Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 10, Verse 23: Krishna to Arjuna — Vibhūti-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  Among the eleven Rudras I am Śaṅkara; among Yakṣas and Rākṣasas I am Kubera (vit-teśa, lord of wealth). Among the eight Vasus I am Pāvaka (Agni, the purifier); among mountains bearing peaks I am Meru. These vibhūtis (divine glories) do not assert a plurality of Brahman — they direct the discriminating intellect (viveka-buddhi) toward the one Ātman whose power alone activates every category of being. The multiplicity of named excellences is provisional; the nāma-rūpa dissolves for the jñānin who sees only the undifferentiated Consciousness behind each supreme instance.

  divergence: Śaṅkara identifies the eleven Rudras, the eight Vasus, and the group ‘yakṣa-rakṣasām' precisely, then closes with meru as superlative among shikhar-bearing ranges — all stated tersely as pointing-fingers, not as objects of meditation in themselves.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  I am Śaṅkara, the most auspicious among the eleven Rudras, and Vaiśravaṇa (Kubera) among Yakṣas and Rākṣasas. Among the eight Vasus I am Pāvaka; among peak-adorned mountains I am Meru. Bhagavān is the inner controller (antaryāmin) of each named being — Śaṅkara's auspiciousness, Kubera's sovereignty over wealth, Agni's purifying splendor, and Meru's towering elevation are all modes (prakāras) of His śarīra (body-soul composite). The devotee who meditates on Bhagavān through these supremely excellent forms cultivates the bhakti-yoga that culminates in prapatti.

  divergence: Rāmānuja supplies ‘shikara-śobhinām' (peak-adorned, beautiful-peaked mountains) as a qualifier for parvatas, and includes the interrogative ‘aham?’ — emphasizing personal Bhagavān-identity rather than impersonal power.

• Madhvadvaita

  Reconstructed from the dvaita school's doctrine, not translated from Madhva's commentary at this verse.

  Among the Rudras, Śaṅkara (the auspicious Rudra) — not Rudra generically but the most paratantra (eternally dependent) and bhakti-saturated among them, highest in Hari-proximity within that class. Among Yakṣas and Rākṣasas, Vitteśa Kubera, whose lordship over wealth holds only by Hari's anugraha (grace). Among the eight Vasus, Pāvaka (fire), whose purifying power conveys oblations to Hari and is thus the Vasu whose function is most directly Hari-facing. Among śikhariṇām (peaked mountains), Meru — its axial eminence real, not illusory, yet ontologically dependent. In each case the vibhūti (divine manifestation) is the highest paratantra existent within its class: rudrāṇāṃ śaṃkaraś cāsmi vitteśo yakṣa-rakṣasām | vasūnāṃ pāvakaścāsmi meruḥ śikhariṇām aham. The named being possesses its excellence not as svatantra (independently real, self-sufficient) but as granted and sustained by Hari alone. Pañca-bheda (the five-fold real distinction) stands intact: Hari is not Śaṅkara, not Kubera, not Pāvaka, not Meru — each is genuinely distinct yet entirely Hari-dependent. The taratamya (graded ontological hierarchy) orders even these eminent beings beneath Hari, and recognition of each vibhūti as such is itself an act of bhakti directed toward the sole svatantra.

  divergence: Madhva and Jayatīrtha are silent on this śloka. The reading voices Dvaita siddhānta — pañca-bheda, taratamya, paratantra dependency, the non-identity of vibhūti and Hari — directly off the mūla without attributing specific moves to either commentator.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  Among the eleven Rudras, Śaṅkara is foremost because he is mūla-vaiṣṇava (the Rudra who holds Kṛṣṇa as root-reality) — I am he. Kubera is my koṣa-adhikārī (treasurer of the divine household), administering the prasāda-wealth that flows from my will. Among the Vasus, Pāvaka is Agni who faces Bhagavān directly as mouth (mukha-bhūta) — my own instrument of receiving havis. All these distinctions are Kṛṣṇa's own līlā-rasa unfolding in the manifest world; to recognise them as such is itself a form of puṣṭi-bhakti.

  divergence: Vallabha highlights Śaṅkara's Vaiṣṇava dignity (‘vaiṣṇavatvena mānanīyaḥ’), Kubera as ‘koṣādhikārī' (treasury official), and Agni as ‘bhagavan-mukha-bhūta' — consistently reading each manifestation as functionary within Kṛṣṇa's household economy.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  Among the Rudras I am Śaṅkara; Rākṣasas are grouped with Yakṣas because of their shared quality of cruelty (krūratva-sāmya), and among that combined class I am Kubera (vit-teśa). Among the Vasus I am Pāvaka, the fire. Among the high-peaked mountains (ucchrīta, those rising eminently) I am Meru. Śrīdhara notes the grouping of Rākṣasas with Yakṣas as a point of precise philological justification — the Bhagavān who encompasses even the fierce and cruel classes does so to reveal that no order of existence falls outside His sovereign glory.

  divergence: Śrīdhara's distinctive contribution is the explicit reason for the Yakṣa-Rākṣasa pairing: ‘rākṣasānām api krūratvādi-sāmyāt yakṣaiḥ saha ekīkṛtya nirdeśaḥ’ — by similarity of cruelty etc. they are grouped together for the purpose of instruction.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  Among the eleven Rudras I am Śaṅkara; among Yakṣas and Rākṣasas I am Vit-teśa Kubera (dhana-adhyakṣa, overseer of wealth). Among the eight Vasus I am Pāvaka-Agni; among the exceedingly high (atyucchrīta) peak-bearing mountains I am Sumeru. Madhusūdana holds both registers simultaneously: Kṛṣṇa's self-identification reveals the Brahman that is pure Consciousness while also nourishing the devotee's rasa — the same Awareness that is the Vedāntic substratum is here clothed in the most beloved and magnificent forms, feeding the bhakta's heart even as it instructs the Vedāntin's mind.

  divergence: Madhusūdana supplies ‘su-meru' (the auspicious Meru) and ‘atyucchrīta' (exceedingly elevated), adding qualitative intensity that the other commentators omit, consistent with his rasa-sensitivity alongside jñāna-orientation.