient scriptures, the study aims to offer a deeper moral awareness, genuine compassion and spiritual fulfilment. The comparative analysis revels a shared understanding of death’s inevitability, the transient nature of physical existence, and timeless spiritual wisdoms in these works. It underlines a related and transformative ethical outlook for modern society, providing advice against transactional relationships and superficial values.

1. Introduction

The intersection of literature and philosophy frequently gives profound insights into human nature and existence, building cultural divides and ephemeral boundaries. This study examines such an intersection through a comparative analysis of Shakespeare’s play, The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, the ancient Katha Upanishad and the profound spiritual discourse found in the Bhagavad Gita. At the core of this study lies a pondering on the nature of charity, the inevitability of death, existential wisdom and the temporary pleasures of worldly life. Before further discussing the aims of this study, it is important to first briefly summarize the texts.

In the play Hamlet, Prince Hamlet seeks revenge against his uncle Claudius, who assassinated Hamlet’s father to acquire the throne and marry Hamlet’s mother. Engulfed by moral uncertainty and existential contemplation, Hamlet simulates madness, contemplates on death, and delays action. The Katha Upanishad starts when the young Nachiketa confronts his father, Vajashravas, questioning the sincerity of donating old, unproductive cattle during a ritual sacrifice. In Indian culture it was believed that earnest sacrifice would earn merit and lead to higher realms after death. Irritated by his son’s questioning, Vajashravas impulsively offers Nachiketa himself to Yama, the God of Death. Nachiketa accepts this fate fearlessly, travels to the realm of death, and through insightful dialogue with Yama, gains metaphysical spiritual knowledge about the nature of the eternal Self and immortality. The Bhagavad Gita is advice to the warrior Arjuna who is filled with despair over the prospect of fighting against his own relatives and teachers. Lord Krishna, his charioteer and spiritual guide, counsels him regarding duty, detachment and righteous action without any expectation of rewards. Empowered by Lord Krishna’s teachings on spiritual wisdom and selfless duty, Arjuna then adheres to his responsibilities and fights the war.

By examining the philosophical depth of Nachiketa’s conversation with Yama and Hamlet’s introspective soliloquies, this study identifies striking parallels in ethical thought and spiritual awareness across cultures. The gravedigger scene from Hamlet serves as an essential focus, combining humour with serious existential truths that resonate in the teachings of the Upanishads and the Gita. Through this comparative study, the assessment underlines the timeless relevance of genuine generosity, ethical integrity and philosophical wisdom. The synthesis of these works aims to bring transformative thoughts that can address the problems of ethical dilemmas in contemporary societies and show pathways to deeper moral sincerity, compassion and selffulfilment.

The aims of this study are twofold. The first aim is to explore Hamlet’s existential thoughts and dialogues that pertain to morality, existence and human destiny, to connect them to the discussion of Nachiketa with his father and Yama, along with Lord Krishna’s messages on the immortality of the soul and certainty of death. The second and equally important aim is to highlight the contemporary relevance and transformative value of combining Shakespeare’s literary thoughts and the wisdom and teachings of Katha Upanishad and Bhagavad Gita for addressing modern societal ethical, moral and existential dilemmas.

The ideas expressed in Hamlet, the Katha Upanishad and the Bhagavad Gita may be seen concurrently as unique, universal and reflexive. Each text arises from its own philosophical and cultural heritage -- Elizabethan existentialism, Vedic metaphysics and classical Hindu dharma, in that order, marking their uniqueness. Yet the core concerns they explore -- death, moral struggle and the search for transcendence -- speak to a universal human condition that cuts across cultural boundaries. The reflexive dimension is worth exploring, particularly in the context of early Orientalist scholarship and the Renaissance’s openness to classical and non-Western thought. While direct cross-cultural influence remains historically debated, the thematic convergence suggests that these works reflect parallel philosophical intuitions that recur throughout civilizations.

Materials and Methods

This study uses a comparative analytical method to understand the philosophical similarities among Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, the Katha Upanishad and the Bhagavad Gita. Originally, key textual excerpts were cautiously examined based on their thematic relevance to charity, mortality, existential wisdom and transient worldly pleasures. A close textual analysis was made, focusing on philosophical dialogues, soliloquies and scene prominence in revealing ethical and existential thoughts. The textual ideas were compared to identify philosophical parallels and variations, teachings on genuine generosity, moral integrity and the transient nature of life. Scholarly interpretations and commentaries such as those by Swami Krishnanada, Swami Lokeswarnanada, Colin McGinn and other academic sources, were identified to enhance interpretative depth and contextual understanding. Comparative conclusions are integrated to articulate their contemporary meaningfulness, underlining their practical applicability for addressing modern societal and ethical dilemmas.

Results

The Katha Upanishad begins with a prominent philosophical event, Nachiketa’s questioning to his father’s superficial charity. The narrative offers a deep philosophical discussion when Nachiketa sees his father, Vajasravasa, donating aged and infertile cows as charity with the hope of earning merit and heavenly reward. Historically, donation of cattle mentioned in Katha Upanishad were ritual offerings performed during significant ceremonies such as the Rajasuya Yaga (royal consecration), these acts symbolized wealth, prosperity, and religious devotion, highlighting social status and spiritual merit in ancient Vedic tradition. The following verse encapsulates Nachiketa’s understanding beautifully.

“Tam̐ ha kumāram̐ santaṃ dakṣiṇāsunīyamānāsu śraddhāviveśa so’manyata .” 1(p6)

When the gifts had been given, with faith in his heart speaks out Nachiketa, who is still a boy. He said to himself, “joyless for sure are the worlds to which he goes who donates cows which no longer are able to drink, to eat, to give milk, or to calve.” 1(p6)

As portrayed eloquently in the Upanishad, Nachiketa being a young boy, understands the scriptural teachings with great faith, which insisted that true charity involves in giving away the best of the things. Swami Krishnananda, who was a prominent Indian spiritual teacher, philosopher, and author known for his profound interpretations of Vedanta and yogic philosophy, states in his book: “What does ‘gift’ mean? Charity means the giving of that which we love most. It does not mean simply giving something. If we have lost nothing by giving, we have given nothing.” 2(p16) The lesson to be underscored here is clear, the cultivation of genuine generosity is essential for individuals to engage meaningfully in charitable acts, superficial generosity will have negative repercussions rather than spiritual merits. The Upanishad especially cautions against such actions, reiterating the need of honest generosity and underlining the consequences of false charity.

Shakespeare echoed these prominent teachings through Hamlet, in the scene when the actors have come to the Denmark to perform a play in the presence of the Claudius, Gertrude, Hamlet and other courtiers. These dialogues of Hamlet with Polonius regarding the actors display parallels in charity and generosity. Hamlet states “God’s body kins, man, much better. Use every man after his desert, and who should ’scape whipping?”3(p115) Through this dialogue, Shakespeare conveys a comparable philosophical thought, if one offers just what another deserves, rather than generously giving more than deserved, the giver risks lacking merit then heavenly reward. Colin McGinn, a British philosopher renowned for his work in the philosophy of mind, in his book Shakespeare’s Philosophy, identifies the concepts in his plays, and says that “Shakespeare sees the value of generosity and charity, but he does not see them as normal acts of mere giving. For him such acts echo deeper moral truths and ethical identity, often pointed by the ability to give without expecting return.” 4(p111) Hamlet underlines the idea that true generosity transcends mere transactional giving, insisting abundance, benevolence in charity as an ethical need than an obligation.

Nachiketa’s philosophical depth extends further as displayed by his encounter with Yama, the God of Death. The initial talk revolves around hospitality, generosity and moral duty. Katha Upanishad offers a different perspective on Yama, the God of Death whom everyone fears to face. After knowing that Nachiketa was there without hospitality in his absence, Yama addresses Nachiketa respectfully displaying his compassion towards the young boy, embodying perfect gen-erosity and ethical behaviour. Yama is the epitome of humility

“Tisro rātrīryadavātsīrgṛhe me, ‘naśnan brahmannatithirnamasyaḥ , namaste’stu brahman svasti me’stu, tasmātprati trīnvarānvṛṇīṣva.” 1(p15)

“Oh Brahmin, salutations to you, you are an important guest and have waited in my house for three nights without eating, therefore choose now three boons, one for each night, Oh Brahmin, may all be well with me.” 1(p16)

Yama acknowledging his lapse in hospitality, and gives Nachiketa three boons, exemplifying how generosity is important in maintaining social and spiritual harmony. Nachiketa is deserving yet this act of Yama stands as a Awareness, Vol 1, Issue 2: Pages 38-45 41 lesson to mankind that he didn’t distance himself by providing other random gifts instead gave three boons which portray his generosity.

Shakespeare resonates strongly with this concept through Hamlet’s wise counsel “Use them after your own honour and dignity. The less they deserve, the more merit is in your bounty. Take them in.” 3(p115) Hamlet emphasizes that true generosity, especially when stretched out towards the undeserving, carries profound spiritual merit, embodying humility, dignity, and moral excellence. These thoughts, deeply echoed in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, closely parallel those elaborated in the Bhagavad Gita, which underscores the essential human virtues needed for a spiritually enriched life. Lord Krishna describes these qualities clearly in the following quote.

“Abhayaṁ sattva-saṁśuddhir jñāna-yoga-vyavasthitiḥ, Dānaṁ damaś cha yajñaś cha svādhyāyas tapa ārjavam.” 5(p647)

“These virtues include compassion, purity of mind, charity, fearlessness, wisdom, gentleness and freedom from greed.” 5(p647)

These values echo in Shakespeare’s thoughts on generosity expressed through Hamlet. Hamlet and the Bhagavad Gita emphasize that acts of charity should arise from purity of intention and genuine compassion. As Swami Krishnananda explains, “Actions like charity must arise from the awareness that love is the rule and that such actions become a purifying medium, and not a binding medium when done with divine consciousness.” 6(p58-60)

The analysis of Hamlet, the Katha Upanishad and the Bhagavad Gita together portrays charity and generosity. The synthesis of Shakespeare’s literary insight and the philosophical teachings of ancient Indian scriptures like the Katha Upanishad and the Bhagavad Gita teaches contemporary relevance. In modern times, individuals tend to accumulate excess beyond their needs, reflecting a decline in generosity and a growing inclination toward self-indulgent spending. By embracing deeper spiritual and ethical wisdom displayed clearly in Hamlet’s dialogues, Nachiketa’s bold stand and Lord Krishna’s message, if practised, can cast aside superficial values and cultivate deeper moral awareness, genuine compassion and lasting spiritual fulfilment.

The gravedigger scene in Hamlet is philosophically crafted, which is pregnant with most important aspects of human life, blending humour and philosophy in a way that manifests a deeper existential truth. Initially portraying a comic relief, the scene subtly embodies powerful philosophical truths on the inevitability of the death and the fairness it brings. Carla Della Gatta is a theatre historian and scholar specializing in Latinx adaptations of Shakespeare’s notes, “Hamlet’s words in gravedigger scene pause the forward action of the play to inspect the border space of identity, revealing Shakespeare’s intense meditation on mortality and existence through a blend of humour and philosophy.” 7(p110) Through the light-hearted dialogue of the grave diggers, Shakespeare emphasizes the paradox of human existence, although individuals yearn for control and possession all through their lives, finally the grave is a certain dwelling crafted by another’s hands. The gravedigger humorously remarks, “Cudgel thy brains no more about it, for your dull ass will not mend his pace with beating. And when you are asked this question next, say, ‘A grave-maker.’ The houses that he makes last till doomsday.” 3(p243) This playful dialogue weighs a thoughtful message, no matter one’s status or pride, all share the same destiny in death. Harry Levin, in his influential article Hamlet and the Grave Diggers, explores the symbolic and philosophical significance of the graveyard scene, states that “the gravedigger acts as Hamlet’s philosophical alter ego, humorously yet strongly underlining mortality and the permanence of graves against transient human endeavours.” 8(p631) The philosophical depth of this Shakespearean insight is eloquently in line with the teachings found in the Katha Upanishad. Nachiketa, appealing in a dialogue with his father before reaching Yama, the God of Death states

“Anupaśya yathā pūrve pratipaśya tathā’pare. sasyamiva martyaḥ pacyate sasyamivājāyate punaḥ.” 1(p6) “

Look back and check how it was with those who came earlier than us and observe how it is with those who are now with us, human ages like corn and grows like corn from the birth.” 1(p6)

The imagery of humans ripening and coming back like crops clearly shows the cyclical nature of life and death, underscoring humanity’s temporary existence. The universal truth finds further reassurance in the Bhagavad Awareness, Vol 1, Issue 2: Pages 38-45 42 Gita, where in Lord Krishna in a nutshell captures the inevitability of death and rebirth in the following quote

“Jātasya hi dhruvo mṛtyur Dhruvaṁ janma mṛtasya ca Tasmād aparihārye’rthe Na tvaṁ śocitum arhasi.” 5(p98)

“For one who is born, death is inevitable, and for one who dies, rebirth is certain. Therefore, you should not feel sorrow over what is inevitable.” 5(p98)

This deep message resonates intensely with the two grave diggers’ dialogues that humans amass possessions, power, and pride only to walk into the house called a grave, built by others. Both the scriptures also highlight that man takes birth after birth portraying the life cycle.

Shakespeare, in the same gravedigger scene subtly conveys reflective thoughts regarding the temporary nature of youth, love and worldly pleasures. Hamlet’s expression of love to Ophelia, “I loved Ophelia. Forty thousand brothers, could not, with all their quantity of love, Make up my sum. What wilt thou do for her?” 3(p255) This quote from Hamlet underlines both the passion and depth of youthful affection. Correspondingly Shakespeare employs the gravedigger’s weighty song, “In youth when I did love, did love, Me thought it was very sweet, To contract—o—the time, for—to—a—my behove, Oh, methought, there—was—nothing—a— meet.” 3(p243) This quote shows how youthful pleasures, seemingly permanent, inevitably fade with time. The gravedigger’s wistful reflection underlines the transitory nature of youthful longings, gently warning viewers that time ultimately changes what seems most valuable and enduring. Dr. Martina Bross specialising in early modern English literature, particularly Shakespearean drama, explains, “the gravedigger scene demonstrates how Shakespeare’s wordplay not only becomes a challenge for the characters but also for the audience, encouraging deeper contemplation of impermanence and identity.” 9(p26)

This Shakespearean wisdom reflects strongly the teachings from the Katha Upanishad, which teaches a corresponding thought on the fleeting nature of worldly pleasures in the following quote.

“Parācaḥ kāmānanuyanti bālā. ste mṛtyoryanti vitatasya pāśam. atha dhīrā amṛtatvaṃ viditvā dhruvamadhruveṣviha na prārthayante.” 1(p116)

“The immature humans chase external pleasures and therefore fall into the extensive net of death. But the elevated soul knowing eternal immortality, stops pursuing temporary pleasures in this transient world.” 1(p117)

Yama teaches that all those who run behind the worldly attachments would fall into the trap of life and death, like Shakespeare’s text, the Katha Upanishad cautions humanity regarding the ephemeral nature of the youthful desires and promotes for deeper spiritual wisdom, equanimity, go beyond fleeting satisfaction. The Bhagavad Gita also reiterates this understanding, stating that in the following quote.

“Ye hi saṁsparśa-jā bhogā duḥkha-yonaya eva te, Ādyanta-vantaḥ Kaunteya na teṣu ramate budhaḥ.” 5(p260)

“The enjoyments that arouse the senses are the root cause of troubles, the wise don’t find joy in them as these senses have beginning and end.” 5(p260)

Gita also conveys that any pleasures derived from the senses would give suffering at the end, this message deeply aligns with Shakespeare and the Upanishadic insistence on the temporary nature of physical existence and external pleasures. A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada was an Indian spiritual teacher and founder of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), who translated and commented on major Vedic texts states that “a liberated soul is not interested in anything which is temporary,” for such a person “very well aware the joys of transcendental pleasures, cannot accept to enjoy false pleasure.” 5(p259) These texts motivate understanding the eternal nature of the soul to transcend life’s temporary illusions.

Further, Shakespeare’s existential thought is eloquently summarized when Hamlet ponders, “What a piece of work is man! How noble in reason...And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?” 3(p102) Here, Shakespeare articulates a paradoxical truth, although human possess exceptional capacities, finally their bodies are temporary, mere dust. Colin McGinn says that “Hamlet’s speech underlines humanity as capable of noble Awareness, Vol 1, Issue 2: Pages 38-45 43 reason yet fundamentally brought down to a mere quintessence of dust, embodying the play’s existential tension.” 4(p55) This echoes closely the philosophical insights in the Bhagavad Gita in the following quote.

“Antavanta ime dehā nityasyoktāḥ śharīriṇaḥ, Anāśhino’prameyasya tasmād yudhyasva Bhārata.” 5(p88)

“Bodies are perishable, but the soul is immortal, imperishable, infinite, therefore fight, Oh descendant of Bharatha.” 5(p88)

Emphasizing the eternal nature of the soul amid the impermanence of the physical form, Harold Bloom was a renowned American literary critic best known for his influential work Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human, in which he argued that Shakespeare’s characters profoundly shaped modern conceptions of human nature. Bloom states that “Nothing of Hamlet’s antic disposition lingers after the graveyard scene, and even there the madness has evolved into an intense irony directed at the gross images of death.” 10(p383-385)

As the gravedigger casually throws the skull from the grave, Hamlet ponders with Horatio concerning their identities, contemplating, “That skull had a tongue in it and could sing once. How the knave jowls it to the ground, as if it were Cain’s jawbone, that did the first murder! It might be the pate of a politician… or of a courtier.” 3(p244) Through these reflections, Shakespeare conveys the truth of human equality in death, regardless of societal status, everyone finally goes back to the same earth, degenerating to just skulls and bones. Hamlet’s further dialogues on the skull of a landlord explores this existential contemplation, “Will his vouchers vouch him no more of his purchases… The very conveyances of his lands will hardly lie in this box.” 3(p244) Shakespeare strongly says that material possessions, lands, money and titles finally value nothing beyond life. Humans leave every possession taking nothing from the world, not even the physical body itself. At the time of death, a person requires only enough land to accommodate their body, while the eternal soul leaves to continue its spiritual journey. This insightful metaphysical truth finds strong relevance with the existential teachings of the Katha Upanishad, where in Nachiketa says, “Oh death, all the sensory enjoyments until tomorrow, later the senses lose its futility, even the prolonged life is momentary.” 1(p41) This says everything is transitory in this world.

At this juncture, it’s crucial to understand Hamlet’s famous soliloquy, “To be, or not to be? That is the question, whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer, the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and, by opposing, end them?” 3(p127) Hamlet’s existential dilemma encompasses humanity’s intense introspection regarding life, existence and the forces controlling one’s destiny. C.C.H. Williamson, an early 20th-century scholar, in his work reflects the period’s academic engagement with Shakespearean themes through philosophical and moral inquiry. He says “Hamlet as playing with the thoughts of suicide and death, showcasing a mind encompassed by pessimism as to life’s value and underlining the character’s deep existential questioning.” 11(p88) As Hamlet moves further into contemplation, he reveals his internal fear and hesitation, “Thus conscience doth make cowards of us all.” 3(p129) He contemplates on how death is making him a coward and also lacking the ability to act according to the need. Yet, proficiently Hamlet grows from uncertainty to an enlightened acceptance of the inevitability of death. This acceptance resonates a deeper understanding of the comic principle as Hamlet speaks, “We defy augury. There’s a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, ’tis not to come. If it be not to come, it will be now. If it be not now, yet it will come the readiness is all.” 3(p272) Hamlet concludes saying that there is some force which makes everything happen in this world, this realization is strikingly mirrored in the philosophical dialogues of the Katha Upanishad. Nachiketa in his earnest search for truth, asks Yama about the nature of existence after death. Yama answers Nachiketa by affirming that when the soul departs from the body, what truly remains is the Self referred to as the ultimate reality. He explains that human life is not sustained merely by physical forces like breath, but by a deeper transcendent principle. This metaphysical thought mirrors Hamlet’s reflections on the transitory nature of life and the mystery beyond death. 1(p142)

Likewise, Hamlet says a universal providence is moulding human destiny and fate, by controlling everything around, brought out poetically as a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. Williamson argues that Awareness, Vol 1, Issue 2: Pages 38-45 44 “Hamlet’s readiness to die represents inward growth and an acceptance of a larger providence guiding his fate.” 11(p98) Both Shakespeare and Yama would send out a message that there is one particular entity that has pervasive and inevitable influence: Hamlet’s journey from existential sorrow to calm surrendering nature and Nachiketa’s philosophical enlightenment, high-lighting a shared understanding of life’s deeper spiritual truth. This philosophical theme is additionally explained in the Bhagavad Gita, underling the eternal journey of the soul and the temporary nature of physical existence, in the following quote.

“Dehino ’smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā, Tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīrastatra na muhyati.” 5(p80)

“As the mortal self-changes from childhood to youth to old age, in the same way, soul changes from one body to another after death, the wise remain undisturbed by these inevitable transitions.” 5(p81)

Hamlet in Act 1 Scene 4 says that the soul is immortal and cannot be harmed, just like death itself cannot destroy what is eternal. It shows that Shakespeare always portrayed the soul as something imperishable. Thus, the Bhagavad Gita’s teachings closely echo with Shakespeare’s dialogues and the wisdom of Katha Upanishad that understanding and accepting the soul’s eternal nature and the surrender to that cosmic power would liberate one from fear and uncertainty.

Conclusion

The contemporary relevance of this comparative study is in its strength to address present day ethical and existential problems, identified by vast materialism, shallow relationships, and a lack of heartfelt compassion. In today’s modern era, people are overwhelmed by stress, peer pressure, and daily struggles, often finding themselves trapped in cycles they cannot flee. Amid this chaos, the deeper awareness of a divine providence guiding life is frequently forgotten. The ability to surrender to this higher order is one that brings peace, purpose, and perspective, which is increasingly absent in modern lives.

In conclusion, this comparative study reiterates the timeless importance of literary and philosophical thoughts into human existence, morality and spiritual wisdom. Shakespeare’s Hamlet, with the Katha Upanishad and the Bhagavad Gita, highlights the universal truths of genuine generosity, the temporary nature of worldly bondages and the inevitability of mortality. Taken together, these texts provide an everlasting ethical structure that crosses cultural boundaries and temporary limits. Understanding these teachings can guide individuals in contemporary society towards greater moral awareness, compassion, and lasting soulful fulfilment.

Acknowledgments: I sincerely thank Professor Holli A. Semetko for her patient guidance in editing this manuscript and for her invaluable encouragement throughout the process. Her insightful support has greatly enriched my academic journey.

References

1. Lokeswarananda, S. Katha Upanishad; Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture: Kolkata, India, 1997.

2. Krishnananda, Swami. Commentary on the Kathopanishad; The Divine Life Society: Rishikesh, India, 2018; pp. 16-17.

3. Shakespeare, W. Hamlet, ed. Mowat, B.A.; Werstine, P.; Folger Shakespeare Library, Simon & Schuster: New York, USA, 2012.

4. McGinn, C. Shakespeare’s Philosophy: Discovering the Meaning Behind the Plays; Harper Perennial: New York, NY, 2006; pp. 110-112.

5. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, A.C., translator. Bhagavad-gītā As It Is; Bhaktivedanta Book Trust: Los Angeles, CA, 1972.

6. Krishnananda, Swami. Commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita; The Divine Life Society: Rishikesh, India, 2018; pp. 58-60.

7. Della Gatta, C. Decoloniality. In: Della Gatta, C. Latinx Shakespeare: Staging U.S. Intracultural Theatre; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, 2023; pp. 108-132. Accessed via JSTOR. https://www.jstor. org/stable/10.3998/mpub.12253912.8

8. Levin, H. Hamlet and the grave diggers. Kenyon Rev. 1939;pp. 309-317. Accessed via JSTOR. www.jstor. org/stable/2939352.

9. Bross, M. “Equivocation will undo us”? Wordplay and ambiguity in Hamlet’s first and second line. In: Zirker, A., Winter-Froemel, E., eds. Wordplay and Metalinguistic / Metadiscursive Reflection: Authors, Contexts, Techniques, and Meta-Reflection; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2015; pp. 25-45. Accessed via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvbkk30h.4 

10. Bloom H. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. New York, NY: Riverhead Books; 1998; pp. 383–391.

11. Williamson, CCH. Hamlet. Int J Ethics. 1922; pp. 85-100. Accessed via JSTOR. www.jstor.org/stable/2377179.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements and opinions contained in this publication are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the publisher or editors. They disclaim responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of the content.