StudyVedanta
Skip to the verse
V.216.116.3
Read slowly

Eleven marks of a nature turning toward the good, defined with unusual care.

It would be easy to skim past this as a list of pleasant virtues. Read closely, several of the definitions are precise enough to be tested: truth measured by its effect on others, gentleness measured against a foolish question, modesty timed to the very threshold of a wrong act.

2Chapter 16
The verseSpoken by Krishna
Voices6 commentators · 5 schools · modern voices
The readingAbout 5 minutes, unhurried
अहिंसा सत्यमक्रोधस्त्यागः शान्तिरपैशुनम्।दया भूतेष्वलोलुप्त्वं मार्दवं ह्रीरचापलम्
ahinsā satyam akrodhas tyāgaḥ śhāntir apaiśhunam dayā bhūteṣhv aloluptvaṁ mārdavaṁ hrīr achāpalam

Harmlessness, truthfulness, freedom from anger, a further letting-go, an inner peace, and no picking apart of others behind their backs. Compassion for every creature, a mind not pulled by what it wants, gentleness, an honest sense of shame, and a stillness that does not fidget without cause.

Bhagavad Gita 16.2
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 building the portrait he began in the previous verse, the daivi sampad, the divine endowment. Nothing dramatic happens in this verse; no argument turns on it. It is simply eleven more traits, named in a row, continuing the same list without a break in register.

The teaching

Eleven marks of a nature turning toward the good, and a few places where the tradition itself falls quiet.

Read closely, several of these definitions are more exact than they first appear. Non-violence is not causing pain to any being, in mind, speech, or action. Truth is speech that reports a thing as it is, but every source insists it must also serve the good of the one who hears it; truth used as a weapon has already failed the instruction, not merely bent it. Freedom from anger is defined against real provocation, the calming of anger that has already risen toward someone who has struck or insulted you, not the easier absence of anger when nobody has provoked you at all. Compassion is an inability to bear another's suffering. Freedom from slander is refusing to expose a weak point behind someone's back, though Madhva is careful to note that naming a fault to help someone, a student's error pointed out for instruction, is not slander at all; what decides the matter is the intent to injure. The remaining qualities name the quiet interior beneath that conduct. Renunciation is a further letting-go, though Sridhara reads it more warmly still, as open-handed generosity rather than bare release. Peace is the mind itself settled. Non-greed is the senses staying unmoved when their objects are right there in front of them. Gentleness is more than softness left untested; Madhusudana ties it specifically to staying a kind teacher even toward a foolish question, which is to say, gentleness that has actually been provoked and has held. Modesty is timed precisely: the shame that rises exactly at the threshold of a wrong act, before it is done, not regret arriving after. And freedom from fickleness is simply not setting speech, hand, or foot into motion without a real reason. What holds the eleven together, on every reading available, is that they are not graded. No source ranks compassion above modesty, or truth above stillness. They are one nature seen from many angles, and a genuine hold on any single one is read as enough to begin drawing the others along with it, in time.

The doubt that rises

If truth means saying a thing exactly as it is, and freedom from slander forbids exposing someone's fault, where exactly does honest correction, a fault named for someone's own good, fit between those two instructions? The verse names both virtues side by side and does not fully resolve how they meet in a single difficult conversation.

Where the paths divide

Advaita Vedanta

Read as sober, precise facts about a refined nature.

Shankara and Madhusudana keep to close definition throughout, refusing to turn any of these eleven qualities into devotion toward a personal Lord. Madhusudana is the most exacting: he binds truthfulness and harmlessness into a single instruction rather than two virtues that might trade off against each other, and he closes by naming several of the traits, from truthfulness onward, the special duties of the brahmin, a station-bound classification rather than a claim about universal human nature.

Vishishtadvaita

Read relationally, each virtue measured by its bearing on others.

Ramanuja's brief comment already leans outward: truth is speech that serves the welfare of all beings, and gentleness exists specifically to make a person fit for the fellowship of the good. Compassion, in his reading, is an inability rather than a decision, something that simply cannot bear another's pain. His comment at this verse is compact, and the fuller theology reading these traits as forms of surrender to the Lord belongs more fully to his later tradition than to his own words here.

Dvaita

Read exactly as far as the surviving comment goes, and no further.

Honesty matters most here. Madhva's extant remark on this verse glosses only three of the eleven terms: slander, which he defines by lexical citation as harmful reporting to an authority meant to injure; greed, which he equates with attachment; and steadiness, which he defines as firmness. He does not restate the other eight terms in his own voice at this verse. Any broader claim about all eleven qualities as delegated competences under the Lord's will would have to be inferred from his method elsewhere, not read directly off this comment.

Kashmir Shaivism

Read only as far as the source honestly extends, which is not far.

No comment specific to 16.2 survives from Abhinavagupta. His running commentary folds this verse into a single unit spanning 16.1 through 16.5 and delivers its explanation entirely at 16.1, where he reads the whole catalogue as marking the sattvic, divine portion whose very self is knowledge, a portion whose growth overcomes the ignorance lodged in the demonic. A reader wanting a Kashmir Shaiva gloss on, say, freedom from fickleness specifically, is reading past what the source contains; what can honestly be offered is only this general frame, plus a clearly labeled guess at how it might extend.

Bhakti

Read plainly, with one term drawn warmer than the rest.

Sridhara's glosses across this verse are largely unadorned: no harm to anyone, saying a thing as it is, no stirring of the mind even when struck. But his reading of relinquishment stands out, generosity and open-handedness rather than a formal giving-up of fruit, a warmer and more active virtue than release alone. His timing of modesty is exact too: the fear of disgrace rising precisely as a wrong act is about to begin, functioning as a check rather than as remorse.

Modern

Read for how the definitions hold under an actual provocation.

What stands out for a contemporary reader in Madhusudana's tightened definitions is that they are built to be tested, not merely displayed. Truth and harmlessness are fused so that a wounding truth has already failed, not merely bent, the instruction. Gentleness is measured against a foolish question actually asked, not gentleness performed when no one is testing it. Naming these as station-bound duties is itself a reminder that these virtues are meant to meet real, particular provocations, not to be admired as abstractions.

This page will not force a ranking among the eleven qualities, since none of the six sources ranks them either. Nor will it manufacture full commentary where the tradition itself is thin: Madhva's word here covers three terms, not eleven, and Abhinavagupta's individual comment on this verse simply does not survive, only his wider frame at 16.1. What is left open, honestly, is exactly how truth and freedom from slander meet in a single hard conversation, and exactly how much of the missing commentary could be filled in faithfully versus how much would only be invention wearing an ancient name.

A question to carry

Of these eleven qualities, which one does your actual life provoke and test most often, this week, not in theory? And are you willing to start there, rather than waiting for a tidier or more impressive place to begin?

Take up one quality, not all eleven. Hold it exactly at the moment it is tested, not merely when it costs you nothing. And trust, with the sources, that an honest grip on one begins, quietly and without your managing it, to draw the others along.

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.

Krishna continues the catalogue of the divine endowment begun in the previous verse, adding eleven more traits to the portrait of a nature already leaning toward the good.

Where they agreethe convergence

These are not eleven separate achievements to collect in sequence but one nature seen from many angles, and every source agrees a true grip on any single one tends to draw the rest along with it.

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

This is a list, not an argument: eleven qualities continuing directly from the previous verse, describing a nature rather than commanding one into being.

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

All six readings agree on the basic shape of the passage: this is a list, not an argument, eleven named qualities continuing the catalogue of the divine endowment begun in the previous verse. None of the six commentators treats it as a set of commands to be obeyed one by one; each treats it as a description, the marks by which a nature already leaning toward the good shows itself.

Asked in question 1, below
4schools

The outward-facing qualities are exact under real provocation: freedom from anger is anger already arisen and then calmed, not anger merely absent; freedom from slander is exposing a weak point behind someone's back, not any mention of a fault.

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

Every acarya who glosses the opening five terms lands on the same core sense: non-violence as not causing pain to any being, truth as speech that matches fact, freedom from anger as the calming of anger once it has arisen rather than its mere absence, renunciation as a letting-go, and peace as the settling of the mind itself. The words are read narrowly and carefully rather than loosely paraphrased.

Asked in question 2, below
2schools

The inward-facing qualities describe the quiet ground beneath that conduct: peace as the mind settled, non-greed as the senses unmoved before their objects, stillness as no motion in speech, hand, or foot without real purpose.

Across Advaita, DvaitaŚaṅkara · Madhva
In Śaṅkara and Madhva’s words

Freedom from slander is treated with unusual precision across the sources: it is specifically the exposing of another's weak points, most pointedly behind that person's back, and Madhva sharpens this further into reporting a fault to an authority with intent to injure. This precision matters, since it leaves room for honest correction that serves someone's good, a point the sources converge on even though only Madhva states it explicitly.

3schools

Where the sources are thin, this reading says so plainly: Madhva's extant comment glosses only three of the eleven terms, and Abhinavagupta's individual word for this verse does not survive at all, only his frame for the wider passage at 16.1.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Śrīdhara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 2 others’ words

Compassion, non-greed, gentleness, modesty, and freedom from fickleness are read by every available source as inward dispositions rather than outward achievements: compassion as an inability to bear another's suffering, non-greed as the senses staying unmoved before their objects, gentleness as an absence of harshness, modesty as the shame that halts a wrong act before it starts, and stillness as the absence of pointless motion in speech, hand, or foot.

3schools

None of the six treats the list as ranked; any one quality, taken up honestly, is read as sufficient to begin, since a genuine hold on one draws the others toward it over time.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Śrīdhara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 2 others’ words

None of the six sources, at this exact verse, tries to rank the eleven qualities against one another or single one out as supreme. They are presented and defined side by side, continuing directly from the previous verse's list without a break in register, which is itself a shared judgment about how this material is meant to be read: cumulatively, as one unfolding portrait rather than as competing claims.

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
Are these eleven qualities best read as sober, precise facts about a refined character, or does the passage's own silence in places (Madhva's narrow lexical note, Abhinavagupta's missing verse-specific comment) show that even the tradition's confidence about this list has real limits?
The traditional commentators
Advaita Vedāntasee this school across the GītāŚaṅkara, Madhusūdana
The eleven qualities are given exact, sober definitions, with Madhusudana fusing truth and harmlessness into one clause and naming several traits duties specific to the brahmin.
Read as precise ethical and psychological facts, not recast as devotion.
Viśiṣṭādvaitasee this school across the GītāRāmānuja
Ramanuja's brief gloss already measures each virtue by its bearing on other beings; truth serves their welfare, gentleness fits one for their company.
Read relationally, though the fuller devotional theology belongs to his later sub-commentators.
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words

Ramanuja's brief comment already leans relational: truth is speech that serves the good of all beings, gentleness exists to make one fit for the company of good people, and compassion is an inability to bear another's pain rather than a private feeling. The fuller theological reading of these traits as forms of surrender to the Lord belongs more to his tradition's later sub-commentary than to his own compact remark at this verse, and that distinction is worth keeping honest.

Rāmānuja
Dvaitasee this school across the GītāMadhva
Madhva's surviving comment glosses only three of the eleven terms by strict lexical citation; the rest of the list is not restated in his own words at this verse.
Honestly scoped to what the extant fragment actually covers.
Dvaita, in their fuller words

Madhva's surviving word at this verse is narrow: only three terms, slander, greed, and steadiness, receive his lexical attention, each pinned down by citation to an authoritative word-list. He does not restate the whole eleven in his own voice here, so any wider claim about these virtues as delegated competences under the Lord's will is an extension by analogy with his method elsewhere, not something this verse's extant comment itself asserts.

Madhva
Asked in question 3, below
Shaivasee this school across the GītāAbhinavagupta
No independent comment on 16.2 survives from Abhinavagupta; his frame for the whole 16.1 to 16.5 unit reads the list as marking the sattvic portion whose self is knowledge.
Scoped honestly to the general frame given at 16.1, not a word-by-word gloss.
Shaiva, in their fuller words

Abhinavagupta's individual comment on 16.2 does not survive; his running commentary folds 16.1 through 16.5 into one unit and delivers its explanation at 16.1, where he reads the whole catalogue as marking the sattvic, divine portion whose self is knowledge, serving release because it dispels desire. Extending that frame down to each of the eleven specific terms of 16.2, for instance reading stillness as the mind no longer scattering itself, is offered here only as a labeled possibility, not as his stated word.

Abhinavagupta
Asked in question 6, below
BhaktiŚrīdhara
Sridhara reads relinquishment as open-handed generosity rather than bare renunciation, and keeps the rest of the list plain and unadorned.
A warmer, more active cast on one term, otherwise a plain gloss.
Bhakti, in their fuller words

Sridhara's glosses are plain and practical, but one choice stands out: he reads relinquishment as being open-handed and generous, warmer and more active than a bare letting-go of fruit. His modesty is the fear of public disgrace rising exactly at the moment a wrong act is about to begin, and his freedom from fickleness is simply staying clear of pointless, fruitless activity, unadorned but exact.

Śrīdhara
Modern voices teachers of the last two centuries, read together; they stand apart from the classical schools
A modern readingMadhusūdana
Madhusudana's tightened definitions have practical bite: virtues are fused together and tested specifically under provocation, not displayed only when untested.
Read for how the definitions hold up under an actual difficult moment.
A modern reading, in their fuller words

Read for a contemporary ear, Madhusudana's tightening of the definitions has practical bite: harmlessness and honesty are fused into one instruction rather than two separate virtues that might be traded off against each other, and gentleness is tested specifically against the provocation of a foolish question, not merely displayed when no one is testing it. His naming these as duties of a station is a reminder that virtue here is contextual, not a free-floating abstraction.

Madhusūdana
Asked in question 4, below
Sit with these

A few questions to carry

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

1
How is this list of eleven qualities best understood?
2
According to Shankara, what exactly does freedom from anger require?
3
How does freedom from slander leave room for honest correction, on Madhva's reading?
4
If Madhusudana binds truth and harmlessness into one instruction, what does that suggest for a hard truth you must speak?
5
How much of the eleven-term list does Madhva's surviving comment at this verse actually gloss?
6
What is true about Abhinavagupta's commentary at exactly this verse, 16.2?
For a second sitting6 more questions
7
What does Sridhara's reading of relinquishment (tyaga) emphasize that differs from a bare letting-go?
8
What does Ramanuja's gloss of gentleness (mardava) add beyond a bare absence of harshness?
9
Sridhara defines modesty (hri) as shame rising at what specific moment?
10
How does Madhusudana's gloss test gentleness (mardava) specifically?
11
What practical lesson follows from the sources' shared refusal to rank the eleven qualities?
12
Why does this study treat Abhinavagupta's Kashmir Shaiva extension of the list as clearly labeled speculation rather than his stated word?

Carry this with youwhat stays

Pick one term from the eleven, not all of them, and hold it for a single day. Notice where the day tests exactly that quality and nowhere else: freedom from anger when you are actually provoked, not merely when no one troubles you; truth that must also be kind, not truth used as a blade. Let the test be the practice, and let the other ten wait their turn.

Do not try to hold all eleven at once. Take the one your own day already tests, hold it honestly when the provocation actually comes, and let that single grip begin its quiet work on the rest.

अहिंसा सत्यमक्रोधस्त्यागः शान्तिरपैशुनम्। दया भूतेष्वलोलुप्त्वं मार्दवं ह्रीरचापलम्॥ahiṁsā satyam akrodhas tyāgaḥ śhāntir apaiśhunam, dayā bhūteṣhv aloluptvaṁ mārdavaṁ hrīr acāpalam

Read deeper

Everything a full study holds, folded below.

Word by word12 terms
ahinsānon-violencesatyamtruthfulnessakrodhaḥabsence of angertyāgaḥrenunciationśhāntiḥpeacefulnessapaiśhunamrestraint from fault-findingdayācompassionbhūteṣhutoward all living beingsaloluptvamabsence of covetousnessmārdavamgentlenesshrīḥmodestyachāpalamlack of fickleness
All the commentary, woven togetherevery voice, in one place

The commentary, woven together

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

ll six readings agree on the basic shape of the passage: this is a list, not an argument, eleven named qualities continuing the catalogue of the divine endowment begun in the previous verse. None of the six commentators treats it as a set of commands to be obeyed one by one; each treats it as a description, the marks by which a nature already leaning toward the good shows itself.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Every acarya who glosses the opening five terms lands on the same core sense: non-violence as not causing pain to any being, truth as speech that matches fact, freedom from anger as the calming of anger once it has arisen rather than its mere absence, renunciation as a letting-go, and peace as the settling of the mind itself. The words are read narrowly and carefully rather than loosely paraphrased.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Freedom from slander is treated with unusual precision across the sources: it is specifically the exposing of another's weak points, most pointedly behind that person's back, and Madhva sharpens this further into reporting a fault to an authority with intent to injure. This precision matters, since it leaves room for honest correction that serves someone's good, a point the sources converge on even though only Madhva states it explicitly.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhvācārya

Compassion, non-greed, gentleness, modesty, and freedom from fickleness are read by every available source as inward dispositions rather than outward achievements: compassion as an inability to bear another's suffering, non-greed as the senses staying unmoved before their objects, gentleness as an absence of harshness, modesty as the shame that halts a wrong act before it starts, and stillness as the absence of pointless motion in speech, hand, or foot.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

None of the six sources, at this exact verse, tries to rank the eleven qualities against one another or single one out as supreme. They are presented and defined side by side, continuing directly from the previous verse's list without a break in register, which is itself a shared judgment about how this material is meant to be read: cumulatively, as one unfolding portrait rather than as competing claims.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Divergence

Advaita Vedānta

Shankara and Madhusudana keep the register sober and definitional throughout, refusing to recast any of the eleven qualities as devotion to a personal Lord. Madhusudana goes furthest in tightening definitions, for instance binding truth and harmlessness into a single clause, and he closes by naming several of the traits the special duties of the brahmin, tying the list to a station and its obligations rather than to universal or devotional claims.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Viśiṣṭādvaita

Ramanuja's brief comment already leans relational: truth is speech that serves the good of all beings, gentleness exists to make one fit for the company of good people, and compassion is an inability to bear another's pain rather than a private feeling. The fuller theological reading of these traits as forms of surrender to the Lord belongs more to his tradition's later sub-commentary than to his own compact remark at this verse, and that distinction is worth keeping honest.

Rāmānujācārya

Dvaita

Madhva's surviving word at this verse is narrow: only three terms, slander, greed, and steadiness, receive his lexical attention, each pinned down by citation to an authoritative word-list. He does not restate the whole eleven in his own voice here, so any wider claim about these virtues as delegated competences under the Lord's will is an extension by analogy with his method elsewhere, not something this verse's extant comment itself asserts.

Madhvācārya

Kashmir Śaiva

Abhinavagupta's individual comment on 16.2 does not survive; his running commentary folds 16.1 through 16.5 into one unit and delivers its explanation at 16.1, where he reads the whole catalogue as marking the sattvic, divine portion whose self is knowledge, serving release because it dispels desire. Extending that frame down to each of the eleven specific terms of 16.2, for instance reading stillness as the mind no longer scattering itself, is offered here only as a labeled possibility, not as his stated word.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

Sridhara's glosses are plain and practical, but one choice stands out: he reads relinquishment as being open-handed and generous, warmer and more active than a bare letting-go of fruit. His modesty is the fear of public disgrace rising exactly at the moment a wrong act is about to begin, and his freedom from fickleness is simply staying clear of pointless, fruitless activity, unadorned but exact.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Modern

Read for a contemporary ear, Madhusudana's tightening of the definitions has practical bite: harmlessness and honesty are fused into one instruction rather than two separate virtues that might be traded off against each other, and gentleness is tested specifically against the provocation of a foolish question, not merely displayed when no one is testing it. His naming these as duties of a station is a reminder that virtue here is contextual, not a free-floating abstraction.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

A Seeker Asks

There are eleven qualities here and more besides in the surrounding verses. Where do I even begin, and does it matter which one I start with?

The sources converge on this much: these are read as one nature seen from many angles, not eleven separate achievements to collect in sequence. Taking up any single one honestly tends, over time, to call the others along with it, so the starting point matters less than the honesty of the grip.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Notice that several definitions are only tested under provocation: freedom from anger is defined against being struck or reviled, gentleness against a foolish question, modesty against the pull toward a wrong act already underway. Choose the one your actual daily life provokes most often; that is where the practice has real traction, not the one that sounds most appealing in the abstract.

Rāmānujācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Do not let the length of the list become an excuse for starting nowhere. Sridhara's plain, unadorned glosses suggest these are not exotic attainments but ordinary conduct named carefully: not harming, not lying, not exposing another's fault behind their back. Begin with whichever of those you already half-know you are failing at.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Contemplation

Pick one term from the eleven, not all of them, and hold it for a single day. Notice where the day tests exactly that quality and nowhere else: freedom from anger when you are actually provoked, not merely when no one troubles you; truth that must also be kind, not truth used as a blade. Let the test be the practice, and let the other ten wait their turn.

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