Skip to the verse
V.52.42.6

Chapter 2 · Verse 5·Spoken by Arjuna

गुरूनहत्वा हि महानुभावान् श्रेयो भोक्तुं भैक्ष्यमपीह लोके। हत्वार्थकामांस्तु गुरूनिहैव भुञ्जीय भोगान् रुधिरप्रदिग्धान्

gurūnahatvā hi mahānubhāvān śhreyo bhoktuṁ bhaikṣhyamapīha loke hatvārtha-kāmāṁstu gurūnihaiva bhuñjīya bhogān rudhira-pradigdhān

It would be better to live on alms in this world than to kill these noble elders. If I kill them, even here the wealth and pleasures I gain would be drenched in their blood.

Word by Word

gurūnteachersahatvānot killinghicertainlymahā-anubhāvānnoble eldersśhreyaḥbetterbhoktumto enjoy lifebhaikṣhyamby beggingapieveniha lokein this worldhatvākillingarthagainkāmāndesiringtubutgurūnnoble eldersihain this worldevacertainlybhuñjīyaenjoybhogānpleasuresrudhirabloodpradigdhāntainted with
—:—— / —:——

Saved for this reading session

Three movements · tap a label to switch

Sanskrit recitation by Swami Brahmānanda

Audio from the Gītā Supersite, IIT Kanpur

Reading size

Synthesis · a glossed leaf

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

rjuna is answering an unspoken question that follows from his refusal to fight: if he will not kill his elders and seize the kingdom, how will he even live? His reply is that it would be better to live in this world on bhaiksha, the food won by begging, than to slay his gurus. The commentators stress how much weight this carries. Begging is normally forbidden and disgraceful for a kshatriya, a warrior, yet Arjuna deliberately chooses it. He embraces a despised livelihood willingly, ranking it above a kingdom, because to him the killing of his elders is a far worse wrong than the shame of the begging-bowl. Several note that both acts are forbidden, but of the two the slaying of gurus seems to him the more forbidden by far.

Braided from 11 commentators

Śrī Ānandagiri · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Puruṣottama · Swami Ramsukhdas · Lokmanya Tilak · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

The reason Arjuna prefers the beggar's crust is that it harms no one and keeps the next world safe, whereas slaying the gurus ruins it. Begging brings only ill repute and insult in this world; people will revile him, but no inauspiciousness in the world to come will follow. Killing his teachers, by contrast, is contrary to the next world. So the disgrace of begging is a loss confined to here, while the sin of striking down elders reaches beyond death. Faced with a worldly shame on one side and a spiritual ruin on the other, Arjuna chooses to bear the shame.

Braided from 7 commentators

Śrī Ānandagiri · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Puruṣottama · Swami Ramsukhdas

Arjuna calls his elders mahanubhavan, the great-souled, and the commentators read this word as a deliberate defense against a hard objection. The objection runs: the tradition itself permits abandoning a guru who is arrogant, who does not know what should and should not be done, and who has taken to a wrong path (Mahabharata 5.178.24); and Bhishma, Drona and the rest, by siding with the unrighteous Duryodhana and betraying their own pupils, seem to fit that description, so why not kill them? Arjuna's word mahanubhavan denies the premise. Their power rests on Vedic study, celibacy, austerity and conduct; men of such stature, who have mastered even Time and desire, simply do not contract the petty taint of arrogance. Their greatness keeps them above the fault that would have made them abandonable.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha

The verse then turns to the other side, marked by the particle tu (but), and Arjuna faults the alternative with the image of blood. Even if he kills these elders and gains the kingdom, what he wins is only bhoga, sense-enjoyment, smeared and drenched with their blood (rudhira-pradigdhan). Such enjoyment is utterly contemptible, impure because it is bought with the slaughter of his own teachers. Many add that this would be enjoyment here, in this world only, not in the next, and that it yields enjoyment alone, never dharma or liberation. So the choice is starkly unequal: clean alms-food that costs no one anything, against a blood-stained feast that buys a little pleasure now and a hell-like suffering both here and hereafter.

Braided from 12 commentators

Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Puruṣottama · Vallabhācārya · Sant Jñāneśvar · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas

Divergence

Modern

Reads arthakaman (desirous of wealth) as qualifying the pleasures, not the elders, and argues the point directly. Taking it to mean greedy-for-wealth gurus is unfitting on two grounds: first, Bhishma, Drona and the rest were not actually craving wealth; they were beneficiaries of Duryodhana's living, eaters of his salt, who simply did not think it their duty to desert him at war's hour, and so stood on the Kaurava side out of loyalty rather than greed. Second, Arjuna has just called them mahanubhavan, great-souled, and the great-minded cannot be wealth-hungry while the wealth-hungry cannot be great-minded; the two descriptions cannot both fit. So the word can only describe the bhoga, the pleasures in which lust for wealth is foremost. This voice also frames the whole speech psychologically: Krishna's words in the prior verses are beginning to work on Arjuna, who now speaks not with heat but with some slackening, sensing the mistake may lie in his own understanding.

Swami Ramsukhdas

Modern

Reads the plural gurun as elders and not as preceptors, on a precise historical ground: there was no teacher of the martial arts in the army other than Dronacharya, so the plural cannot mean instructors. It points to the scene where Yudhishthira, before the war, laid down his shield and went humbly to place his head at the feet of these elders, Bhishma, Drona and Shalya, to ask their blessing; their reply explained why they fought for Duryodhana. This voice takes arthakaman as describing those elders, abashed and bound by monetary considerations, quoting their own words to Yudhishthira: man is the slave of wealth, wealth is the slave of nobody, so the Kauravas have tied me by the bonds of wealth (Mahabharata Bhishma-parva).

Lokmanya Tilak

Advaita Vedānta

Within this school the phrase about wealth-craving is read in more than one way. One voice offers both senses at once: even slaying gurus, Arjuna would gain only enjoyments and not liberation, where arthakama may describe those very enjoyments made of wealth and desire, or may grant that the gurus, though greedy for wealth, are still gurus in relation to him, which is why the word guru is repeated. Another voice takes the wealth-desire as belonging to the elders themselves, reasoning that gurus who crave wealth will certainly help Duryodhana, so their killing too becomes implicated, with the particle tu marking this opposing side. This school also notes a second, ornamental sense of mahanubhavan: besides great-souled, it can be heard as sun-like or fire-like, whose blaze destroys cold dullness; and one voice presses the defense further with the maxim that for the fiery, like an all-consuming fire, a transgression counts as no fault, so no blemish can attach to such men.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri

Bhakti

This stream tends to take arthakaman as describing the elders, the wealth-coveting teachers, while insisting that even so they remain Arjuna's gurus. One voice phrases it as having slain those who covet wealth, then immediately adds that the repeated mention of teachers shows their standing is untouched: greedy or not, they are still his teachers, so to kill them and enjoy is to feast as one who has betrayed his elders, the pleasure mingled with sin. Another offers the wealth-reading of the elders as an explicit alternative, since they will not withdraw from war, being bound to the Kauravas by wealth, yet concludes that either way the deed is unbearable. The Marathi voice in this stream dwells lovingly on Drona in particular as a fathomless ocean of equanimity, learning and motherly tenderness, so that Arjuna recoils from enjoyments dipped in blood drawn from such noble hearts and would rather forsake the country or live in mountain caves than raise a weapon against him.

Śrīla Baladeva · Sant Jñāneśvar · Śrīdhara Svāmī

A Seeker Asks

Is Arjuna's preference for begging over battle genuine reverence and renunciation, or is it attachment to his kin dressed up in the language of dharma?

The honest answer the sources support is: both are present, and that is exactly what makes the moment difficult. Arjuna's reverence is not faked. The commentators agree that the elders really are mahanubhavan, great-souled, men whose power rests on study, austerity and self-mastery, who have subdued even Time and desire; refusing to kill such teachers, and choosing the despised beggar's bowl over a throne won by their slaughter, is a real and creditable scruple, not mere cowardice.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva

Yet one voice diagnoses what the reverence is quietly carrying. Krishna's earlier words have started to work on Arjuna, and here he speaks with some slackening rather than heat, half-sensing the mistake lies in his own understanding. The deeper trouble is moha, attachment to the bodies of his loved ones; under its influence the abandonment of his duty stops looking like abandonment and starts looking like the virtue of non-harming. So his conclusion that begging is the higher course is colored: a genuine tenderness toward his elders has become the vehicle for a refusal that is really driven by clinging.

Swami Ramsukhdas

This is why the question cannot be settled by Arjuna alone, and why the Gita does not end here. An evil that comes wearing the face of good is the hardest to recognize, and removing it takes time and great effort, which is precisely why Krishna must keep teaching. The seeker's takeaway is not to despise reverence, but to notice that even a sincere, high-sounding refusal can be quietly serving an attachment, and to let a clearer eye than our own test it.

Swami Ramsukhdas

Contemplation

One voice gives a piercing piece of self-examination drawn from this verse. An evil that arrives looking like evil is easy to refuse; an evil that arrives wearing the face of good is very hard to remove. When Ravana came before Sita and the demon Kalanemi came before Hanuman, neither was recognized at first, because both wore the garb of holy men. In just this way the wrong of abandoning his rightful duty has come to Arjuna disguised as the good of non-harming, so that walking away from the battle looks to him like compassion and reverence. The hidden root is moha, a clinging attachment to the bodies of his loved ones, and that attachment is what makes the lesser good of his elders' lives loom larger than his actual duty. The contemplative invitation is to watch for this pattern in ourselves: when a refusal feels noble and high-minded, to ask quietly whether some attachment of our own is wearing the costume of virtue, because the evil that looks like good is exactly the one that takes long and patient effort, even divine effort, to see through.

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.