Even under honor and its opposite, even toward friend and foe, he starts nothing more for gain.
Three marks close the portrait: unmoved by praise or contempt shown even without a word, unmoved by whichever camp claims him, launching no fresh project for wealth or recognition while the plain work of living continues.
The same in honor and in disgrace, the same toward a friend's side and a foe's, having given up every project begun for gain: such a person is said to have crossed beyond the three qualities of nature.
The reading read whole, as one unhurried piece
Where it stands
You are still reading the marks of the one who has crossed beyond the three qualities of nature, begun two verses earlier. This verse names three more, and with them Krishna finishes answering what such a person looks like and how he carries himself. What remains, taken up next, is the harder question: by what actual means does a person get there.
The teaching
You stay the same under honor and under dishonor, unmoved by being lifted up or put down. This reaches past mere words. Blame and praise are made of speech, but honor and its opposite can be shown by an act of body or of bearing alone, without a syllable spoken, and even these do not move you. You stay the same, too, toward the side of a friend and the side of a foe. Notice how these sides can form: you may hold to neither by your own choice, and still, by someone else's choice, be counted among the friends or among the foes. However the camps arrange themselves around you, you remain the same toward both. And you give up all undertakings, every project whose aim is a result, whether that result shows itself here or beyond. What continues is only the bare living of the body; what has stopped is the launching of anything further for wealth, for pleasure, for being well thought of. None of this is coldness. It rests on a discernment, not a numbness: you have simply seen that nothing which stirs praise or contempt, friendship or enmity, is actually joined to who you are. Living this way, this fourth mark, joined to the ones before it, is what it means to have gone beyond the three qualities of nature.
The doubt that rises
If being the same toward friend and foe, and giving up all undertakings, is what marks the one beyond the gunas, does that leave a person unable to love particular people, or to care in earnest how any of his own work turns out?
Where the paths divide
Read as the closing portrait of the renouncer on the path of knowledge.
Giving up all undertakings is read here as real renunciation of action, not a figure of speech for inward calm while outward activity continues. What remains is only what the body needs simply to go on. And this whole four-verse portrait works twice over: before knowledge dawns, it is a discipline the seeker practices by deliberate effort; once knowledge has arisen, the identical conduct needs no more effort at all, and stands on its own as the plain, visible mark of the one already free while still living.
Read as one continuous discernment running beneath every pair named.
Every pair in this whole description, pleasure and pain, clod and gold, the dear and the undear, honor and dishonor, friend and foe, rests on one single fact: he abides in his own self, and only that self is truly dear to him. Being skilled at telling nature from self, he sees that none of what stirs honor or enmity is actually joined to who he is, so it fails to reach him. Undertakings occasioned only by being embodied are given up along with the very conceit that generates the wanting of them.
Read as an honest gap in the source, not a reconstructed position.
No independent word from Madhva survives at this verse; what is preserved treats it together with the verse before as one passage, pointing back to equal-mindedness already spoken of earlier still. What can be offered honestly is only a labeled extrapolation, not his own reading: consistent with a theology of radical dependence on the Lord, even this equanimity would be read as sustained moment to moment by that same will in a soul made fit to hold it, never an independent achievement of the self alone.
Read as a thin, shared passage-note whose substance sits two verses earlier.
Abhinavagupta's one extant remark covering this ground is given at 14.23, not fresh here: the one who stands as though indifferent, making no distinctions, is for that very reason the one who truly knows, and so never falls from his own true nature, holding firmly that no fruit is sought while body and senses do whatever acting occurs. This verse's own three marks, honor and dishonor, friend and foe, giving up undertakings, are not addressed in his own surviving words; any extension reading them as consciousness's freedom viewed from an unfallen center is a labeled inference, not his own text.
Read as a brief, exact confirmation rather than an expansive gloss.
What survives from Sridhara here is precise rather than developed: a direct naming of the three marks, sameness in honor and dishonor, sameness toward friend and foe, complete giving up of every result-aimed undertaking, offered as sealing the outward portrait that the two verses before it had already begun from within. He does not carry the comment further in his own extant words.
Read as a caution against loosening this verse's specific claim.
Madhusudana's own careful distinction is worth holding onto: honor and dishonor are acts of body and mind, capable of happening without a word ever spoken, unlike blame and praise, which are made only of speech. The gunatita is untouched by both kinds equally. This precision keeps the verse's claim exact, a real evenness under acts as well as words, rather than a vaguer comfort about simply not minding what people say aloud.
All six positions agree on the outward description: sameness under honor and its opposite, sameness toward friend and foe, no fresh undertaking begun for gain. They differ on what grounds that sameness. Is it renunciation of action itself, practiced by effort and then effortless, as Shankara and Madhusudana read it? Is it the fruit of one continuous discernment of self from nature, as Ramanuja reads it? Two of the six voices, Madhva and Abhinavagupta, leave a real gap in what survives at this exact verse, and this page marks that gap rather than filling it with invented confidence. What is left open, too, is what this evenness actually feels like from the inside, whether it is closer to Ramanuja's steady self-abidance or to Madhusudana's exact untouched-ness by acts without words, and that is not a question the text on this page will settle for you.
A question to carry
Where, this week, has honor or its absence actually reached you, not in words but in how someone looked at you or turned toward or away from you, and what would it mean to let that touch land somewhere it can pass through rather than lodge?
Where this teaching travels
Verses that sit near this one, each going its own way; follow whichever calls you.
Let this evenness be practiced, not performed. Watch for the small place where a slight or a compliment still finds a foothold in you, and simply notice it, without demanding of yourself that it vanish 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 completes the two-verse portrait just before it, sealing what marks the one who has gone beyond the three qualities of nature and how he carries himself, and clears the ground for the very next question: by what means does a person actually cross over.
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.
He is the same under honor and dishonor, and this reaches past mere words, since both can be shown by act of body or mind alone.
Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Madhusūdana · ŚrīdharaIn Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 2 others’ words
This verse names three final marks of the gunatita, the one who has gone beyond the three qualities of nature. He stays the same under honor and under dishonor, unmoved by the swing between being lifted up and being put down. Several sharpen this past mere words: honor and dishonor can be shown by an act of body or mind without a syllable spoken, and even these do not reach him.
He is the same toward the side of a friend and the side of a foe, however those camps happen to form around him.
Across Advaita, ViśiṣṭādvaitaŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana · RāmānujaIn Śaṅkara, Madhusūdana, and 1 others’ words
He is the same toward the side of a friend and the side of a foe, holding no preference for the one and no aversion for the other. Shankara notes something exact here: a person may himself intend no sides at all, yet by another's intention come to be counted a friend or an enemy regardless. However the camps form, the gunatita remains the same toward both.
He gives up every undertaking begun for a result, seen or unseen, while the bare upkeep of the body plainly continues.
Across Advaita, Bhakti, ViśiṣṭādvaitaŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana · Śrīdhara · RāmānujaIn Śaṅkara, Madhusūdana, and 2 others’ words
He is the giver-up of all undertakings, every action begun for the sake of a result, whether that result is seen in this world or unseen beyond it. What continues is only the bare upkeep of the body; what has stopped is the launching of fresh projects for wealth, enjoyment, or recognition. He is not paralyzed. He simply no longer starts anything for gain.
This sameness is discernment, not dullness: nothing here is actually joined to his true self, so none of it reaches him.
Across Viśiṣṭādvaita, AdvaitaRāmānuja · Madhusūdana · ŚaṅkaraIn Rāmānuja, Madhusūdana, and 1 others’ words
This evenness is not coldness, blindness, or a forced performance. Ramanuja stresses that the gunatita is skilled precisely in discerning nature from the self, and it is that discernment, not any dulling of perception, that lets praise, blame, honor, dishonor, friendship, and enmity all fail to reach him: he sees plainly that none of it is actually joined to who he is.
The very same conduct is practiced by effort before knowledge and stands effortlessly as the natural mark once knowledge has arisen.
Across AdvaitaŚaṅkara · MadhusūdanaIn Śaṅkara and Madhusūdana’s words
A teaching runs underneath the whole four-verse portrait, on the reading shared by Shankara and Madhusudana: before knowledge has risen, this very conduct must be won by deliberate effort, practiced as the means toward crossing the qualities. Once knowledge has risen, the identical conduct stands on its own, effortlessly, and becomes simply the outward mark by which the one already free while living is known.
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 gathers the entire run of pairs, pleasure and pain, clod and gold, the dear and undear, praise and blame, and now honor, dishonor, friend, and foe, onto one single thread: the gunatita abides in his own self, which alone is dear to him, and is skilled in discerning that self from the nature that is not the self. Everything that stirs honor or enmity arises from the conceit of being an embodied man, and since none of it is actually joined to the true self, it simply does not touch him. Giving up undertakings follows from the same discernment, since the embodied state is what generates the appetite for them.
Dvaita, in their fuller words
No independent comment from Madhva survives on this verse; the source states plainly that he treats 14.24 and 14.25 as one passage, with the only preserved line at 14.24 pointing back further still, to equal-mindedness already told before. What can honestly be offered is only a labeled extrapolation: on a Dvaita reading consistent with his wider theology, even this equanimity and this cessation of undertakings would be read as sustained by the Lord's will in a soul fit to receive it, since no capacity is ever the self's independent possession. This is not Madhva's own reading of 14.25, since none is extant.
Shaiva, in their fuller words
Abhinavagupta treats verses twenty-three through twenty-five as one passage and gives his substantive remark once, at 14.23, rather than fresh at this verse. What is extant there is that the one who stands as though indifferent is, for that very reason, the one who truly knows, and so neither stirs nor falls from his own true nature, holding firmly that he seeks no fruit at all while the body and senses do the acting. This verse's own three marks are not commented on in his own words. A Kashmir Shaiva extension, reading honor, dishonor, friend, and foe as simply consciousness's own freedom viewed from an unfallen center, goes beyond what survives and is offered here only as a labeled inference.
Bhakti, in their fuller words
Sridhara's own extant remark is brief and exact rather than expansive: he confirms the three marks directly, sameness in honor and dishonor, sameness toward the party of friends and the party of foes, and the complete giving up of undertakings whose aim is any result, seen or unseen, and names these as sealing the outward portrait the two prior verses had already begun from within. He does not extend the comment further in his own surviving words.
A modern reading, in their fuller words
Read in a more analytic register, Madhusudana's own careful distinction stands out: honor and dishonor are acts of body and mind and can occur without a single word spoken, unlike blame and praise which are made of speech; the gunatita is untouched by both kinds. This attention to what exactly a mark consists of, rather than a general appeal to detachment, doubles as a caution against collapsing this verse's specific claim into a vaguer one about not minding what people say.
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 where your own peace actually breaks this week, not where you would like to claim it holds. Is it the moment someone shows you contempt without saying a word, a slight in posture or attention rather than speech? Is it the pull to lean toward whoever seems to be on your side and away from whoever seems against you? You are not asked to stop seeing these differences. You are asked to notice the inner reaching, toward favor, away from disgrace, and let it settle, so that whatever comes, honor or its opposite, finds less and less of you standing there to receive it as your own.
Notice, without judgment, where honor or its absence still reaches you, and let the noticing itself be the small, steady work of loosening its grip.
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
his verse names three final marks of the gunatita, the one who has gone beyond the three qualities of nature. He stays the same under honor and under dishonor, unmoved by the swing between being lifted up and being put down. Several sharpen this past mere words: honor and dishonor can be shown by an act of body or mind without a syllable spoken, and even these do not reach him.
Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīdhara Svāmī
He is the same toward the side of a friend and the side of a foe, holding no preference for the one and no aversion for the other. Shankara notes something exact here: a person may himself intend no sides at all, yet by another's intention come to be counted a friend or an enemy regardless. However the camps form, the gunatita remains the same toward both.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Rāmānujācārya
He is the giver-up of all undertakings, every action begun for the sake of a result, whether that result is seen in this world or unseen beyond it. What continues is only the bare upkeep of the body; what has stopped is the launching of fresh projects for wealth, enjoyment, or recognition. He is not paralyzed. He simply no longer starts anything for gain.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Rāmānujācārya
This evenness is not coldness, blindness, or a forced performance. Ramanuja stresses that the gunatita is skilled precisely in discerning nature from the self, and it is that discernment, not any dulling of perception, that lets praise, blame, honor, dishonor, friendship, and enmity all fail to reach him: he sees plainly that none of it is actually joined to who he is.
Rāmānujācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śaṅkarācārya
A teaching runs underneath the whole four-verse portrait, on the reading shared by Shankara and Madhusudana: before knowledge has risen, this very conduct must be won by deliberate effort, practiced as the means toward crossing the qualities. Once knowledge has risen, the identical conduct stands on its own, effortlessly, and becomes simply the outward mark by which the one already free while living is known.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Divergence
Advaita Vedānta
Both read giving up all undertakings as genuine renunciation of action itself, not a metaphor for inner detachment while work continues. The gunatita abandons every deed whose aim is a result, keeping only what the body needs to go on living. Madhusudana adds the precise before-and-after structure: the same conduct is a discipline won by effort prior to knowledge, and an effortless, self-standing mark once knowledge has arisen; Shankara closes the whole stretch on this same note, that the description now complete opens directly onto the question of the actual means of crossing over, taken up next.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Viśiṣṭādvaita
Ramanuja gathers the entire run of pairs, pleasure and pain, clod and gold, the dear and undear, praise and blame, and now honor, dishonor, friend, and foe, onto one single thread: the gunatita abides in his own self, which alone is dear to him, and is skilled in discerning that self from the nature that is not the self. Everything that stirs honor or enmity arises from the conceit of being an embodied man, and since none of it is actually joined to the true self, it simply does not touch him. Giving up undertakings follows from the same discernment, since the embodied state is what generates the appetite for them.
Rāmānujācārya
Dvaita
No independent comment from Madhva survives on this verse; the source states plainly that he treats 14.24 and 14.25 as one passage, with the only preserved line at 14.24 pointing back further still, to equal-mindedness already told before. What can honestly be offered is only a labeled extrapolation: on a Dvaita reading consistent with his wider theology, even this equanimity and this cessation of undertakings would be read as sustained by the Lord's will in a soul fit to receive it, since no capacity is ever the self's independent possession. This is not Madhva's own reading of 14.25, since none is extant.
Madhvācārya
Kashmir Śaiva
Abhinavagupta treats verses twenty-three through twenty-five as one passage and gives his substantive remark once, at 14.23, rather than fresh at this verse. What is extant there is that the one who stands as though indifferent is, for that very reason, the one who truly knows, and so neither stirs nor falls from his own true nature, holding firmly that he seeks no fruit at all while the body and senses do the acting. This verse's own three marks are not commented on in his own words. A Kashmir Shaiva extension, reading honor, dishonor, friend, and foe as simply consciousness's own freedom viewed from an unfallen center, goes beyond what survives and is offered here only as a labeled inference.
Ācārya Abhinavagupta
Bhakti
Sridhara's own extant remark is brief and exact rather than expansive: he confirms the three marks directly, sameness in honor and dishonor, sameness toward the party of friends and the party of foes, and the complete giving up of undertakings whose aim is any result, seen or unseen, and names these as sealing the outward portrait the two prior verses had already begun from within. He does not extend the comment further in his own surviving words.
Śrīdhara Svāmī
Modern
Read in a more analytic register, Madhusudana's own careful distinction stands out: honor and dishonor are acts of body and mind and can occur without a single word spoken, unlike blame and praise which are made of speech; the gunatita is untouched by both kinds. This attention to what exactly a mark consists of, rather than a general appeal to detachment, doubles as a caution against collapsing this verse's specific claim into a vaguer one about not minding what people say.
Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
A Seeker Asks
If I become the same toward friend and foe and stop starting anything for the sake of gain, do I become someone who can no longer love, or work, or care how anything turns out?
What is described is not the loss of perception but of a particular reaction. Ramanuja is explicit that the gunatita is skilled precisely in discerning nature from the self; he still knows a friend from a foe, honor from its opposite. What has stopped is the false attachment that treats these as touching his true self at all.
Rāmānujācārya
Giving up undertakings is not giving up all action. Shankara and Madhusudana both limit it to projects begun for a result, seen or unseen, while the plain upkeep of the body continues without interruption. Nothing here forbids caring for the work in front of you; it forbids only launching that work for the sake of what it will bring you.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
The evenness toward friend and foe is a statement about inner favor and grudge, not about withdrawing from either. Shankara's own observation that camps can form around a person regardless of his intentions suggests the sameness asked for is a steadiness carried into whatever relations already exist, not a retreat from having any.
Śaṅkarācārya
Contemplation
Notice where your own peace actually breaks this week, not where you would like to claim it holds. Is it the moment someone shows you contempt without saying a word, a slight in posture or attention rather than speech? Is it the pull to lean toward whoever seems to be on your side and away from whoever seems against you? You are not asked to stop seeing these differences. You are asked to notice the inner reaching, toward favor, away from disgrace, and let it settle, so that whatever comes, honor or its opposite, finds less and less of you standing there to receive it as your own.
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.