Arjuna no longer asks who the Lord is; he asks how to know him, and where to look.
Having just heard Krishna name himself the source of all, Arjuna turns from doctrine to method. He confesses that ceaseless meditation has not closed the gap on its own, and asks for concrete forms in the world where contemplation can actually take hold.
Master of yoga, how am I to know you, meditating on you always? And in what forms, Lord, am I to hold you in mind?
The reading read whole, as one unhurried piece
Where it stands
Krishna has just declared himself the source of all things, the root from which everything, gods and sages included, proceeds. Arjuna does not doubt this. What he lacks is the practical means: how a mind of limited reach actually arrives at this knowing, and where, in the world in front of him, to fix his attention.
The teaching
Notice first what you are not asking. Who the Lord is has already been settled by everything just spoken, and you have accepted it without argument. What you ask now is how, the manner and the means by which knowing actually happens, not a further statement of doctrine. You address him as the master of yoga, appealing to the very power by which he governs and brings about what is not yet brought about, a power that can open a mind otherwise unfit to know him. And you are honest about your own condition: you have been meditating always, pondering him fully, on every side, and you still do not know how the knowing is to be reached. This is not despair returning. It is an accurate report that constancy of effort, however real, has not by itself closed the distance. So you ask a second question, doubled for weight: in which and which states of being, the many things sentient and insentient, is he to be held in mind. You want concrete, nameable places to stand, not further titles or restated doctrine. Two of the six voices gathered here, Madhva and Abhinavagupta, are recorded as leaving this exact verse without comment. Rather than invent what they might have said, this reading says so plainly, and offers only clearly labeled extensions of positions they are shown holding elsewhere, never as their own attested word on this verse.
The doubt that rises
If ceaseless meditation has not yet delivered the knowing you seek, what, short of trying harder at the very thing that has not worked, would actually close the gap?
Where the paths divide
Read as a terse restatement, without an extended gloss surviving at this exact verse.
What survives from Shankara here is brief: a restatement of the two questions, how am I to know you, and in what dispositions are you to be thought upon. Read against his wider treatment of the chapter, the address yogin already implies that the Lord's own power exceeds what unaided constancy of mind can reach, and that his disclosure, not effort alone, is what finally opens the gap. Any fuller answer to where the knowing should be lodged belongs to what follows, not to an elaboration recorded here.
For a devotee already settled in contemplation, asking to deepen it further.
You speak here, on Ramanuja's reading, as one already established in devotion, not a beginner seeking a first foothold. The Lord you already ponder holds a host of lovely qualities and full lordship; the question is how that ongoing contemplation is to be carried further and, in your second question, in which states of being, distinct from what has already been named, he is to be pondered as their indwelling ruler. What is missing is not who he is, already settled, but the objective field where his governance can be traced.
Read honestly: the source is silent here, and only a labeled extension can be offered.
No comment from Madhva survives on this particular verse, and nothing here is presented as his own confident word. What can honestly be offered, marked plainly as extension, draws on positions attested elsewhere in his work: even the capacity to know the Lord, and the wish to know him, are themselves dependent on the Lord's own consent to be known, so that constancy of contemplation, without his disclosure, does not by itself close the distance.
Read honestly: the source is silent here too, and only a labeled extension can be offered.
No comment from Abhinavagupta survives on this verse either, and his fragmentary Gitartha-samgraha leaves nothing attested in his own voice to report. On a conditional extension only, flagged clearly as such, the question could be read as bounded awareness struggling to recognize a freedom and presence it has never actually lacked, and the plea for particular forms as a request for supports through which that recognition can steady.
For the devotee who wants concrete places, not titles, where remembrance can rest.
Sridhara reads the verse as showing its own purpose. You do not want a roster of honorific names, nor a further point of doctrine already given; you want the actual objects in the world among which the Lord's glory can be tracked by a steadied devotee's mind. It is through named, countable glories, the forms the coming verses will supply, that an ordinary, wandering attention finds handholds sturdy enough to sustain remembrance.
Read as the exact hinge between a confessed difficulty and the coming catalogue.
Madhusudana frames the verse as answering the chapter's own implicit question, why recount these glories at all. Your confessed dullness of mind is exact, not merely polite, and your two questions fit together precisely: by contemplating the Lord within his glories, you will come to know him, so the request for particular forms is exactly what the coming catalogue of glories exists to answer.
All six readings agree that Arjuna's question has shifted from who the Lord is to how he is to be known and where. They part on what that shift finally requires, effort deepened, a field of forms supplied, or a disclosure only the Lord can give, and two of the six voices, Madhva and Abhinavagupta, are recorded as leaving this exact verse without comment at all. This reading does not resolve the fork, and it does not pretend those two silences are anything other than what the record shows.
A question to carry
When your own steady practice has not yet delivered the knowing you sought, can you ask, as plainly as Arjuna does here, not for more resolve but for a concrete place to stand?
Where this teaching travels
Verses that sit near this one, each going its own way; follow whichever calls you.
So bring your asking down to something you can actually hold: not the whole of the infinite at once, but one form, one place, where remembrance of him can begin to rest today.
Each school is voiced from the commentators named above. Their full words, every translation, and where the schools agree and differ wait in the reading desk just below. Open the commentary desk.
This verse turns the chapter from a settled claim about who Krishna is toward the practical question of how to know him, and its plea for particular forms is what calls forth the long catalogue of glories that follows.
Where they agreethe convergence
Across schools and centuries the commentators come to the same ground. These are the points they share, and the voices that hold each one.
Arjuna does not ask who the Lord is, since that is settled; he asks how the knowing is to be reached at all.
Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Śrīdhara · MadhusūdanaIn Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 2 others’ words
Arjuna's question is practical, not a further piece of doctrine. He has just heard Krishna declare himself the source of all things; he does not ask who Krishna is, since that is settled. He asks how he is to come to know him, and by what means an actual seeker, of limited capacity, arrives at that knowing rather than merely being told it in words.
He calls Krishna yogin, appealing to the very power that can make an unfit seeker fit to know what he seeks.
Across Advaita, ViśiṣṭādvaitaŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · MadhusūdanaIn Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 1 others’ words
Arjuna addresses Krishna as yogin, master of yoga, and this address is not decoration. Yoga here is read as the Lord's own unsurpassed lordship, the power that brings about what is not yet brought about, the very power by which he can both be known and can make an otherwise unfit seeker fit to know him.
He confesses that ceaseless contemplation has not, by itself, delivered the knowing, leaning the question toward disclosure rather than effort alone.
Across AdvaitaŚaṅkara · MadhusūdanaIn Śaṅkara and Madhusūdana’s words
The verse pairs constant contemplation with a confessed difficulty. Arjuna reports that he is meditating always, on every side, and still does not know how the knowing is to be reached; some readings have him name his own mind as dull or gross. The question therefore leans toward the Lord's own disclosure, not toward effort alone closing the gap.
He asks, doubled for emphasis, in which and which forms he should contemplate the Lord, wanting concrete objects rather than titles.
Across Viśiṣṭādvaita, Bhakti, AdvaitaRāmānuja · Śrīdhara · MadhusūdanaIn Rāmānuja, Śrīdhara, and 1 others’ words
The second question asks, doubled for emphasis, in which and which states of being, sentient and insentient, the Lord is to be contemplated. This is read as a request for concrete, particular objects in the world, not a plea for more names or titles, and it is precisely this request that calls forth the long catalogue of glories filling the rest of the chapter.
Where the record itself falls silent, as with Madhva and Abhinavagupta on this verse, honesty about that silence matters more than a confident-sounding invention.
Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Śrīdhara · MadhusūdanaIn Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 2 others’ words
Underneath both questions lies one aim: to make the earlier promise, that whoever truly knows the Lord's glory and power is joined to an unwavering yoga, actually usable. Arjuna wants the manner of knowing and the objects of knowing so that contemplation stops being an abstract exercise and becomes something a limited mind can actually sustain.
This is the shared ground; it can be carried as it is. Below is where they differ.
Where they differthe divergence
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words
Ramanuja reads Arjuna as one already settled in devotion, not a beginner seeking a first foothold, so the question is how to deepen contemplation already underway of a Lord possessing a host of lovely qualities and full lordship. The second question asks for the objective field, in which states of being, distinct from what has already been named, the Lord is to be pondered as their indwelling ruler, since who he is has been settled and what remains is where his governance can be traced.
Dvaita, in their fuller words
Madhva is recorded as offering no comment on this verse; nothing in his own voice can honestly be reported here. What can be offered only as a labeled extension of positions attested elsewhere in his work is that even the capacity to know the Lord, and the wish to know him, are themselves dependent on the Lord's own consent to be known, so that constancy of contemplation alone, without his disclosure, does not close the distance.
Shaiva, in their fuller words
Abhinavagupta is recorded as offering no comment on this verse; the fragmentary state of his surviving Gitartha-samgraha means nothing in his own voice can be reported here either. On a conditional Kashmir Shaiva extension, flagged clearly as extension and not as his attested word, the question would be read as bounded awareness struggling to recognize a freedom and presence it has never actually lacked, and the plea for particular forms as a request for supports through which that recognition can steady.
Bhakti, in their fuller words
Sridhara reads the verse as showing its own purpose: Arjuna wants practical means, not titles or further doctrine. He asks for the actual objects and substances among which the Lord's glory can be tracked by a steadied devotee's mind, since it is through named, countable glories that an ordinary, wandering attention finds handholds sturdy enough to sustain remembrance.
A modern reading, in their fuller words
Madhusudana frames the verse as answering the chapter's own implicit question, why recount these glories at all. Arjuna's confessed dullness of mind is read as exact rather than merely polite, and his two questions are shown to fit together precisely: by contemplating the Lord in his glories, the Lord himself indicates, the seeker will come to know him, so the second question is the exact request the coming catalogue exists to answer.
A few questions to carry
These ask for understanding, not recall; each answer is settled by the commentary itself.
For a second sitting
Carry this with youwhat stays
Notice, today, one ordinary thing your attention keeps returning to on its own, without effort. Rather than pulling your mind away from it toward some more abstract idea of the divine, let that very thing become the place where you practice remembering. This is the shape of Arjuna's own request: not less particularity, but a concrete, namable place to stand.
So let your own asking be as plain as Arjuna's: not more resolve alone, but a place, however ordinary, where your attention can actually come to rest on him.
Read deeper
Everything a full study holds, folded below.
Word by word
All the commentary, woven together
The commentary, woven together
machine-assisted draft, pending review
Convergence
rjuna's question is practical, not a further piece of doctrine. He has just heard Krishna declare himself the source of all things; he does not ask who Krishna is, since that is settled. He asks how he is to come to know him, and by what means an actual seeker, of limited capacity, arrives at that knowing rather than merely being told it in words.
Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Arjuna addresses Krishna as yogin, master of yoga, and this address is not decoration. Yoga here is read as the Lord's own unsurpassed lordship, the power that brings about what is not yet brought about, the very power by which he can both be known and can make an otherwise unfit seeker fit to know him.
Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
The verse pairs constant contemplation with a confessed difficulty. Arjuna reports that he is meditating always, on every side, and still does not know how the knowing is to be reached; some readings have him name his own mind as dull or gross. The question therefore leans toward the Lord's own disclosure, not toward effort alone closing the gap.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
The second question asks, doubled for emphasis, in which and which states of being, sentient and insentient, the Lord is to be contemplated. This is read as a request for concrete, particular objects in the world, not a plea for more names or titles, and it is precisely this request that calls forth the long catalogue of glories filling the rest of the chapter.
Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Underneath both questions lies one aim: to make the earlier promise, that whoever truly knows the Lord's glory and power is joined to an unwavering yoga, actually usable. Arjuna wants the manner of knowing and the objects of knowing so that contemplation stops being an abstract exercise and becomes something a limited mind can actually sustain.
Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Divergence
Advaita Vedānta
The surviving Shankara material on this verse is a terse restatement of the two questions rather than an extended gloss: how am I to know you, and in what dispositions are you to be thought upon by me. Read against his wider treatment of the chapter, the address yogin already carries the claim that the Lord's own power both exceeds unaided effort and can open the seeker to a knowledge the mind's constancy alone does not reach. Any fuller Advaita answer to where knowing should be lodged belongs to the verses that follow, not to an elaboration Shankara is shown making here.
Śaṅkarācārya
Viśiṣṭādvaita
Ramanuja reads Arjuna as one already settled in devotion, not a beginner seeking a first foothold, so the question is how to deepen contemplation already underway of a Lord possessing a host of lovely qualities and full lordship. The second question asks for the objective field, in which states of being, distinct from what has already been named, the Lord is to be pondered as their indwelling ruler, since who he is has been settled and what remains is where his governance can be traced.
Rāmānujācārya
Dvaita
Madhva is recorded as offering no comment on this verse; nothing in his own voice can honestly be reported here. What can be offered only as a labeled extension of positions attested elsewhere in his work is that even the capacity to know the Lord, and the wish to know him, are themselves dependent on the Lord's own consent to be known, so that constancy of contemplation alone, without his disclosure, does not close the distance.
Madhvācārya
Kashmir Śaiva
Abhinavagupta is recorded as offering no comment on this verse; the fragmentary state of his surviving Gitartha-samgraha means nothing in his own voice can be reported here either. On a conditional Kashmir Shaiva extension, flagged clearly as extension and not as his attested word, the question would be read as bounded awareness struggling to recognize a freedom and presence it has never actually lacked, and the plea for particular forms as a request for supports through which that recognition can steady.
Ācārya Abhinavagupta
Bhakti
Sridhara reads the verse as showing its own purpose: Arjuna wants practical means, not titles or further doctrine. He asks for the actual objects and substances among which the Lord's glory can be tracked by a steadied devotee's mind, since it is through named, countable glories that an ordinary, wandering attention finds handholds sturdy enough to sustain remembrance.
Śrīdhara Svāmī
Modern
Madhusudana frames the verse as answering the chapter's own implicit question, why recount these glories at all. Arjuna's confessed dullness of mind is read as exact rather than merely polite, and his two questions are shown to fit together precisely: by contemplating the Lord in his glories, the Lord himself indicates, the seeker will come to know him, so the second question is the exact request the coming catalogue exists to answer.
Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
A Seeker Asks
If I already meditate as steadily as I can and still feel I do not know God, what does that failure actually mean, and what should I ask for instead of trying harder?
Arjuna's own confession is the model here. He has been contemplating always, on every side, and still asks how. That does not mean his practice has failed; it means constancy of effort alone was never going to be the whole of the answer, and asking is itself the right next step, not a sign of defeat.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Notice what Arjuna asks for next: not more resolve, but a where. He wants particular objects, states, and substances in which the knowing can actually be lodged. If constant effort has left you no closer, the question worth asking may not be how much harder to try, but what, concretely, your attention could be resting on instead.
Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī
Where the sources themselves fall silent, as with Madhva and Abhinavagupta on this exact verse, the honest lesson is that even the tradition does not pretend every question has a full answer on record. The right response to that silence is not manufactured certainty but staying with what can genuinely be said, and letting the rest remain open.
Madhvācārya · Ācārya Abhinavagupta
Contemplation
Notice, today, one ordinary thing your attention keeps returning to on its own, without effort. Rather than pulling your mind away from it toward some more abstract idea of the divine, let that very thing become the place where you practice remembering. This is the shape of Arjuna's own request: not less particularity, but a concrete, namable place to stand.
Sit with this · sonnet-5-authored
All the translations and commentary
Pull up a chair.
You have come to sit with this verse. When you are ready to hear the translators and the commentators in full, open a tradition in the doorways below, or add a voice by name above.
Also hear this verse, tradition by tradition.