Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 13, Verse 31: Krishna to Arjuna — Kṣetra-Kṣetrajña-Vibhāga-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  The paramatman (supreme self) is anadi (beginningless) and nirguṇa (without the three modes of nature), therefore it neither acts nor is stained, even while dwelling in the body. Shankara's commentary on the adjacent verse clarifies: when one perceives the pṛthagbhava (separate existence) of all beings as resting in the single atman, and sees their vistaara (expansion, emanation) from that same atman alone, one attains brahman. The body's agency and its defects can never adhere to the atman, just as space (akasha) dwelling within a pot is untouched by the pot's impurity.

  divergence: Shankara on 13.30-31: 'ekasmin atman sthitam... tata eva ca vistaaram atmatah' — all differentiation rests in the one self, all expansion proceeds from it alone.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  The paramatman, extracted from the body by its own svabhava (intrinsic nature) and described in itself, is avyaya (imperishable) by virtue of being anadi (beginningless), and nirguṇa meaning free of the sattva-rajas-tamas modes that characterize matter. Though eternally conjoined with the body as its inner controller, it neither acts as the body acts nor is bound by the body's nature. Ramanuja insists the jiva-body relationship is real: the question 'if nirguṇa, why not stained by the body's nature?' is precisely what the verse answers — immutability of the self's essential form is not destroyed by real body-self relation.

  divergence: Ramanuja: 'nityasamyuktah dehasyabhavaih katham na lipyate' — though permanently conjoined with body, how is it not stained? The verse itself is the answer.

• Madhvadvaita

  Madhva reads 'ekastham' as resting in Vishnu alone — the pṛthagbhava (differentiated existence) of all beings abides in Vishnu, and their vistaara (expansion) proceeds from Vishnu's own will. The paramatman here is Vishnu, anadi (beginningless) and nirguṇa (free of the three gunas of prakriti), who neither acts in a dependent sense nor is tainted; the jiva by contrast does act and can be tainted, making the distinction between Ishvara and jiva structurally essential. The brevity of Madhva's gloss ('ekastham — resting in Vishnu; tata eva — from Vishnu alone') underscores that the entire metaphysics of the verse is resolved by acknowledging Vishnu's sovereign independence.

  divergence: Madhva: 'ekasthamekasminnVishnau sthitam. tata eva ca Vishnorvistaaram.' — the sole anchor is Vishnu; all else derives from him.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  Vallabha reads this verse within the third fruit of kshetra-kshetrajna knowledge: when one perceives the pṛthagbhava (distinctions such as divinity, humanity, size, form) of all beings as simultaneously resting in prakriti and in samashti-purusha (the aggregate person), and sees their vistaara proceeding from the akshar atman as sparks from fire (citing Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.1.20), one achieves brahma-sampatti — not mere jnana but actual akshara-identity. Vallabha explicitly distinguishes this from the mayavada reading: the unity is not an avidya-superimposition but Hari's own akshara-shakti; the jiva's entry into Purushottama is by His own ichha (will), not dissolution.

  divergence: Vallabha: 'aksharena sahaaikyam hi purushasya... Purushottamatas tvaaikyam praveshaha svechhaya matah' (Vallabha-siddhanta-muktavali) — unity with akshar is the jiva's nature; entry into Purushottama is by Hari's free will.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  Sridhara reads 13.31 as answering how the atman, though dwelling in the body, is untouched: because all the pṛthagbhava (differentiation) of sthavara (immobile) and jangama (moving) beings rests in a single Ishvara-shakti-rupa prakriti at dissolution, and their vistaara (creation-expansion) proceeds from that same prakriti at creation. Seeing this non-difference at both ends, one perceives the beings as nothing beyond prakriti, and the atman as transcending prakriti entirely — thereby becoming paripurnam brahma. The verse is thus a practical instruction in non-dual vision that liberates even while embodied, not a metaphysical abstraction.

  divergence: Sridhara: 'bhutanam prakritita-vanmaatratvenabhedat... brahmaiva bhavatityarthah' — by seeing all beings as no more than prakriti, and thus non-different at root, one becomes brahman itself.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  Madhusudhana takes this verse as the removal of even kshetra-differentiation after 13.30 removed kshetrajna-differentiation. The pṛthagbhava of all inert beings is perceived as kalpita (superimposed) in the one atman of sat-rupa (pure being), in the same way dream-images are not separate from the dreamer's mind. Even so, the vistaara — the plurality — is seen as proceeding from that one atman, like maya or a dream. When both moves are internalized simultaneously, brahma-sampatti occurs: the seeing of sarvabhuta-atmaiva results in the collapse of sajatiya (same-class), vijatiya (other-class), and svagata (internal) distinctions. He cites Isha Upanishad: 'yada bhutani sarvaanyatmaivaabhud vijaanatah, tatra ko mohah kah shoka ekatamanupashyatah.'

  divergence: Madhusudhana: 'kalpitasyadhisthanadanatirakat sad-rupa-atma-svarupad anatichinnam' — the differentiation does not exceed the substratum of pure being in which it is superimposed.