Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 4, Verse 13: Krishna to Arjuna — Jñāna-Karma-Sannyāsa-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  The fourfold order (cātur-varṇya) was projected by Me through the Lord's power of māyā, differentiated by the three guṇas (sattva, rajas, tamas) and the corresponding duties each guṇa dictates — the brāhmaṇa established in sattva with śama and dama, the kṣatriya with sattva-subsidiary rajas bearing śaurya, the vaiśya with rajas-subsidiary tamas tending agriculture, the śūdra with dominant tamas serving the three. Yet though you would conclude that I, as creator of this order, must bear its fruit-karma (karmaphala), know Me in ultimate truth (paramārthatah) as akartā — not-doer. This is so because I am avyaya (inexhaustible, unmodifiable): the conventional creator in vyāvahārika appearance, but untouched by action or its fruit in pāramārthika reality.

  divergence: Śaṅkara explicitly: 'yady api māyā-saṃvyavahāreṇa tasya karmaṇaḥ kartāram api santaṃ māṃ paramārthataḥ viddhy akartāram' — the vyāvahārika/pāramārthika distinction carries the full weight of the akartā claim.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  The entire cosmos, from Brahmā down to a blade of grass (brahma-stamba-paryanta), is projected, sustained, and withdrawn by Me alone — cātur-varṇya being its most visible differentiation by guṇa and corresponding duty (karma-vibhāga). Notice that Rāmānuja's bhāṣya extends 'sṛṣṭam' to include rakṣaṇa and upasamhāra: creation is not a single past act but Bhagavān's continuous threefold lordship. I am nonetheless akartā because My action issues from a will utterly free of self-interest (ahantā, mamantā) — the antarātman of all beings acts through their guṇas while remaining the ground that is never depleted (avyaya).

  divergence: Rāmānuja: 'sṛṣṭi-grahaṇaṃ pradarśanārtham — mayā eva rakṣyate mayā eva ca upasamhriyate' — the verse's 'sṛṣṭam' indexes the complete sṛṣṭi-sthiti-saṃhāra cycle.

• Madhvadvaita

  I alone am the true kartā (kartā eva hi) of the fourfold order — Madhva's bhāṣya insists on this direct assertion, reversing any impression that Kṛṣṇa deflects agency. The guṇa-distribution is ontologically fixed: brāhmaṇa is sāttvika, kṣatriya is sāttvik-rājasa, vaiśya is rājasa-tāmasa, śūdra is tāmasa; the karma-vibhāga to follow in 18.42. Yet I am simultaneously akartā because My activity (kriyā) is utterly unlike jīva-activity (vailakṣaṇyāt) — the Śruti 'viśvakarma vimanāḥ' confirms a doer whose doing leaves no saṃskāra-trace. The jīva forever depends; Hari forever acts without dependence.

  divergence: Madhva: 'kriyāyāṃ vailakṣaṇyāt kartā'py akartā' — the term vailakṣaṇya (categorical difference in kind of action) is Dvaita's technical solution, supported by Ṛgveda 8.3.17.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  The charming diversity of cātur-varṇya arises not from any inequity in Kṛṣṇa's will but from the guṇas already embedded in each jīva along with the faculties He gave them — 'mātārthaṃ ca bhavārthaṃ ca svātmane'kalpanāya ca' (Bhāgavata 10.87.2). The charge of partiality (vaiṣamya) and cruelty (nairghṛṇya) addressed in Vallabha's bhāṣya is dissolved: like rain that equally waters different seeds, Bhagavān provides prasāda (grace-fuel) uniformly; it is each jīva's prior karma-bīja that produces differential fruit. I am akartā because I am avyaya — free of ahaṃkāra (ahankāra-rahita), the very condition that makes action binding in ordinary beings.

  divergence: Vallabha cites Brahma-sūtra 2.1.34 and Kauṣītakī Upaniṣad 3.3.9 on Kṛṣṇa as sāpekṣa (condition-responsive) yet not implicated: 'vṛṣṭivad bhagavān bījavat karma'.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  The brāhmaṇas, whose nature is sattva-predominant, are given śama and dama as their prescribed duty; kṣatriyas, sattva-rajas mixed, receive śaurya and battle; vaiśyas, rajas-tamas, tend agriculture and trade; śūdras, tamas-predominant, are assigned service of the three higher orders — this is guṇa-karma-vibhāga as Śrīdhara reads it, a natural consequence of the guṇa-mixture each being carries. Though generator of this variegated order, I am in effect (phalataḥ) akartā: because I am avyaya — meaning āsakti-rāhitya (absence of attachment) rendering Me śrama-rahita (exempt from fatigue) and nāśādi-rahita (beyond diminishment).

  divergence: Śrīdhara: 'tathāpi evaṃ tasya kartāram api phalato'kartāram eva māṃ viddhi — tatra hetuḥ, avyayam āsakti-rāhityena śrama-rahitaṃ nāśādi-rahitam' — the akartā is glossed specifically as phalataḥ akartā (non-doer in terms of fruit), a distinct register from Śaṅkara's paramārthataḥ.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  The body-initiating inequalities of guṇa (śarīrārambhaka-guṇa-vaiṣamya) guarantee that beings cannot be of uniform nature — this is Madhusūdana's opening move, emphasizing that cātur-varṇya encodes empirical necessity, not divine preference. In vyāvahārika perspective I am kartā; in paramārtha I am akartā. But Madhusūdana sharpens what Śaṅkara leaves implicit: I am avyaya because I am nirahankāra (free of 'I-sense') — hence akṣīṇa-mahiman (undiminished in greatness). This synthesizes: Advaita's two-truth frame carries Kṛṣṇa's inexhaustible personal greatness as the very ground of the paradox.

  divergence: Madhusūdana: 'vyavahāra-dṛṣṭyā kartāram api māṃ paramārtha-dṛṣṭyā viddhy akartāram avyayaṃ nirahankāratvena akṣīṇa-mahimānam' — 'nirahankāratvena akṣīṇa-mahimānam' is his own synthesis not found in Śaṅkara's bhāṣya.