Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 3, Verse 4: Krishna to Arjuna — Karma-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  By not commencing the prescribed actions — yajña (sacrifice), dāna (giving), tapas (austerity), whether performed in this birth or a prior one as antaḥkaraṇa-purifiers — the puruṣa (person) does not attain naiṣkarmya, which Śaṅkara defines precisely as jñāna-yoga-niṣṭhā (firm abidance in the niṣkriya-svarūpa, the intrinsically actionless nature of the ātman). Śaṅkara's bhāṣya argues the upāya-upeya (means-end) relationship is inviolable: karma removes accumulated pāpa (sin), purifies the sattva, and generates the citta-śuddhi without which jñāna cannot arise, just as the Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad teaches yajña, dāna, and tapas as the very instruments of ātma-vidyā. Nor does mere saṃnyāsa — outer renunciation stripped of jñāna — deliver siddhi, because any scriptural sanction for directly entering saṃnyāsa (abhayaṃ sarvabhūtebhyo dattvā naiṣkarmyam ācaret) is addressed to the jñānin, not to the one who is jñāna-rahita (devoid of knowledge); the false renunciant bypasses the upāya and therefore cannot reach the upeya.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  Rāmānuja's bhāṣya identifies two complementary errors this verse corrects: thinking that non-initiation of śāstrīya-karma (scripture-ordained action) delivers naiṣkarmya, and thinking that abandonment of already-commenced śāstrīya-karma delivers ātma-niṣṭhā. For Rāmānuja, the only karma that qualifies as the means to jñāna-yoga is karma performed anabhisaṃhita-phala (without fruit-desire) as Paramapuruṣa-ārādhana (worship of the Supreme Person); such karma dissolves the anādi-pāpa-saṃcaya (beginningless accumulated sin) that keeps the indriya (senses) turbulent and the antaḥkaraṇa unfit for sustained ātma-sākṣātkāra (self-realisation). Without this karma-jana (action-born) purification, the sammāhita (collected) and śānta (serene) inner state that alone enables ātma-niṣṭhā is duḥsampādya (extremely difficult to accomplish); neither avoidance nor abandonment of ordained action substitutes for this metabolic work.

• Madhvadvaita

  Madhva's bhāṣya anchors both negations in his doctrine of jīva-svātantrya-abhāva (the jīva's complete dependence on Hari): mere non-performance of ordained actions — yuddha and the rest — does not yield naiṣkarmya, because mokṣa requires tattva-jñāna (knowledge of Hari's supremacy) as its instrumental cause, not behavioural inaction. The deeper argument in the bhāṣya is structural: the jīva always inhabits a body, gross or subtle, and the ananta-karma (endless actions) from numberless prior births continue to mature and produce embodiment — as the Brahma-purāṇa confirms, the saṃsāra-cakra is anādi (beginningless) and can be exited only by knowing the Param-deva (Supreme God), not by stopping present action. Saṃnyāsa as mere kāmya-karma-parityāga (abandonment of desire-motivated action) without the antaḥkaraṇa-śuddhi that desireless action produces is equally incapable: the Bhāgavata-purāṇa confirms that karmabhiḥ śuddha-sattvasya vairāgyaṃ jāyate hṛdi — vairāgya (dispassion) and then jñāna arise from purified action, not from its cessation.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  Vallabha's Subodhinī is compressed but precise: it reads the verse as ratifying the Puṣṭi-mārga's established principle from the Āptabhāṣya that karma, jñāna, and bhakti each purify the antaḥkaraṇa by saṃyoga-pṛthaktva-nyāya (the principle of connection and separation), so all three are required at their respective adhikāra (eligibility) levels — and for the karma-adhikārī, no substitute exists. The first hemistich closes the escape of inaction: the karma-adhikārī who refuses ordained action cannot reach naiṣkarmya-mokṣa-siddhi because the antaḥkaraṇa-śodhana (purification of the inner organ) belongs to karma's domain for this category of sādhaka. The second hemistich closes the escape of formal saṃnyāsa: even a jīvanmukta (one liberated while alive) continues to perform action while in the body — dehavattvena karma-karaṇa-darśanāt — so the Puṣṭi-mārga holds that action in the world is never abandoned but transfigured into Kṛṣṇa's own prasāda-movement.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  *Citta-śuddhi* (mind-purification) is the governing purpose behind *karma*: *varṇāśramocitāni karmāṇi kartavyāni* — actions proper to one's station and stage must be performed until *jñāna* arises — *sampyak citta-śuddhyarthaṃ jñānot-patter yantam*. Without this, *citta-śuddhi* is absent, and *jñāna* simply does not arise. The mūla's first hemistich states the case directly: *karmaṇām anārambhād ananūṣṭhānān naiṣkarmyaṃ jñānaṃ nāśnute nāpnoti* — by non-commencement, by non-performance of *karma*, a person does not attain *naiṣkarmya*. Then Śrīdhara pre-empts the objection drawn from the śruti passage *evam eva pravrajino lokam īpsantaḥ pravrajanti*, which might seem to license immediate *saṃnyāsa* as an independent path to *mokṣa*. His reply: *na ca citta-śuddhiṃ vinā kṛtāt saṃnyasanād eva jñāna-śūnyāt siddhiṃ mokṣaṃ samadhigacchati prāpnoti* — renunciation performed without *citta-śuddhi*, empty of *jñāna*, cannot deliver *siddhi*. *Saṃnyāsa* that liberates is not a mechanical bypass of inner preparation; it is precisely the *saṃnyāsa* that emerges from a purified *antaḥkaraṇa*.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  Madhusūdana Sarasvatī's bhāṣya cites the Bṛhadāraṇyaka passage (tamevaṃ vedānuvacana-yajña-dānā-tapasā brāhmaṇā vividīṣanti) to establish that śruti itself ordains karma as the instrument for ātma-jñāna-sādhana: without the citta-śuddhi karma produces, the sādhaka is bahirmukha (outward-facing) and constitutionally incapable of jñāna-yoga-niṣṭhā. On the saṃnyāsa side, Madhusūdana adds his characteristic insistence that saṃnyāsa cannot become samyak-phala-paryavasāyin (fully fruit-bearing) unless it is grounded in karma-janita-citta-śuddhi (purity born of action); saṃnyāsa born only of autsukyamātra (mere eagerness) is an empty gesture — na phala-paryavasāyī, says the bhāṣya. The synthesis is Madhusūdana's own: Kṛṣṇa-bhakti animates the entire sequence as its telos — karma clears the field, bhakti owns it — so the path is one of progressive interiorisation rather than abrupt discontinuity.