StudyVedanta
Skip to the verse
V.1513.1413.16
Read slowly

It lights every sense yet owns none; it bears all things yet clings to nothing.

The knowable is named here by pairing each seeming activity with its exact denial. It is not a riddle to be solved but a precision instrument, built to carry the mind past every ordinary category it would otherwise settle into.

15Chapter 13
The verseSpoken by Krishna
Voices6 commentators · 5 schools · modern voices
The readingAbout 6 minutes, unhurried
सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जितम्।असक्तं सर्वभृच्चैव निर्गुणं गुणभोक्तृ च
sarvendriya-guṇābhāsaṁ sarvendriya-vivarjitam asaktaṁ sarva-bhṛich chaiva nirguṇaṁ guṇa-bhoktṛi cha

It shines through the workings of every sense, yet has none of its own. It clings to nothing, yet holds up the whole of things. It stands apart from nature's three strands, yet is the one who feels them.

Bhagavad Gita 13.15
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 is still unfolding what the knowable, the kshetrajna, actually is. Having called it beginningless and beyond the ordinary categories of being and non-being, he now names it again, this time through a run of paired contradictions that press the mind past any single, settled description.

The teaching

It shines through every sense and owns none of them; it bears the world and clings to none of it.

The knowable shines through the workings of every sense, the five that know and the five that act, together with the inner instruments of mind and intellect, and yet it has none of these as its own nature. Read this widely: all of it is borrowed equipment. Through these instruments the knowable seems to decide, resolve, hear and speak, exactly as the older scripture says, as it were it thinks, as it were it moves. The 'as it were' carries the whole weight. It lends its light to every instrument's working without ever becoming an object any instrument can seize, the way an eye could not see nor an ear hear without some conscious presence behind them, though that presence is never itself something seen or heard. In the same way it is unattached, free of every clinging, precisely because it has no instrument through which to make contact, and for that very reason, not in spite of it, it can bear everything that exists without exception, the way not even a mirage stands without some ground beneath it. And in the same way again, it is free of the three strands of nature, sattva, rajas and tamas, in its own being, yet it experiences those very strands once they ripen, through sound and the other sense-objects, into pleasure, pain and confusion. The fact that they are felt at all is itself the proof: something must stand apart from the changing strands in order to register their change. None of this is confusion dressed as depth. It is a precise device, meant to carry the reader past whatever single category the mind reaches for first.

The doubt that rises

If the knowable truly has no senses and no involvement in the strands, how can it be said to shine through the senses and feel the strands at all? Is this a real teaching or only a clever balancing of opposites that resolves nothing?

Where the paths divide

Advaita Vedanta

Read as the stripping away of an overlay laid on for teaching's sake.

Take the whole verse as removal rather than addition. In truth the knowable is free of senses, unattached, and beyond the strands; the appearance of sense-activity, bearing and enjoying belongs to maya, working through the limiting adjuncts of the instruments. The method is deliberate: earlier verses dressed Brahman in this display of attributes precisely so this verse could take the display off again, delivering the unconditioned knowledge once the dressing has served its purpose.

Vishishtadvaita

Extended from a reading that turns, at this verse, to the Self's fineness rather than to the pairs directly.

What survives from this school at this specific line turns to how the Self, though present equally in every body, is distant for one lacking the qualifying virtues and near for one who holds them. Extending that architecture rather than quoting a line-by-line comment, any bearing or transcendence the Self shows is read as never an independent glory of its own, but always the glory of the one who dwells within it as its indwelling self and sustains it at every point.

Dvaita

Read as the affirmation of a real, causal power rather than its denial.

Here the pairs affirm what is possessed, not what is lacking. Shining by the functions of the senses names the knowable's own causal act, making the senses and their qualities shine forth; it is not that some borrowed instrument merely reveals it. The freedom from senses named in the same breath denies only the bound creature's ordinary, worldly instruments, since the word 'all' in the first line signals a real possession of distinction rather than an erasure of it.

Kashmir Shaivism

No separate comment survives; genuinely his material lies one verse earlier.

No comment of Abhinavagupta's is preserved specifically for this line. His extant text treats 13.13 through 13.18 as a single passage, with the substantive remark recorded only at 13.13, where he states plainly that certain terms were 'already explained earlier' and asks what good empty repetition would do. What is genuinely his there concerns the purpose of naming the knowable at all. Extended, though explicitly flagged as extension and not his recorded word, the paired denials here might be read as consciousness recognizing its own spontaneous freedom rather than as a riddle needing dissolution.

Bhakti

Read as the signature of an unthinkable, inconceivable power.

Press the contradictions rather than resolving them away. Object-shape without senses, bearing without contact, ownership of the strands without ever being stained by them, are read as the very mark of the Lord's unthinkable power. Ordinary things need instruments to act and need contact to bear any weight; a reality that manages both without either is not an embarrassment to explain but a glory to recognize, precisely because it exceeds how ordinary things function.

Modern

Read as a practical instruction for locating the self correctly.

Beneath the metaphysics sits a workable practice: notice, across any ordinary hour, how many sensations, moods and reactions pass through you, each one arising through some instrument and each one changing. The teaching asks you to locate yourself as the light behind that seeing and feeling, not as any one of the passing contents, since only something that does not itself change could register the change at all.

All six readings agree the verse names one reality through a set of paired denials. They part on what the denials are finally doing. Are sense-activity and bearing and enjoying an overlay to be stripped off, as Advaita reads it, or are they, as Dvaita and Bhakti read it, real powers the ordinary rules of contact simply do not apply to? And where the record itself runs thin, as with Ramanuja's and Abhinavagupta's material at this specific line, how much should a reader extend a teacher's known architecture, and how clearly must that extension be marked as extension and not as the teacher's own word? This page does not resolve either question, and states plainly where its own extensions begin.

A question to carry

The next time a sensation, a mood, or a sudden reaction moves through you, can you notice it as a strand passing through borrowed instruments, rather than as something you yourself have become?

May you find, beneath every passing sound and mood and strand of feeling, the quiet light that lends them all their shining without itself ever being any one of them.

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.

Having named the knowable as beginningless and beyond being and non-being in the verses just before, Krishna now names it again through what it does and does not do, tightening the identification before the chapter turns to how it can be seen.

Where they agreethe convergence

By setting each apparent activity beside its own denial, the verse points at a reality no single, ordinary description could hold; on this the readings agree even where they part on what the denials finally mean.

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

2schools

It shines through every sense, the outer ones and the inner mind and intellect together, yet is none of them; it lends the light and is never itself a thing any sense can seize.

Across Advaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Śrīdhara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Śrīdhara, and 1 others’ words

The verse names the knowable through a deliberate string of paired contradictions: it shines through every sense yet has none, it is unattached yet bears all, it is free of the three strands of nature yet experiences them. The commentators agree this pairing is not muddle but precision, a device meant to carry the reader past the ordinary categories any single description would freeze into.

Asked in question 1, below
2schools

Because it clings to nothing and makes contact through no instrument, it is unattached, and for that very reason, not despite it, it can bear everything without exception.

Across Advaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana · Śrīdhara
In Śaṅkara, Madhusūdana, and 1 others’ words

On the first pair, the reading converges: 'all the senses' means the five that know, the five that act, and the inner instruments of mind and intellect together, all of them borrowed equipment rather than the knowable's own nature. It appears to think and move only as scripture's 'as it were' signals, lending its light to every instrument's work without ever becoming an object any instrument can seize.

Asked in question 2, below
2schools

Free of the three strands in its own nature, it still feels them as they ripen into pleasure, pain and confusion, and the very fact of that feeling points to an experiencer beyond the strands.

Across Advaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Śrīdhara
In Śaṅkara and Śrīdhara’s words

The second pair is read as strict cause and consequence rather than accident: because it has no instrument through which to make contact, it is unattached, and precisely because it is unattached it can bear everything without exception, the way no ground, not even a mirage's ground, can be entirely without support beneath it.

Asked in question 3, below
2schools

The pairing itself is the teaching: each seeming contradiction is a precision device, meant to move the seeker past whatever single, comfortable description the mind would otherwise settle for.

Across Advaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana · Śrīdhara
In Śaṅkara, Madhusūdana, and 1 others’ words

The closing pair is unpacked the same way. It is free of sattva, rajas and tamas in its own nature, yet it experiences those very strands once they ripen, through sound and the other sense-objects, into pleasure, pain and delusion. The fact of experience itself is treated as evidence: something must stand apart from the changing strands in order to feel them changing.

Asked in question 4, below
3schools

What is genuinely preserved from each teacher differs in depth, and where a voice offers less, that thinness is itself worth naming honestly rather than smoothing over.

Across Advaita, Dvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Madhva · Śrīdhara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Madhva, and 2 others’ words

Every reading treats this verse as continuing, not interrupting, the identification of the knowable begun in the verses just before it: having been named as beginningless and beyond being and non-being, it is now named again through what it does and does not do, so that the seeker is given both what it is not and what it nonetheless accomplishes.

Asked in question 7, below

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
When the knowable is named by pairing every seeming activity with its denial, sensing without senses, bearing without attachment, tasting the strands while free of them, do the denials cancel real involvement or name a power beyond the ordinary rules of contact?
The traditional commentators
Advaita Vedāntasee this school across the GītāŚaṅkara, Madhusūdana
The denials are the real truth and the activity is maya's overlay through the instruments; the method lays attributes on Brahman only to strip them off again for the unconditioned knowledge.
On the reading where superimposition is followed by its deliberate removal.
Viśiṣṭādvaitasee this school across the GītāRāmānuja
What survives here turns to the Self's fineness and its nearness or distance for different seekers, extended to say that any bearing or transcendence belongs to the one who dwells within and sustains the Self, not to the Self alone.
Extended from Ramanuja's architecture rather than a line-by-line comment at this verse.
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words

The material recorded from Ramanuja at this verse turns to the Self's fineness and its nearness or distance for different seekers rather than to the sense-and-quality pairs directly, so this reading extends his architecture rather than quoting it verse by verse: the Self, being inseparably related to the Supreme as body to its indwelling self, bears and transcends only as an expression of the one who dwells within and sustains it, never as an independent glory of its own. What is genuinely his here is the claim that the same Self, present equally in every body, is distant for one lacking the qualifying virtues and near for one who holds them.

Rāmānuja
Dvaitasee this school across the GītāMadhva
The denials affirm real power rather than canceling it: He makes the senses shine as His own causal act, and freedom from senses denies only the bound creature's ordinary instruments.
On the reading where the word 'all' signals real possession, not erasure.
Dvaita, in their fuller words

Madhva reads the paired denials as affirming a real possession of power, not canceling it. 'Shining by the functions of the senses' names His own causal act, making the senses and their qualities shine forth; the freedom from senses spoken of denies only the bound creature's ordinary instruments, with His supremacy understood throughout, since the word 'all' in the first line signals real distinction rather than its erasure.

Madhva
Asked in question 5, below
Shaivasee this school across the GītāAbhinavagupta
No separate comment survives for this verse; the genuine material at 13.13 concerns the purpose of naming the knowable at all, so any extension to sense-transcendence here must be explicitly flagged as extrapolation.
Folded into a five-verse passage, with the substantive comment recorded only at its opening line.
Shaiva, in their fuller words

No separate comment of Abhinavagupta's survives for this verse; his extant text folds 13.13 through 13.18 into one passage, with the substantive comment recorded only at 13.13, where he explicitly declines to repeat material he considers already explained. What is genuinely his there concerns the purpose of naming the knowable at all, pointing toward an inference of Brahman's true form. Extended, but explicitly flagged as extension rather than his recorded word, the paired denials here might be read as consciousness recognizing its own spontaneous freedom rather than as riddles to be dissolved.

Abhinavagupta
Asked in question 6, below
BhaktiŚrīdhara
The contradictions are pressed as the very signature of the Lord's unthinkable power, needing neither instrument to act nor contact to bear weight, and are offered as proof of glory rather than a puzzle to explain away.
Read where object-shape without senses and bearing without contact mark divine, not ordinary, capacity.
Bhakti, in their fuller words

Sridhara presses the contradictions rather than resolving them into mere appearance: object-shape without senses, bearing without contact, ownership of the strands without being stained by them are read as the very signature of Vasudeva's unthinkable power. Where ordinary things need instruments to act and contact to bear weight, the Lord's glory is precisely that He needs neither, and the paradox is offered as the proof of that glory rather than a puzzle needing to be explained away.

Śrīdhara
Modern voices teachers of the last two centuries, read together; they stand apart from the classical schools
A modern readingŚaṅkara, Madhusūdana
Read as practical instruction, the verse points the seeker to locate themselves as the witnessing light behind the senses and the strands, not as any one of their passing contents.
For the practitioner learning to notice sensation and mood without identifying as either.
A modern reading, in their fuller words

Read for a contemporary seeker, the verse's real instruction is practical rather than merely metaphysical: whatever rises as sensation, mood or reaction is the movement of borrowed instruments and changing strands, never the witnessing presence itself, and the discipline the verse points to is learning to locate oneself as the light behind the senses rather than as any one of their passing contents.

Śaṅkara · Madhusūdana
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 the verse name the knowable through paired contradictions rather than a single plain description?
2
In what sense does the knowable shine through every sense while having none of its own?
3
How can being unattached be the very reason the knowable can bear everything, rather than a contradiction of it?
4
How is the knowable said to be free of the three strands of nature and yet their experiencer?
5
Which school reads 'shining by the functions of the senses' as the knowable's own causal act, making the senses shine rather than merely appearing within them?
6
What is actually recorded from Abhinavagupta at this specific verse?
7
Read as practical instruction, what does this verse ask a practitioner to notice in an ordinary hour?
For a second sitting5 more questions
8
What does Sridhara make of the verse's contradictions rather than smoothing them into mere appearance?
9
What does the extension of Ramanuja's material to this verse emphasize about bearing and transcendence?
10
What method does Madhusudana name for how this verse operates on the attributes given to Brahman earlier in the chapter?
11
Why does the verse's proof that the knowable feels the strands matter to the argument?
12
Why is calling the knowable 'unattached yet all-bearing' not simply a contradiction to be dismissed?

Carry this with youwhat stays

Notice, across a single hour, how many sensations, moods and small reactions pass through you, a sound, an ache, a flash of irritation, a wave of ease. Each one arises through an instrument, the ear, the body, the mind, and each one changes. Ask quietly what it is that notices the changing without itself changing. Rest there for a breath before returning to whatever the hour asks of you.

Whatever moves through you today, a sound taken in, a mood that rises and falls, a strand of nature turning into pleasure or discomfort, let it pass as what it is, a wave on an ocean that itself never stirs; rest, for a moment, as the light behind the seeing rather than as anything seen.

सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जितम्।sarvendriya-guṇābhāsaṁ sarvendriya-vivarjitam

Read deeper

Everything a full study holds, folded below.

Word by word14 terms
sarvaallindriyasensesguṇasense-objectsābhāsamthe percieversarvaallindriyasensesvivarjitamdevoid ofasaktamunattachedsarva-bhṛitthe sustainer of allchayetevaindeednirguṇambeyond the three modes of material natureguṇa-bhoktṛithe enjoyer of the three modes of material naturechaalthough
All the commentary, woven togetherevery voice, in one place

The commentary, woven together

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

he verse names the knowable through a deliberate string of paired contradictions: it shines through every sense yet has none, it is unattached yet bears all, it is free of the three strands of nature yet experiences them. The commentators agree this pairing is not muddle but precision, a device meant to carry the reader past the ordinary categories any single description would freeze into.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

On the first pair, the reading converges: 'all the senses' means the five that know, the five that act, and the inner instruments of mind and intellect together, all of them borrowed equipment rather than the knowable's own nature. It appears to think and move only as scripture's 'as it were' signals, lending its light to every instrument's work without ever becoming an object any instrument can seize.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīdhara Svāmī

The second pair is read as strict cause and consequence rather than accident: because it has no instrument through which to make contact, it is unattached, and precisely because it is unattached it can bear everything without exception, the way no ground, not even a mirage's ground, can be entirely without support beneath it.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī

The closing pair is unpacked the same way. It is free of sattva, rajas and tamas in its own nature, yet it experiences those very strands once they ripen, through sound and the other sense-objects, into pleasure, pain and delusion. The fact of experience itself is treated as evidence: something must stand apart from the changing strands in order to feel them changing.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Every reading treats this verse as continuing, not interrupting, the identification of the knowable begun in the verses just before it: having been named as beginningless and beyond being and non-being, it is now named again through what it does and does not do, so that the seeker is given both what it is not and what it nonetheless accomplishes.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Divergence

Advaita Vedānta

The whole verse is read as removal, not addition. The knowable is in truth free of senses, unattached, and without the strands; the appearance of sense-activity, bearing and enjoying belongs to maya working through the limiting adjuncts of the inner and outer instruments. Madhusudana names the method explicitly: superimposition followed by its own removal, the earlier verses having dressed Brahman in attributes so that this verse can strip them off for the sake of the unconditioned knowledge. What looks like activity is only the adjunct's activity, mistaken for the knowable's own.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Viśiṣṭādvaita

The material recorded from Ramanuja at this verse turns to the Self's fineness and its nearness or distance for different seekers rather than to the sense-and-quality pairs directly, so this reading extends his architecture rather than quoting it verse by verse: the Self, being inseparably related to the Supreme as body to its indwelling self, bears and transcends only as an expression of the one who dwells within and sustains it, never as an independent glory of its own. What is genuinely his here is the claim that the same Self, present equally in every body, is distant for one lacking the qualifying virtues and near for one who holds them.

Rāmānujācārya

Dvaita

Madhva reads the paired denials as affirming a real possession of power, not canceling it. 'Shining by the functions of the senses' names His own causal act, making the senses and their qualities shine forth; the freedom from senses spoken of denies only the bound creature's ordinary instruments, with His supremacy understood throughout, since the word 'all' in the first line signals real distinction rather than its erasure.

Madhvācārya

Kashmir Śaiva

No separate comment of Abhinavagupta's survives for this verse; his extant text folds 13.13 through 13.18 into one passage, with the substantive comment recorded only at 13.13, where he explicitly declines to repeat material he considers already explained. What is genuinely his there concerns the purpose of naming the knowable at all, pointing toward an inference of Brahman's true form. Extended, but explicitly flagged as extension rather than his recorded word, the paired denials here might be read as consciousness recognizing its own spontaneous freedom rather than as riddles to be dissolved.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

Sridhara presses the contradictions rather than resolving them into mere appearance: object-shape without senses, bearing without contact, ownership of the strands without being stained by them are read as the very signature of Vasudeva's unthinkable power. Where ordinary things need instruments to act and contact to bear weight, the Lord's glory is precisely that He needs neither, and the paradox is offered as the proof of that glory rather than a puzzle needing to be explained away.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Modern

Read for a contemporary seeker, the verse's real instruction is practical rather than merely metaphysical: whatever rises as sensation, mood or reaction is the movement of borrowed instruments and changing strands, never the witnessing presence itself, and the discipline the verse points to is learning to locate oneself as the light behind the senses rather than as any one of their passing contents.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

A Seeker Asks

If this reality has no senses of its own and no involvement in the strands, how can it be said to shine through the senses and feel the strands at all? Is this just a clever form of wordplay?

It is not wordplay once you separate what belongs to the instrument from what belongs to the light behind it. The senses, mind and intellect are borrowed equipment; they do the deciding, hearing and speaking. The knowable only lends the light by which they work, the way an eye cannot see nor an ear hear without a conscious presence behind them, though that presence is never itself something a sense can grasp.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

The same logic covers bearing and enjoying. Because it clings to nothing, it can hold up everything without partiality, the way a ground beneath even a mirage must still be there for the mirage to appear at all. And because the strands, once they ripen into pleasure, pain and confusion, are felt by something that does not itself change, the very fact of that felt experience is the evidence of an experiencer standing apart from what it experiences.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Some readings press further and say this is not merely a logical resolution but the Lord's own signature: ordinary things need instruments to act and contact to bear weight, so a reality that manages both without either is not a puzzle to be dissolved but a glory to be recognized, precisely because it cannot be reduced to how ordinary things operate.

Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhvācārya

Contemplation

Notice, across a single hour, how many sensations, moods and small reactions pass through you, a sound, an ache, a flash of irritation, a wave of ease. Each one arises through an instrument, the ear, the body, the mind, and each one changes. Ask quietly what it is that notices the changing without itself changing. Rest there for a breath before returning to whatever the hour asks of you.

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