Chapter 2 · Verse 33·Spoken by Krishna
अथ चैत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि। ततः स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि
atha chet tvam imaṁ dharmyaṁ saṅgrāmaṁ na kariṣhyasi tataḥ sva-dharmaṁ kīrtiṁ cha hitvā pāpam avāpsyasi
But if you will not fight this righteous battle, then you will abandon your own duty and your fame, and you will incur sin.
Word by Word
Saved for this reading session
Three movements · tap a label to switch
Sanskrit recitation by Swami Brahmānanda
Audio from the Gītā Supersite, IIT Kanpur
Synthesis · a glossed leaf
machine-assisted draft, pending review
Convergence
n this verse Krishna turns the argument around. Up to now he has been holding out the reward of fighting; here he names the loss that follows from refusing. The commentators call this 'the fault on the opposite side': having shown what is gained by doing one's duty, Krishna now shows what is forfeited by leaving it undone. The whole verse is a single conditional warning, 'but if you will not wage this war, then...', and what it warns of is not neutral inaction but real, threefold loss.
Braided from 8 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Puruṣottama
The war Arjuna is being asked to fight is called 'dharmya', meaning righteous, lawful, in accord with dharma. This is not a casual adjective. The commentators stress that the fight is enjoined by scripture and conducted by the rules of the good: one does not strike a man who has fallen, or a suppliant, or one who has surrendered, so the killing carries no taint of mere injury. Because the war itself is lawful, refusing it is not the avoidance of a sin but the abandonment of a sacred obligation.
Braided from 10 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Śrī Bhāskara · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Lokmanya Tilak
To refuse this war is to abandon one's own duty, one's 'sva-dharma'. The commentators specify that this is the kshatriya's, the warrior's, own proper work; for a man of that station, withdrawing from a righteous battle is precisely a betrayal of the role life has given him. Several add the sharp point that abandoning your own dharma does not leave you in a clean middle ground. You fall instead into 'para-dharma', another's duty that is not yours to take, and from that displacement sin attaches to you.
Braided from 8 commentators
Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Puruṣottama · Swami Ramsukhdas · Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Lokmanya Tilak
The loss named is threefold and definite: you lose your sva-dharma, you lose your 'kirti' or fame, and you incur 'papa', sin. The fame at stake is concrete in these readings. It is the glory won in great combat, the renown earned by facing mighty foes and even the gods, and that renown will not merely fail to grow but will actively collapse into disgrace if Arjuna turns away. The verse insists that the one who refuses gains 'only sin', dharma and fame falling away on the other side of the ledger.
Braided from 14 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Śrī Bhāskara · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas · Sant Jñāneśvar · Swami Sivananda
The fame is anchored to a specific glory: the renown won by encountering the great gods. Several commentators recall that Arjuna had already earned high fame in such an encounter, fighting Shiva who appeared disguised as a mountaineer and winning from him a celestial weapon, the Pashupata. The fame that would come from fighting this war is fame of that order, the kind that pleases Rudra himself, and it is exactly this that Arjuna stands to throw away.
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīla Baladeva · Swami Sivananda
Divergence
Advaita Vedānta
This reading first removes Arjuna's own earlier objection. Arjuna had said he did not want victory or even the three worlds, so why fight at all? The answer is that the fault lies in NOT fighting: the lawful war is undefiled by the fault of injury because it keeps the rules of the good, such as Manu's, that one must not slay with treacherous weapons, nor one fallen, nor a suppliant, nor one who says 'I am yours'. Acting against the scripture-forbidden withdrawal brings only sin, never dharma and fame. This reading then adds a second, decisive argument the others do not develop: since these aggressors will surely kill Arjuna once he turns his back, fleeing does not even spare him. Citing Manu, that one who turns back in fear and is slain takes on whatever demerit his master carries, and Yajnavalkya, that the king takes the merit of those slain in flight, it concludes that retreat would make Arjuna forfeit his own long-gathered merit and absorb others' sin. By this whole train, Arjuna's earlier fear that 'sin alone would cling by slaying these aggressors' is explicitly set aside.
Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Viśiṣṭādvaita
This school reads the verse with close grammatical care to fix exactly who and what it binds. The refusal springs from 'moha', delusion, defined precisely as the confusion that takes dharma to be adharma. The word 'you' is read as a qualifier marking the kshatriya in particular: withdrawing from war brings no sin to brahmanas and others, so the warning is station-specific. The word 'this' is read as 'already begun', for if mere non-undertaking of war were the fault, the verse would absurdly prescribe permanent, endless war; the sin lies in abandoning the duty once it has actually commenced. The phrase about the fruit of one's duty is read with 'dharma' standing for its fruit, otherwise the word would be empty repetition. On this reading the stakes are 'niratishaya', unsurpassed: the happiness forfeited is unsurpassed happiness, the fame is the unsurpassed fame that comes with victory, and the sin incurred is the cause of unsurpassed pain. So both the seen good and the unseen good are lost, and supreme suffering is taken on.
Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika
Kashmir Shaivism
This reading uses the verse as an argument from the lesser to the greater. Even ordinary kshatriyas, still 'made of desire' and acting for reward, ought not to give up a war of this kind, since it is a cause of heaven. How much less, then, should one to whom this higher knowledge has been taught give it up. That is the verse's force. But this source adds a careful limit the heaven-centered readings do not: the verse does not actually terminate in heaven as its final aim. The promise of heaven is real but is not the Gita's last word, and this teaching points beyond it.
Ācārya Abhinavagupta
Bhedabheda
This reading frames the righteous war as an open, unbarred gateway to heaven, a reward brought without effort and simply set before Arjuna. It then presses a striking qualification: such a war falls only to the fortunate, the 'happy', the partakers of happiness, and not to others. Read another way, it falls to those who shrink from hardship. The plain import is that to refuse this gift is the mark of the ill-fated, of one who has let an effortless door to heaven swing open and then walked away from it.
Śrī Bhāskara
Bhakti
These devotional readings concretize the loss. One specifies that the fame to be won is the fame of slaying foes like Nivatakavacha, a renown that pleases Rudra, and that the sin incurred is precisely the abandonment of one's own duty as forbidden by tradition, by texts such as 'one who does not turn back from battle'. The other paints the consequence in vivid images: to lay down arms is to court your own disaster and voluntarily lose the fame your ancestors won; your existing fame wanes, the whole world censures you, and grave sins seek you out and cling. As a widow is insulted everywhere, and as vultures mangle from every side a corpse left in the forest, so do great sins devour a man who has abandoned the duty that was his own.
Śrīla Baladeva · Sant Jñāneśvar
Modern
This reading first reframes the 'if' itself. Arjuna will not in fact be able to stay out of the fight: helpless before his warrior-nature, his kshatra-svabhava, he will surely fight in the end, as the Gita itself later says. So the condition 'if you do not fight' is only a supposition, granted for the sake of argument. Granting it, the consequences still hold. Renouncing the duty that has come to him of itself, he would be forced to take up another's duty instead, and sin attaches from that. And the destruction of his fame is given a precise, human cause: if Arjuna withdraws, people will conclude that even so great a hero grew afraid of dying, and on that judgment his renown is destroyed.
Swami Ramsukhdas
A Seeker Asks
Why should losing fame and standing among other warriors count as 'sin' at all, and how can refusing to kill in a war ever be the sinful choice?
The first thing to see is that this is no ordinary war but a 'dharmya' one, righteous and enjoined by scripture, fought by the rules of the good: no striking the fallen, the suppliant, or one who has surrendered. Because the war itself is lawful, refusing it is not the avoidance of a sin but the abandonment of a sacred duty, and that is why the refusal, not the fighting, is what carries fault.
Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Lokmanya Tilak
The sin here is not chiefly about reputation. It is the sin of abandoning your 'sva-dharma', your own proper work, and falling into 'para-dharma', a duty that is not yours to take. Walking away from the duty that is genuinely yours does not leave you in a neutral middle ground; it displaces you into a role you were never meant to occupy, and the sin attaches from that displacement.
Swami Ramsukhdas · Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Śrīla Baladeva
The fame, likewise, is read as a real index and not mere vanity. Its collapse has a precise cause: if so great a warrior withdraws, others will conclude he grew afraid to die, and that judgment is itself the disgrace. One reading presses the point further still, that flight would not even spare Arjuna, since the aggressors would cut him down as he turned his back, so that retreat would make him forfeit his own gathered merit and take on others' demerit rather than escape harm.
Swami Ramsukhdas · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Sant Jñāneśvar
Contemplation
Sit honestly with the duty that has come to you 'of itself', the responsibility you did not chase but that simply arrived at your door. The teaching here is that you cannot actually escape it by refusing; you only trade your own proper work for someone else's, and that displacement is where the harm enters. Notice, too, how much of the fear of acting is really the fear of how it will look, the dread that others will think you faltered. The verse gently exposes that the refusal you dress up as scruple may itself be avoidance. The clean path is not to flee the duty that is genuinely yours, but to meet it as yours.
Sit with this · Swami Ramsukhdas
Pull up a chair.
You have come to sit with this verse. When you are ready to hear the translators and the commentators in full, tap a name in The seating.