Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 4, Verse 31: Krishna to Arjuna — Jñāna-Karma-Sannyāsa-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  Those who eat the nectar-remainder of yajña (sacrifice) — performing the enjoined rites and subsisting on only what remains after the offering — reach the eternal Brahman; this world itself, available to all creatures, does not exist for the one who performs no yajña, let alone any higher realm. Śaṅkara reads ‘yajña-śiṣṭa-amṛta' as food that is literally ‘nectar-named' (amṛtākhya) because it has been consecrated through proper ritual; the mokṣa-seeking aspirant reaches sanātana Brahman through this discipline. Where even common worldly existence is forfeited by the ayajña (one without sacrifice), the attainment of a higher realm — achievable only by special means — is manifestly impossible.

  divergence: Śaṅkara's bhāṣya explicit: ‘yathāvidhicoditam annam amṛtākhyaṃ bhuñjate' — the food enjoined by scripture is ‘named nectar'; and ‘sanātanaṃ cirantanaṃ’ confirms timeless Brahman as the destination for the mumukṣu.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  Sustaining the body only with the nectar-remnant of sacrifice — never eating independently of ritual — those engaged in karma-yoga reach the eternal Brahman. For the one who abandons mahāyajña and the obligatory nitya-naimittika rites, not even this natural world yields the puruṣārthas of dharma, artha, and kāma; mokṣa — the supreme puruṣārtha currently under discussion — is then utterly unthinkable. Rāmānuja distinguishes ‘this world' (prākṛta-loka) from the supreme goal: since mokṣa is the topic, worldly attainments are themselves called ‘this world' (ayaṃ lokaḥ), marking how far the ayajña falls short.

  divergence: Rāmānuja's bhāṣya specifies ‘mahāyajñādipūrvakanityanaimittikakarmārahitasya' — one devoid of mahāyajña and obligatory rites — and distinguishes prākṛta-loka from mokṣa-phalа precisely because mokṣa is ‘prastatutvāt' (currently introduced).

• Madhvadvaita

  Yajña-śiṣṭāmṛta-bhujaḥ (those who eat the nectar-remnant of sacrifice) yānti brahma sanātanam (go to the eternal Brahman). One who performs no sacrifice has no footing in this world — nāyaṃ loko ‘sty ayajñasya — still less in any other, kuto ‘nyaḥ kurusattama. Madhva reads 4.30–4.31 jointly. The niyatāhāra (regulated-diet) practitioner accomplishes the prāṇa-offering through prāṇaśoṣāt — the very drying-up, the thinning of the prāṇa-streams that results from sparse eating — whereby the motions of the sense-faculties (indriyavṛttīnām vṛttimattvindriyeṣu saṅkocāt) are contracted back into those same faculties. The offering is thus internal: prāṇān prāṇeṣu juhvati. A second mode, drawn from Kaṭha 3.13, proceeds by speech and mind: yacchedvāṅmanasī prājñaḥ — the wise one should restrain speech into mind, then mind into the higher controlling deity. Jayatīrtha specifies that on this reading niyatāhāra stands as a pṛthak yajña (a separate sacrifice), distinct from the prāṇa-prāṇa offering of the preceding verse. A third warrant is cited from an independent śruti: yad asyālpāśanaṃ tena prāṇāḥ prāṇeṣu vai hutāḥ — sparse eating itself constitutes the prāṇa-oblation. By any of these modes the paratantra jīva (eternally dependent individual self), distinct by bheda (real distinction) from svatantra (the independently real) Hari, attains brahma sanātanam not through dissolution but through the grace secured by unbroken, disciplined worship. The one who abandons even this minimal restraint has no loka here, none elsewhere.

  divergence: The contaminated cell's divergence note flagged that Madhva does not comment on the sanātana-Brahman destination separately, attributing the point to inference from his broader doctrinal scheme. The source bhāṣya, however, does ground the destination implicitly in the joint 4.30–4.31 passage: yānti brahma sanātanam is the mūla's own conclusion, and Madhva's citation of yad asyālpāśanaṃ tena prāṇāḥ prāṇeṣu vai hutāḥ along with Kaṭha 3.13 supplies the sacrificial mechanism leading there. Jayatīrtha further disambiguates the two modes — niyatāhāra as pṛthak yajña versus the prāṇa-prāṇa offering — which the contaminated cell collapsed into one. No supplementary inference beyond the bhāṣya is required.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  Those of regulated diet — withholding food-excess so that the āhāra-vṛttis (food-tendencies) themselves are dissolved into the prāṇas — are yajña-knowers who eat the nectar-remainder as their adhikāra (sanctioned portion), and thus reach sanātana Brahman directly or through a succession of means. Vallabha's reading insists that both the saṃyatāhāra (dietary restraint) and the yajña-śiṣṭa represent Kṛṣṇa's prasāda — accepting nothing outside one's rightful offering converts even eating into a form of līlā-participation. The one who refuses all yajña loses even ‘this body of slight bliss' (ayam alpānando loko deho vā), let alone the divine realm.

  divergence: Vallabha's joint gloss (4.30-4.31) specifies ‘āhāratarpaṇaprāṇān eva vṛttīḥ prāṇeṣu vilāpayanti' and reads ‘ayam alpānando loko deho vā ayajñasya na bhavati' — interpreting ‘this world' as ‘this body of slight joy', tightening the consequence of yajña-neglect to the embodied state itself.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  Having performed the sacrifices, one eats only the unrestricted food remaining after the rite — food that is in the form of nectar (amṛta-rūpa) — and through this practice they attain sanātana Brahman by the doorway of jñāna (vijñāna-dvāreṇa). Śrīdhara stresses that the consequence of neglect is vivid: even this world with its slight joys (alpasukhā api manuṣyaloka) is denied to the ayajña — one who is empty of sacrificial observance — so how much more is the other world forfeited? Therefore yajñas are to be performed by all means.

  divergence: Śrīdhara's bhāṣya reads ‘yajñānkṛtvāvaśiṣṭe kāle aniṣiddham annam amṛtarūpaṃ bhuñjate' and adds ‘jñānadvāreṇa prāpnuvanti' — making jñāna the proximate means. His closing injunction ‘yajñāḥ sarvathā kartavyāḥ’ gives the bhakti-philological voice its practical, universal imperative.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  Having stated the positive fruit (anvaya) of yajña in the prior half, Madhusūdana now isolates the negative (vyatireka) for the one who lacks even a single yajña from among all those described: even this world of slight joy (alpasukha api manuṣyaloka) does not exist for the ayajña, since he is universally censurable (sarvanindyatva); how then could the other world — attainable only by superior means — be within reach? The synthesis of Advaita and Kṛṣṇa-bhakti in Madhusūdana means that ‘ayajña' carries a double deficiency: absence of jñāna-purification and absence of devotional surrender.

  divergence: Madhusūdana's bhāṣya explicitly structures the verse as anvaya-vyatireka: ‘evam anvaye guṇam uktvā vyatireke doṣam āha ardhena' — ‘having stated the merit in the positive case, the fault in the negative case is stated by the half-verse.’ His phrase ‘sarvanindyatva' is the key interpretive addition.