Chapter 3 · Verse 28·Spoken by Krishna
तत्त्ववित्तु महाबाहो गुणकर्मविभागयोः। गुणा गुणेषु वर्तन्त इति मत्वा न सज्जते
tattva-vit tu mahā-bāho guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta iti matvā na sajjate
But one who knows the truth about the modes and their actions is not attached, Arjuna. Knowing that the modes act upon the modes, such a person holds back.
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
his verse draws a sharp line between two kinds of people. The previous verse described the deluded person who thinks 'I am the doer'; this verse describes the opposite, the tattva-vit, the 'knower of truth.' The little word tu, 'but,' is doing real work here: it marks the knower off from the ignorant person just described. Nearly every commentator pauses on this contrast. The point is that the same actions go on in both people; what differs is the inner stance. The knower of truth no longer claims agency for what happens, and so he does not get entangled (na sajjate, 'he is not attached').
Braided from 11 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrī Puruṣottama · Śrī Bhāskara · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Baladeva · Swami Ramsukhdas · Swami Sivananda
What exactly does the knower know? He knows the truth of the guna-karma-vibhaga, the 'division' or 'distinction' of the qualities and of action. Guna here means the basic constituents or strands of nature (commonly named sattva, rajas, tamas), and in practice the body, the senses, and the inner instruments of mind, which are themselves made of these strands. Karma means the workings or activities of those instruments. Most commentators read the verse as teaching that these instruments belong to nature, not to the true self. The knower sees the line clearly: 'I am not made of the qualities; these actions are not mine.' He has directly realized a self that stands apart from both the qualities and their actions.
Braided from 14 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Sivananda · Swami Ramsukhdas · Sant Jñāneśvar · Śrī Bhāskara
The heart of the verse is the phrase guna guneshu vartante, 'the qualities move among the qualities.' The commentators unpack this as a closed circuit within nature itself: the qualities in the form of the instruments (the senses, the eye and the rest) turn among the qualities in the form of the objects (sound, color, and the like). Both the actor-side and the object-side are made of the same stuff of nature. So when the eye sees color, it is nature engaging nature; the self does no part of it. The knower, holding this thought, refuses to insert himself as the doer. He does not seize on kartritva, the conceit of agency.
Braided from 12 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas · Ācārya Abhinavagupta · Vallabhācārya
Because he sees all action as the play of nature's qualities among themselves, the knower does not become attached. Several commentators stress that the result is freedom while still acting: he goes on living and moving in the body, yet stays a witness, untouched, because he no longer owns the doing. The deluded person, by contrast, superimposes 'I' and 'mine' onto the body, senses, and their works, and so gets bound. The single shift, from claiming agency to seeing the qualities act on their own, is what releases a person from entanglement in action.
Braided from 10 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Baladeva · Sant Jñāneśvar · Ācārya Abhinavagupta · Mahatma Gandhi · Swami Ramsukhdas · Swami Sivananda
Divergence
Advaita Vedānta
On this reading the decisive 'division' is the gulf between the insentient and the conscious, between everything that changes and the changeless self. The qualities are the body, senses, and inner organ, the seats of the conceit 'I'; their actions are their workings, the seats of the conceit 'mine.' The 'division' itself is identified with the self: self-luminous knowledge, unattached, which illumines all the insentient, changing things while standing apart from them. The self is immutable and therefore can never be the doer; agency belongs only to the body and instruments. The word vibhaga ('division') is shown to be essential, not redundant: it forces the reading that there are two distinctions, the self's distinctness from the qualities and from the actions. One source illustrates with a striking scriptural image, the blind man finding the gem, the fingerless stringing it, the neckless wearing it, the tongueless praising it, to show that the un-self-luminous eye, the inert hand, the I-conceit, and the intellect each do their part while the self merely runs through them like a thread through flowers.
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri
Viśiṣṭādvaita
Here the 'division' is read more straightforwardly as the classification within nature: the qualities divide into sattva and the rest, and action divides into this kind and that. The qualities, sattva and so on, are engaged among their own qualities, that is, among their own effects. The knower, seeing this, does not think 'I am the doer' with respect to the actions of the qualities. The stress falls on the qualities acting upon their own products, rather than on an immutable, illuminating self set over against inert matter.
Rāmānujācārya
Dvaita
On this reading the verse states real, irreducible differences. The 'gunas' are the senses and the rest, understood as effects or products of primordial nature (prakriti) and so called its 'qualities' in the sense of being subordinate to it; 'among the gunas' means among the objects. The 'division of action' is the genuine distinctness of action. Crucially, this school keeps the soul as a real agent: even though the verse denies that the knower thinks 'I am the doer,' the word 'thinking' (matva) and other texts show that the individual soul does act, only not independently. The dual number in 'division' is taken seriously: it points to the differences grounded in distinct relata, the soul, the Lord, and primordial nature, so the non-attachment is the soul's recognition that it does not act on its own.
Madhvācārya · Śrī Jayatīrtha
Śuddhādvaita
This school reads the verse as at once doctrinal and devotional. The qualities themselves belong to the Lord's own prakriti and act always at his pleasure; so to know the division of guna and karma is to see that the qualities, settled in the souls, operate among the Lord's qualities. One source develops this: the Lord brought the qualities into being for the sake of enjoying the varieties of rasa, savor, in sattva and the rest, and he brings about works fitted for that enjoyment, and other works for the sake of loka-sangraha, the holding-together of the worlds. So the knower does not get attached, thinking 'I alone am the doer and the fruit shall be mine,' because he sees the doing as the Lord's play through the qualities.
Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama
Kashmir Shaivism
This source gives the verse a terse, almost startled phrasing: the knower of the division of the qualities and of action frees himself, thinking 'nature does it; what has come upon me?' The emphasis is on the immediate release that comes the moment one sees the doing as nature's affair and not one's own.
Ācārya Abhinavagupta
Bhakti
These commentators frame the knowledge as the clear inner refrain 'I am not of the nature of the qualities, nor of their effects; these actions are not mine.' Some add precise detail: the division of the qualities is sattva, rajas, and tamas, and the division of action is their effects, named as the presiding deities, the senses, and the objects; the senses, impelled by their presiding deities, engage and illumine the objects, while the self does not. One source preserves the soul's agency by the same matva ('thinking') argument and adds a positive note: the knower, distinct from the qualities, is attached to the Self alone. Another offers the image of the sun, which lights the world's affairs yet is in no way affected by them, so the realized soul lives in the body as a spectator, beyond the mutual ties between the gunas and actions.
Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Sant Jñāneśvar
Modern
These voices restate the teaching in plain terms and draw out its practical edge. The self is entirely distinct from the three gunas and from actions; all that we see is the mutual interplay of the constituents, and the knower says in effect 'I am akarta, not the doer.' One source gives a homely test: just as breathing and winking go on automatically and a person claims no agency for them, so all activity should become automatic, without arrogating to oneself the agency or responsibility, a detachment that comes only through tireless endeavour and God's grace. Another offers the image of watching a cog turn within a larger wheel without claiming the turning as one's own.
Swami Sivananda · Mahatma Gandhi · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas
A Seeker Asks
If 'I' am genuinely not the doer and it is only nature's qualities acting on each other, does that not dissolve all moral responsibility for what I do?
The verse is not handing out an excuse; it is removing a specific knot, the conceit of agency, the inner clutch of 'I am the doer' and 'the fruit is mine.' What the knower drops is not action and not its rightness, but the egoic ownership that breeds attachment. He keeps acting, and acts well; he simply stops inflating himself into the author of the qualities' own workings.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Swami Ramsukhdas · Śrīdhara Svāmī
Several commentators are careful to insist that the soul does not vanish as an agent. The very word 'thinking' (matva) in the verse, they argue, shows that there is still someone who knows and chooses; what is denied is independent, ego-claimed agency, not all agency. So the realized person is not a passive thing exempt from action's demands; he is a clear actor who no longer mistakes nature's instruments for his innermost self.
Madhvācārya · Śrīla Baladeva
Far from licensing carelessness, this seeing tends to make action cleaner. Because he no longer acts to feed the 'I' or to grab a fruit, the knower acts the way the sun gives light or the way breathing happens, naturally and without arrogating credit. One school adds that this knowing is at the same time devotional: the qualities are the Lord's, acting at his pleasure and for the holding-together of the worlds, so responsibility is not abolished but reoriented away from the self and toward what is fitting.
Sant Jñāneśvar · Mahatma Gandhi · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama
Contemplation
One commentator offers a quietly practical doorway into this verse. Watch the things your body already does on its own: breathing, blinking. You claim no credit for them, and you only notice them at all when something goes wrong. The teaching of this verse is to let more and more of your action settle into that same effortless register. A truly generous person, he notes, does not even register that they are 'doing charity'; it has simply become their nature, and they cannot help it. So the practice is not to add a new strain of self-conscious detachment, but to relax the grip of 'I am doing this,' until right action flows the way breath does. He is honest that this does not arrive cheaply: it comes, he says, only through tireless endeavour and God's grace.
Sit with this · Mahatma Gandhi
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.