Advaita Vedānta

These commentators read 'Brahman' in the verse in two layers. Most directly, 'renunciation' means the highest renunciation, which is steadfastness in the knowledge of the supreme Self, and the verse even calls this renunciation itself 'Brahman', supported by the scriptural saying that 'renunciation is Brahma, for Brahma is supreme.' Karma-yoga is strictly subservient: without performance of works there is no purity of mind, and without that purity the supreme renunciation that is right knowledge cannot be reached, so forced renunciation is 'painful.' One voice frames the danger sharply: renunciation taken up by force, apart from the purifying scriptural action, makes one fall from both action and Brahman into the greatest distress. Another reads 'ayogatah' as a locative and warns that careless, outwardly turned, quarrelsome formal renouncers reach only hell, while the address 'mighty-armed' hints that the warrior's qualification is in battle, not in premature formal renunciation. A further voice harmonizes the verse with the scripture 'there is no other path' by saying the non-conceptual absorption is not a second, separate path but only the means to grasp the great saying 'thou art that.'

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri

Viśiṣṭādvaita

For these commentators 'renunciation' means the discipline of knowledge (jnana-yoga), and 'Brahman' means the self in its own proper nature, the object of self-vision, rather than the impersonal absolute. Their distinctive contribution is on the relation between the two paths. The discipline of knowledge attempted on its own is accomplished only with great pain and reaches the self only after a long time, whereas one joined to the discipline of action accomplishes it with ease and reaches the self before long. One voice resolves a fine puzzle: if a free choice between the two paths is allowed, that seems to make them strictly equal, yet here one is called harder. The answer is that the two are equal in fruit, the vision of the self, but not equal in access; karma-yoga must come first, and 'soon' is therefore comparative, measured against the knowledge-only path that needs a prior steady purity even to begin.

Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika

Bhedabheda

This commentator reads on grammatical grounds that 'sannyasa' here does not name renunciation as a thing to be obtained, but names the renunciant, the person; for if renunciation were the object to be gained, the word would stand in the accusative, not the nominative. So the verse means: a renunciant attains Brahman only with difficulty apart from yoga, but the sage who is a renunciant joined with yoga reaches Brahman before long. Distinctively, 'yoga' is glossed as the vision of non-difference: at the moment of offering up the fruit of action the renunciant is established in that vision of non-difference, and it is by this that the sameness of fruit between the two paths is established.

Śrī Bhāskara

Dvaita

These commentators take the verse as a further proof, not merely a restatement, that yoga is better than renunciation. Their key move is about fruit. In the absence of yoga, renunciation does not yield release; it yields only the pain of conquering desire and the like. Any lesser by-product it might have is, they hold, no real fruit at all, for what is fit for a great fruit has no slight fruit, as a handful of rice is no price for a ruby; the Padma Purana is cited that 'what is without the fruit of release is not proclaimed a fruit.' Renunciation joined with yoga, by contrast, has the great fruit of release. They establish yoga's superiority by both negative concomitance (no yoga, no great fruit) and positive concomitance (yoga present, great fruit present), with the difference that yoga, as the means, comes last in this ordering; and 'muni' is glossed as the renouncer who is free of desire and anger.

Madhvācārya · Śrī Jayatīrtha

Śuddhādvaita

These commentators read the verse through the logic of separation and conjunction. Renunciation has the form of separation (the giving up of action), while yoga has the form of conjunction; and since separation presupposes a prior conjunction, there can be no real renunciation without yoga first. One voice argues plainly that you cannot give up what has not been done: renunciation needs an action already performed and now offered, so the seeker first stands in the evenness that is yoga, and only then withdraws; a refusal of action without that inward yoga is the mere appearance of renunciation and brings only pain. The other voice deepens this into the nature of the Lord himself: because the Lord is of the form of rasa, and rasa has its two faces of conjunction and separation, both notes must be heard; the muni who has first tasted yoga as conjunction then, in the season of separation, takes sole refuge in silence (mauna) and soon reaches Brahman, who pervades every divine play (lila).

Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama

Kashmir Shaivism

This commentator reads the verse compactly. The word 'but' (tu) is for emphasis and stands out of its normal grammatical order. The point is the difficulty of renouncing action for one without yoga: by the reasoning given earlier, actions are hard to renounce, so for the person without yoga it is painful even to reach renunciation, whereas for the yogins this same renunciation is easy to come by.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

These commentators emphasize the practical psychology of the mind. Renunciation without karma-yoga is a cause of pain and is simply not feasible, because in the absence of mind-purity the firm standing in knowledge cannot arise; one voice adds that for a renunciant there is no karma-yoga left to pacify a remaining flaw in the mind, and he has no eligibility for it, which is why bare renunciation can fail. They cite a stinging verse of the Varttika that even people who have donned the renouncer's robe are seen heedless, outwardly turned, slanderous, eager for quarrel, their hearts spoiled by fate, to show that the robe by itself settles nothing. The remedy is the prior labour of karma-yoga upon the mind. The one who is yoga-yoked, doing desireless action, becomes pure-minded and so a true sage, and then swiftly knows Brahman with direct, unmediated knowledge.

Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva

Modern

These commentators present the verse as practical encouragement and as a plea against quarreling over paths. One reads 'Brahman' here as renunciation itself, since renunciation consists in the knowledge of the Self, and stresses that karma-yoga is better simply because it is easy for a beginner and prepares him for the higher yoga by purifying the mind. Another insists the two paths are not really different from the point of view of release, so it is improper to magnify their difference and quarrel about it, noting that knowledge is not perfected without action and that action done desirelessly does not bind. A third frames it as a one-way dependence: for success in the path of knowledge (sankhya-yoga) the practice of karma-yoga is needed, but karma-yoga needs no prior practice of the knowledge-path; since attachment (raga) makes the knowledge-path hard even to begin, and acting always for others' welfare wears that attachment down, karma-yoga is the easy means that makes the knowledge-path workable.

Swami Sivananda · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas