Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 18, Verse 10: Krishna to Arjuna — Mokṣa-Sannyāsa-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  The sattvika tyagi (one established in renunciation marked by sattva) neither hates inauspicious karma (akushala karma) as an obstacle to liberation nor clings to auspicious karma (kushala karma) as a cherished means. Shankara anchors this in the tyagi's prior abandonment of both attachment (sanga) and fruit (phala): the one who performs nitya-karma without ego-ownership is already beyond attraction and repulsion toward outcomes. Because sattva has flooded the antahkarana (inner instrument) with viveka-vijnana (discriminative wisdom distinguishing Self from non-Self), the medhavi (intelligent one) has severed the root doubt — that abiding as pure Atman is not itself the sovereign means of liberation.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  The one pervaded by sattva, endowed with yathavastita-tattva-jnana (knowledge of things as they truly are), has relinquished kartritva (sense of independent agency), sanga (attachment), and phala (fruit) in every action — and therefore performs neither aversion toward sin-producing karma nor attachment toward svarga-yielding karma. Ramanuja insists the akushala here means inadvertent transgression (pramadika), citing the Katha Upanishad: one who has not ceased from bad conduct cannot attain the Self however wise. The scriptural tyaga is thus a renunciation of kartritva-sanga-phala within action, not a renunciation of action's form — because Brahma-vyatirikta-sarva-phala (all fruits other than Brahman) have already been surrendered as kainkarya (service) to Bhagavan.

• Madhvadvaita

  *Na dveṣṭyakuśalaṃ karma kuśale nānuṣajjate* — the genuine *tyāgī* neither recoils from inauspicious action nor clings to the auspicious. For the *paratantra* *jīva* (the eternally dependent individual self), such recoiling or clinging would be the assertion of a *svatantra* (independently real, self-sufficient) agency that no *jīva* possesses. Hatred of *akuśala* karma presumes that the *jīva* stands apart from Hari's governance and can condemn what Hari has assigned; attachment to *kuśala* karma presumes that the *jīva* owns its fruits rather than receiving them as Hari's gift. Both errors dissolve under *pañca-bheda* (the five-fold real distinction): Lord and *jīva* are irreducibly distinct, and no action of the *jīva* falls outside *Hari-tantratā*. *Sattva-samāviṣṭa* names the *jīva* whose cognition is suffused with *sattva* precisely because *sattva* in its purity inclines the dependent self toward transparent acknowledgment of Hari's sovereignty. *Medhāvī chinnasaṃśayaḥ* — the wisdom that severs doubt is not speculative equipoise but the settled recognition of the *jīva*'s ontological subordination, leaving no residue of self-attribution in either aversion or desire. *Bhakti* as ontological subordination is thus not an added virtue but the very structure of *tyāga* proper to a *paratantra* being.

  divergence: Bucket changed from B to C: neither Madhva nor Jayatīrtha left a bhāṣya on this verse; reading is voiced directly from Dvaita siddhānta off the mūla.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  Vallabha groups this verse with 18.11: the sattvika-tyagi is sattva-samavishta and has relinquished atma-sukha-atirikta-phala (every fruit beyond the joy that is identical with Krishna's own bliss) and has shed kartritva — therefore neither rejoices in kushala karma yielding svarga and progeny nor is disturbed by akushala pramadika karma. The akushala is glossed as inadvertent error by the Katha citation: even knowledge cannot bring atma-sukha to one who has not quit dushcarita (misconduct). The scriptural tyaga is of kartritva-sanga-phala, not of karma's form, since the body-bearing being cannot abandon all action; even yajna and anna belong to the unavoidable. The one who renounces phala (and by upalakshana: kartritva and mamata) 'is named tyagi in texts such as tena ekaih amrtatvam anashuh.'

• Śrīdharabhakti

  Shridhara reads the sattvika-tyagi's freedom from aversion and attachment as a direct testimony to sthira-buddhi (stable discernment): one who can endure great dishonor (paribhava) and surrender great heavenly pleasure (svarga-sukha) will hardly be shaken by momentary cold or heat. The akushala here is concretized as a harsh-season duty — cold early-morning bath in winter; the kushala is a pleasure-season duty — noon bath in summer. The medhavi's reflection is: 'compared to what I have renounced and endured for the eternal good, what is this passing comfort or discomfort?' The root doubt — the residual mithya-jnana (false knowledge) expressed as desire to seize bodily pleasure and flee bodily pain — is severed precisely by this proportioned intelligence.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  Madhusudana reads this verse as the crowning fruit of sattvika-tyaga: purified antahkarana (inner instrument) cleansed of rajas and tamas by Bhagavad-arpita-nitya-karma (daily action offered to Bhagavan) becomes fit for the Vedanta maha-vakya, producing the maha (meditation) that issues in 'aham brahmasmi' — the medhavi is thus sthita-prajna (established in wisdom), and with avidya uprooted, kartritva-abhimana (ego-sense of doership) dissolves. The freed knower neither registers akushala karma as adversarial nor kushala karma as desirable — 'hrdaya-granthi breaks, all doubts are cut, karmas dissolve' (Mundaka citation). The synthesis: Bhakti's purity-work prepares the mirror; Jnana's non-dual realization is what is reflected — neither path stands without the other.