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.