StudyVedanta
Skip to the verse
V.4110.4010.42
Read slowly

Every glory you meet is a single spark; the fire it comes from is his alone.

The catalogue of wonders has run as long as any catalogue can run. Now Krishna closes it, not by adding one more item, but by handing over the rule that reaches everything the list left out.

41Chapter 10
The verseSpoken by Krishna
Voices6 commentators · 5 schools · modern voices
The readingAbout 5 minutes, unhurried
यद्यद्विभूतिमत्सत्त्वं श्रीमदूर्जितमेव वा। तत्तदेवावगच्छ त्वं मम तेजोंऽशसंभवम्
yad yad vibhūtimat sattvaṁ śhrīmad ūrjitam eva vā tat tad evāvagachchha tvaṁ mama tejo ’nśha-sambhavam

Whatever thing you find touched with majesty, beauty, or overwhelming strength, know it for what it is: a single spark struck from my own splendor.

Bhagavad Gita 10.41
0:00 / 0:00

Saved for this reading session

Three movements · tap a label to switch

Sanskrit recitation by Swami Brahmānanda

Audio from the Gītā Supersite, IIT Kanpur

The reading read whole, as one unhurried piece

Where it stands

Krishna has spent this chapter naming himself across the world: mountain, river, sage, season, syllable, weapon, animal. No such list could ever be finished. So here, at its close, he stops adding examples and instead hands Arjuna the rule itself, one mark by which any remaining glory, named or not, can be recognized.

The teaching

Every glory in the world is a single spark; the fire is his.

Take any being at all, anywhere. Whatever holds majesty, whatever is rich in fortune or beauty, whatever surpasses in strength: know that it has arisen from a portion of the Lord's own splendor. Not the whole of his power, a single fragment of it, and that fragment alone is enough to ground an entire excellence. This is not offered chiefly as a fact about the world's origins. It is offered as a practice you can carry into every day that follows this one. You do not need Krishna to name a thing before you can trace it back to him; you need only meet something glorious, anywhere, and apply the rule yourself. The unfinishable catalogue becomes, this way, an unbounded invitation: every beauty and every strength you encounter for the rest of your life becomes a doorway rather than a distraction.

The doubt that rises

If even a fragment of the Lord's power is enough to produce the greatest glories a person can witness, what does that actually change about how you meet a beautiful or powerful thing tomorrow? And where the record from a given master is thin, as it is for more than one voice gathered here, how much can honestly be said in his name, and how much must be marked as reasonable extension rather than his own word?

Where the paths divide

Advaita Vedanta

Read from a terse, mostly lexical extant gloss.

What survives under Shankara's name here fixes the verse's terms precisely, majesty, fortune, vigour, and rests on the phrase born of a portion of my splendor as the defining move. It does not, in what remains, unfold an explicit non-dual argument for this particular line. Read against his broader commentary elsewhere, the portion would be a concession of ordinary speech rather than a literal division of something without parts, but that fuller claim belongs to the wider architecture, not to this terse note by itself.

Vishishtadvaita

Read as the Lord's governing power showing through, not divided by, each being.

Ramanuja glosses splendor precisely as the power to prevail and to govern, unthinkable in its scope. Every glorious being shows forth one small region of that power, and nothing is subtracted from the Lord in the showing. The chief gift of the verse, on this reading, is the general rule itself: having heard specific glories named, the listener is now equipped to extend the list forever on his own.

Dvaita

Read as a hard line drawn between two kinds of being.

Madhva presses the word portion until it divides all glorious beings into two unequal classes. Ordinary souls, even great gods like Indra and Rudra, shine only because a fragment of the Lord's splendor has been joined to them; they remain dependent, individual selves. But certain forms, the Boar, Krishna, Rama, Kapila, are not fragments at all. They are the Lord himself, in essential form, a distinction he grounds in supplementary hymns and in the Bhagavata's own wording, where the word but marks the line as decisive.

Kashmir Shaivism

Read honestly from a shared, not verse-specific, extant comment.

No dedicated note on 10.41 alone survives under Abhinavagupta's name. He treats this verse as part of one continuous unit running from 10.19 to 10.42, and his surviving remark sits at 10.19, where he does quote this verse's own words and reads them as the difference-moment of a difference-and-non-difference teaching, one that the passage resolves two verses later into undivided non-difference, citing the Rig Veda's image of the Lord as a quarter of all beings. On a Kashmir Shaiva reading more broadly, one might extend this further, that the portion names consciousness recognizing its own splendor concentrated at a point, but that extension is offered here only as a labeled possibility, not as this master's own stated word on this exact line.

Bhakti

Read as an unbounded, portable practice of remembrance.

Sridhara treats the verse less as information and more as instruction. Since no catalogue of glories could ever be completed, the listener is handed a key he can use for the rest of his life: meet anything glorious, anywhere, and let it become an occasion for the heart to rest in the Lord. Read this way, admiration for the world stops competing with devotion and becomes one of its ordinary forms.

Modern

Read as a confirming note, with its likely extension named as extension.

What is preserved under Madhusudana's name here mainly restates the verse's plain sense, glory, beauty, power, sourced in a portion of the Lord's splendor, without building a distinct new argument. Set against his larger project of reconciling non-dual philosophy with devotional language elsewhere in his commentary, a further reconciling reading suggests itself readily, but it belongs to that broader method, not to this terse note, and is offered here as a flagged extension rather than as his stated position on 10.41.

Every voice gathered here agrees that a glory is a portion, not the whole. They part on what portion means. Does it divide beings into two ranks, ordinary souls and a small class that is the Lord himself undivided, as Dvaita reads it? Or does it name one power showing through every being alike without division at all, as Vishishtadvaita reads it? And for more than one master here, the honest record itself is thin or shared across many verses rather than given for this one alone; what can rightly be attributed to a master's own thought, and what is a reasonable extension of his method, is a line this page marks rather than erases.

A question to carry

The next time something stops you with its beauty or its sheer force, can you let it be exactly what it is, a single spark, and follow your attention past the spark toward the fire it came from?

So let the next glory that finds you, however small or overwhelming, be received as a portion of something greater than itself. Let your wonder stay honest: real enough to notice, humble enough to keep looking past it.

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 falls at the very close of the chapter's long roll of manifestations, turning an unfinishable list of named glories into a single covering principle before the chapter's final summary two verses on.

Where they agreethe convergence

Whatever shines with majesty, fortune, or strength, anywhere, has sprung from a portion of the Lord's splendor, never the whole of it, and every source here converges on treating this as reachable by anyone who simply learns to look.

Across schools and centuries the commentators come to the same ground. These are the points they share, and the voices that hold each one.

4schools

No list of glories could ever be finished, so one mark is given instead: majesty, fortune, or vigour, wherever it appears.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, Dvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Madhva · Śrīdhara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 3 others’ words

This verse closes the long catalogue of divine manifestations with one covering rule. No list of glories could ever be finished, so instead of adding one more item, Krishna hands over the mark itself: whatever being holds majesty, is rich in fortune or beauty, or is full of vigour has sprung from a portion of his splendour. The commentators agree the grammar is deliberately unbounded, reaching every excellence, named or not.

Asked in question 1, below
4schools

Even the most dazzling thing carries only a fragment of his splendor; the whole remains behind it, unmeasured.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, Dvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Madhva · Śrīdhara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 3 others’ words

The key phrase, amsha-sambhavam, born of a portion, is read across the sources as marking a real but partial derivation: even the most dazzling thing in the world carries only a fragment of the Lord's tejas, never the whole of it. Wonder at the glory is therefore never misplaced, but it is also never final; the glory points to something greater standing behind it.

Asked in question 2, below
3schools

The rule is meant to be carried forward by you: any excellence anywhere, named or not, falls under it.

Across Viśiṣṭādvaita, Dvaita, Kashmir ŚaivaRāmānuja · Madhva · Abhinavagupta
In Rāmānuja, Madhva, and 1 others’ words

Tejas itself is consistently glossed as power in the sense of the capacity to prevail, to overcome, to shine forth and govern, rather than as mere physical brilliance. Whether that power is read as ruling force, as borrowed splendour, or as consciousness's own vigour, the commentators converge on reading it as something that acts, not merely something that gleams.

Asked in question 3, below
2schools

Where the extant word from a given master is thin or a shared block-comment, that limit is named rather than papered over with invented certainty.

Across Viśiṣṭādvaita, BhaktiRāmānuja · Śrīdhara
In Rāmānuja and Śrīdhara’s words

Several readings treat the verse less as a closed doctrinal statement and more as a portable instruction: because the catalogue can never be completed, the listener is handed a rule he can apply on his own, so that any glory met anywhere in life, not only the specific items Krishna has named, becomes recognizable as a trace of him.

Asked in question 4, below
2schools

To trace a glory to its source is not to stop admiring it, but to let the admiration reach past the spark toward the fire.

Across Advaita, Kashmir ŚaivaŚaṅkara · Abhinavagupta · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Abhinavagupta, and 1 others’ words

Where the extant commentary is thin, as with Shankara, Abhinavagupta, and Madhusudana on this particular line, the surviving notes still agree on the verse's basic function: it supplies the defining mark, majesty, fortune, vigour, and the single source, a portion of the Lord's splendour, by which every remaining glory in the world can be recognized, even without an elaborated argument attached to each master's name.

This is the shared ground; it can be carried as it is. Below is where they differ.

Where they differthe divergence

The question they answer differently
Is the portion of splendor behind every glory one undivided power showing through all beings alike, or does the word portion itself divide beings into two unequal kinds?
The traditional commentators
Advaita Vedāntasee this school across the GītāŚaṅkara
The verse supplies a precise closing definition, majesty, fortune, vigour, sourced in a portion of the Lord's splendour; a fuller non-dual ground is implied by the wider commentary rather than argued in this particular note.
Where the extant gloss stays close to lexical definition rather than elaborated doctrine.
Viśiṣṭādvaitasee this school across the GītāRāmānuja
Splendor is the Lord's own power to govern and prevail; every glorious being shows forth one region of that unthinkable power, undiminished in him.
Read as the general rule by which the seeker extends the catalogue himself.
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words

Ramanuja reads tejas specifically as the Lord's power to overcome and govern, and every glorious being as showing forth one small region of that unthinkable ruling power. Nothing is diminished or divided in the Lord himself; the portion is his power becoming visible through a particular being, and the verse's real gift is the general rule by which the seeker can extend the listing on his own.

Rāmānuja
Dvaitasee this school across the GītāMadhva
Ordinary beings, even great gods, carry only a dependent fragment; certain forms like Krishna and Rama are not fragments at all but the Lord himself.
Pressed from the word portion and the scriptures Madhva cites alongside it.
Dvaita, in their fuller words

Madhva presses amsha to draw a hard line between two classes of being: ordinary souls, even great gods like Indra and Rudra, carry only a dependent, borrowed fragment of the Lord's splendour, while forms like the Boar, Krishna, Rama, and Kapila are not fragments at all but the Lord himself in essential form, a distinction he grounds in supplementary hymns and the Bhagavata's own wording.

Madhva
Asked in question 5, below
Kashmir Śaivasee this school across the GītāAbhinavagupta
No verse-specific bhasya survives; the shared 10.19-10.42 comment reads this verse's naming of many glories as difference resolved, two verses later, into undivided non-difference.
Honestly marked as a block-comment rather than a dedicated note on 10.41 alone.
BhaktiŚrīdhara
The verse is a portable practice: any glory met anywhere, not only the ones Krishna names, becomes an occasion for the heart to rest in him.
Read as an unbounded invitation rather than a closed catalogue.
Bhakti, in their fuller words

Sridhara treats the verse chiefly as a practice rather than a piece of information: since Krishna's list could never be exhausted, the listener is handed a portable key, so that any glory met anywhere in ordinary life becomes an occasion for the heart to rest in the Lord, turning the finite catalogue into an unbounded invitation to remembrance.

Śrīdhara
Modern voices teachers of the last two centuries, read together; they stand apart from the classical schools
A modern readingMadhusūdana
The surviving note mainly restates the verse's plain sense; a modern-facing reading treats portion as a concession to the seeker's standpoint on the way to one undivided reality, offered as extension rather than as the note's own claim.
The operation is confirming the plain sense; the reconciling argument is extrapolated, flagged as such.
A modern reading, in their fuller words

The extant note attributed to Madhusudana is terse and largely restates the verse's plain sense without extending it into fresh argument. Read against his broader project of reconciling non-dualism with devotional language, a modern-facing gloss would treat 'portion' as a concession to the seeker's standpoint on the way to recognizing one undivided reality behind every named and unnamed glory, but this is a plausible extension of his method, not a claim this particular note itself makes.

Madhusūdana
Asked in question 6, below
Sit with these

A few questions to carry

These ask for understanding, not recall; each answer is settled by the commentary itself.

1
Why does Krishna end the long catalogue of glories with this one sweeping rule?
2
What does the phrase 'born of a portion' (amsha-sambhavam) claim about even the most dazzling glory in the world?
3
How do the commentators generally understand 'tejas' (splendor) in this verse?
4
If Krishna's own list of named glories never mentions the specific thing that impresses you, does the verse's rule still apply to it?
5
What is distinctive about Madhva's reading of the word 'portion' (amsha) here?
6
What is the honest limit on extending Madhusudana's terse note into a fuller argument?
For a second sitting6 more questions
7
What is the honest state of Abhinavagupta's extant commentary on this specific verse?
8
Within that shared 10.19-10.42 comment, how does Abhinavagupta read this verse's teaching?
9
According to Ramanuja, what happens to the Lord's own power when a portion of it appears in a glorious being?
10
What three marks does the verse itself give for recognizing that a being carries a portion of the Lord's splendor?
11
For Sridhara, what is the verse's primary function, beyond stating a fact about origins?
12
Does recognizing a glory as 'only a portion' mean you should stop admiring it?

Carry this with youwhat stays

Try carrying this verse as a lens rather than a fact. The next time something stops you, a view, a piece of music, someone's unexpected strength or unexpected kindness, pause before naming it merely impressive. Let the pause itself be the practice: sense that what caught you is a single spark, not the whole fire, and let your attention follow the spark back toward its source rather than settling only on its brightness.

So let the next thing that stops you, whatever its shape, be received as a single spark of him, and let your attention follow that spark home.

तत्तदेवावगच्छ त्वं मम तेजोंऽशसम्भवम्।tat tad evāvagaccha tvaṃ mama tejo'ṃśa-sambhavam

Read deeper

Everything a full study holds, folded below.

Word by word15 terms
yat yatwhatevervibhūtimatopulentsattvambeingśhrī-matbeautifulūrjitamgloriousevaalsoortat tatall thatevaonlyavagachchhaknowtvamyoumamamytejaḥ-anśha-sambhavamsplendoranśhaa partsambhavamborn of
All the commentary, woven togetherevery voice, in one place

The commentary, woven together

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

his verse closes the long catalogue of divine manifestations with one covering rule. No list of glories could ever be finished, so instead of adding one more item, Krishna hands over the mark itself: whatever being holds majesty, is rich in fortune or beauty, or is full of vigour has sprung from a portion of his splendour. The commentators agree the grammar is deliberately unbounded, reaching every excellence, named or not.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

The key phrase, amsha-sambhavam, born of a portion, is read across the sources as marking a real but partial derivation: even the most dazzling thing in the world carries only a fragment of the Lord's tejas, never the whole of it. Wonder at the glory is therefore never misplaced, but it is also never final; the glory points to something greater standing behind it.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Tejas itself is consistently glossed as power in the sense of the capacity to prevail, to overcome, to shine forth and govern, rather than as mere physical brilliance. Whether that power is read as ruling force, as borrowed splendour, or as consciousness's own vigour, the commentators converge on reading it as something that acts, not merely something that gleams.

Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Several readings treat the verse less as a closed doctrinal statement and more as a portable instruction: because the catalogue can never be completed, the listener is handed a rule he can apply on his own, so that any glory met anywhere in life, not only the specific items Krishna has named, becomes recognizable as a trace of him.

Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Where the extant commentary is thin, as with Shankara, Abhinavagupta, and Madhusudana on this particular line, the surviving notes still agree on the verse's basic function: it supplies the defining mark, majesty, fortune, vigour, and the single source, a portion of the Lord's splendour, by which every remaining glory in the world can be recognized, even without an elaborated argument attached to each master's name.

Śaṅkarācārya · Ācārya Abhinavagupta · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Divergence

Advaita Vedānta

The extant gloss stays close to the verse's own terms, fixing vibhutimat, shrimat, and urjitam precisely and resting on tejomsha-sambhavam as the defining phrase. It does not, in what survives, spell out an explicit non-dual argument for this particular line, though read against Shankara's wider commentary the portion, amsha, would be a concession of ordinary speech rather than a literal division of the partless Brahman.

Śaṅkarācārya

Viśiṣṭādvaita

Ramanuja reads tejas specifically as the Lord's power to overcome and govern, and every glorious being as showing forth one small region of that unthinkable ruling power. Nothing is diminished or divided in the Lord himself; the portion is his power becoming visible through a particular being, and the verse's real gift is the general rule by which the seeker can extend the listing on his own.

Rāmānujācārya

Dvaita

Madhva presses amsha to draw a hard line between two classes of being: ordinary souls, even great gods like Indra and Rudra, carry only a dependent, borrowed fragment of the Lord's splendour, while forms like the Boar, Krishna, Rama, and Kapila are not fragments at all but the Lord himself in essential form, a distinction he grounds in supplementary hymns and the Bhagavata's own wording.

Madhvācārya

Kashmir Śaiva

No dedicated bhasya on 10.41 survives; Abhinavagupta treats 10.19-10.42 as one unit and comments at 10.19, where he quotes this verse's language as the difference-side of a difference-and-non-difference teaching that the passage resolves two verses later into undivided non-difference, citing the Rig Veda's a quarter of him is all beings. A further Kashmir Shaiva reading, that the portion names consciousness recognizing its own splendour at a point, is offered here only as a labeled, conditional extension, not as the extant text's own words.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

Sridhara treats the verse chiefly as a practice rather than a piece of information: since Krishna's list could never be exhausted, the listener is handed a portable key, so that any glory met anywhere in ordinary life becomes an occasion for the heart to rest in the Lord, turning the finite catalogue into an unbounded invitation to remembrance.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Modern

The extant note attributed to Madhusudana is terse and largely restates the verse's plain sense without extending it into fresh argument. Read against his broader project of reconciling non-dualism with devotional language, a modern-facing gloss would treat 'portion' as a concession to the seeker's standpoint on the way to recognizing one undivided reality behind every named and unnamed glory, but this is a plausible extension of his method, not a claim this particular note itself makes.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

A Seeker Asks

If every glory I admire is only a fragment of something greater, does that mean I should stop admiring the glory itself and try to leap straight to its source?

No school here asks you to bypass the glory; they ask you to read it rightly. The commentators agree the fragment is real and worth noticing. What changes is not whether you admire it but what you understand the admiration to be reaching toward.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Ramanuja's reading is useful here: the portion is not a lesser, diluted copy standing between you and the source, it is the source itself becoming visible through that particular thing. So attending closely to the glory in front of you is already a way of attending to what stands behind it.

Rāmānujācārya

And practically, Sridhara turns this into something you do rather than merely understand: let the admiration continue, but let it also become a small act of remembrance, so the beautiful or powerful thing you already loved becomes the very place your attention comes to rest in him.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Contemplation

Try carrying this verse as a lens rather than a fact. The next time something stops you, a view, a piece of music, someone's unexpected strength or unexpected kindness, pause before naming it merely impressive. Let the pause itself be the practice: sense that what caught you is a single spark, not the whole fire, and let your attention follow the spark back toward its source rather than settling only on its brightness.

Sit with this · sonnet-5-authored

All the translations and commentary7 translations
Translationsthe verse re-voiced; tap a translator
The commentatorsthe schools expound the verse

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.

Where this teaching echoesin the Haripath