Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 2, Verse 1: Krishna to Arjuna — Sāṅkhya-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  Sañjaya reported: seeing Arjuna overwhelmed by kṛpā (compassion-confusion) — eyes brimming with tears, unable to see clearly — and sinking into viṣāda (grief-despondency), Madhusūdana spoke. Śaṅkara offers no gloss on this verse directly; the scene simply establishes that the ātman, whose nature is unchanging witness-consciousness, is about to be spoken to through the veil of avidyā (ignorance) that has produced this mistaken identification of self with the body and its kinship-relations. The teaching that follows will dissolve that confusion at its root.

  divergence: Advaita reads kṛpā not as virtuous compassion but as its confusion-driven counterfeit — a product of avidyā that mistakes bodily relationships for real. Śaṅkara has no direct bhāṣya here; rendering draws on his framing of Ch.2's opening context.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  Sañjaya spoke. Seeing Arjuna seated *evamupaviṣṭe pārthe* (thus positioned, having collapsed into the state described in the prior chapter) — eyes brimming with tears, overwhelmed within by *kṛpā* (inner sorrow) and without by manifest *śoka* — Bhagavān Madhusūdana took up speech. The name *madhusūdana* signals here, as Vedāntadeśika marks, *śokamūlarajastamonibarhaṇatva* (the power to uproot the rajas and tamas that are the root of grief). Rāmānuja's *bhāṣya* records the Lord's move precisely: *kutaḥ ayam asthāne samutthitaḥ śoka iti ākṣipya* — rebuking with the question 'Whence has this grief arisen in the wrong place?' — he then identifies *tam imaṃ viṣamastha śokam* (this grief standing in the wrong place) by five characterizations: *avidvatsevitam* (frequented only by the unlearned), *paralokavirodhiṇam* (opposed to one's welfare in the worlds beyond), *akīrtikaram* (disgraceful), *atikṣudram* (utterly petty — Deśika specifies *atikṣudram* to indicate *kāṣṭhāprāptaṃ kṣudratvaṃ*, extremity of pettiness, given Arjuna's own stature), and *hṛdayadaurbalyakṛtam* (produced by feebleness of heart, *adṛḍhahṛdayatvakṛtam*). Having named these, the Lord commands: *parityajya yuddhāya uttiṣṭha* — abandon this grief and rise to battle. The epithet *parantapa*, read by Deśika as bearing an *ākṣepakāku* (a tone of reproach), reminds Arjuna of his own identity as scorcher of foes, making his present *kātarya* (diffidence, the *klaibyam* of the verse) all the more condemnable. The chapter's whole purpose, as Deśika opens, is *śokāpanodana* (removal of grief) — and Madhusūdana, the destroyer of the demon Madhu, is precisely the one whose intervention can uproot *rajas* and *tamas* at their source.

  divergence: The viśiṣṭādvaita reading, grounded in Rāmānuja's bhāṣya and Deśika's elaboration, foregrounds Bhagavān's personal, diagnostic rebuke: the Lord names *asthāne* grief in five specific registers and commands action. The *śarīra-śarīrī-bhāva* relation is not yet explicit here, but the Lord's active, loving authority over the *jīva*'s misdirected *śoka* is already in view. Advaita would trace the grief to *avidyā* and *adhyāsa* requiring *jñāna-niṣṭhā*; Rāmānuja's reading keeps the rebuke and command to *dharmic* action at the center.

• Madhvadvaita

  Sañjaya reported: Arjuna had fallen into viṣāda (despondency), his eyes flooding with tears and unable to function, overcome by what he called kṛpā but which was in fact a distorted emotional state pulling him away from the worship owed to Hari through rightful action. Madhusūdana — Hari himself, slayer of the demon Madhu — now speaks, because the eternally distinct jīva (individual soul) left to its own impulses defaults to confusion; only Hari's direct word can orient the dependent soul toward its proper function. The scene marks the moment where the jīva's illusion of autonomous sorrow must yield to the Lord's sovereign instruction.

  divergence: Dvaita insists on the eternal ontological gap between jīva and Hari — the jīva cannot self-correct; it requires the Lord's direct word. Madhva's bhāṣya text was not supplied; this rendering is grounded in the verse and Dvaita's established frame of dependent worship.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  Sañjaya spoke again — for the question arises, what then happened? — and his words are themselves part of Kṛṣṇa's own līlā (divine play). Vallabha's maṅgala verses make clear: the first chapter established vairāgya (detachment from worldly ends) in Arjuna, thereby confirming him as an adhikārī (qualified recipient) for the teaching of Sāṅkhya-yoga; now the second chapter opens with this scene so that the adhikāra may be recognised and the teaching of ātma-svarūpa (the nature of the self) and sthira-buddhi (steady wisdom) may begin. For the Puṣṭi-bhakta, none of this is Arjuna's own striving — the vairāgya, the tears, the grief, the Lord's forthcoming words are all prasāda (gracious gift) flowing from Kṛṣṇa's own will; the correct response is to receive what is given and act according to his ādeśa (command).

  divergence: Śuddhādvaita uniquely frames the entire scene — including Arjuna's grief — as Kṛṣṇa's orchestrated gift. Other schools treat the grief as an error to be corrected; Vallabha treats it as the divinely arranged doorway that establishes Arjuna's qualification. The Puṣṭi-bhakta does not pursue Sāṅkhya for its own sake but only as Kṛṣṇa's ādeśa.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  Sañjaya reported to Dhṛtarāṣṭra what followed: Madhusūdana spoke this verse to Arjuna — the very Arjuna whose eyes were filled with tears and whose vision was ākulam (disordered, clouded over), who was viṣīdantam (visibly sinking into grief). Śrīdhara's terse gloss keeps the scene devotionally grounded: the name Madhusūdana is not incidental — it signals that the one speaking is the destroyer of demonic obstruction, and he will speak to this grief-stricken devotee with that same power of liberation.

  divergence: Śrīdhara's rendering is deliberately spare, letting the epithet Madhusūdana carry doctrinal weight — the destroyer of Madhu will destroy viṣāda the same way. Unlike Rāmānuja he does not enumerate the failures of Arjuna's grief; unlike Madhusūdana Sarasvatī he does not analyze kṛpā's ontological status.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  Vaiśampāyana reports that Sañjaya spoke in order to remove Dhṛtarāṣṭra's *ākāṅkṣā* (eager expectation) — *tataḥ kiṃvṛttam ity ākāṅkṣām apanināyiṣuḥ* — the king's heart being at ease, *svasthahṛdayasya dhṛtarāṣṭrasya*, as he inferred from Arjuna's battle-aversion that his sons' kingdom was secure and undisturbed, *svaputrāṇāṃ rājyam apracalitam avadhārya*. *Kṛpā* is a particular attachment born of the thought 'these are mine', *mama ite iti vyāmohanimitta-snehaviśeṣaḥ*; it is *svabhāvasiddhā*, naturally arisen, and it *āviṣṭam*, pervaded Arjuna entirely. By naming Arjuna as the grammatical object (*karmatva*) and *kṛpā* as the agent (*kartṛtva*), the verse dispels any notion that this affection is his own act — *tasyā āgantukkatvam vyudastam*. Likewise *viṣāda* — *snehaviṣayībhūtasvajanavicchedāśaṅkānimitta-śokāparyāyaś cittavyākulībhāvaḥ* — the mental agitation that is another name for grief, arising from the fear of separation from beloved kinsmen — is shown by its own grammatical position as *āgantuka*, not native to Arjuna's *ātman*. The eyes, filled and troubled by tears on account of these two — *kṛpāviṣādavaśād aśrubhiḥ pūrṇe ākule darśanākṣame cekṣaṇe* — betray both conditions matured into their twofold visible effect. To Arjuna thus agitated by *kṛpā* and *viṣāda* grown to full force, *kṛpāviṣādābhyām udvignam*, Madhusūdana spoke this forthcoming *soppattika* discourse — *na tu upekṣitavān*, he did not stand by indifferent. The name *Madhusūdana* signals that he who destroyed the demon Madhu by his own sovereign power will deploy that same capacity here — *svayaṃ duṣṭanigrahakartā arjunaṃ praty api tathaiva vakṣyatīti bhāvaḥ*.

  divergence: The contaminated cell paraphrased the bhāṣya's grammatical argument at a remove. This repair quotes the bhāṣya's defining phrases verbatim — *tasyā āgantukkatvam vyudastam*, *svaputrāṇāṃ rājyam apracalitam avadhārya*, *kṛpāviṣādavaśād aśrubhiḥ pūrṇe ākule*, *na tu upekṣitavān*, *svayaṃ duṣṭanigrahakartā* — so that the case-structure and devotional register of Madhusūdana Sarasvatī's reading come through directly rather than through paraphrase.