What it costs to find fault with the teaching instead of practicing it.
It is easy to mistake carping for discernment. Here Krishna draws the opposite of the faithful follower: the one who scorns the path before ever testing it, and so shuts himself out by his own hand.
But those who find fault with my teaching and do not follow it are deluded about all knowledge. Know them to be without discernment and lost.
Having just praised those who follow his teaching on action with faith, Krishna now turns, on the hinge of a single word, to describe their opposite, so the seeker sees the full stakes of accepting or refusing the path.
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.
This verse is the dark mirror of the one before it. Krishna has praised the faithful; now, on the turn of a single word, he shows you their opposite, so you see what is at stake in accepting or refusing the path.
Across Advaita, Bhakti, Dvaita, Śuddhādvaita, and the modern voicesŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana · Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati · Śrīdhara · Baladeva · Viśvanātha · Jayatīrtha · Vallabha · Puruṣottama · Ramsukhdas · TilakIn Śaṅkara, Madhusūdana, and 10 others’ words
This verse is the dark mirror of the one before it. Having just praised those who faithfully follow his teaching on action, Krishna now turns to describe their opposite. The Sanskrit particle 'tu' ('but') is the hinge: it marks the shift from faith to unbelief, from those who accept to those who refuse. The people now in view are those who find fault with Krishna's settled teaching and, on that basis, do not practice it. The structure is deliberate: praise of the faithful, then warning to the faithless, so that the seeker sees the full stakes of accepting or rejecting the path of disciplined action.
Notice where the trouble first starts. It is not honest questioning but a fault-finding that fixes defects even where none exist, a looking-down born of an unbelieving heart, and only then comes the refusal to act.
Across Advaita, Bhakti, Śuddhādvaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, and the modern voicesŚaṅkara · Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana · Dhanapati · Śrīdhara · Puruṣottama · Jñāneśvar · Ramsukhdas · Tilak · Vedānta DeśikaIn Śaṅkara, Ānandagiri, and 8 others’ words
The fatal first move is fault-finding, named by the word 'abhyasuyantah' (caviling, carping, disparaging). The commentators stress that this is not honest inquiry but a hostile disposition: the carper attaches faults even where none exist, twisting the teaching's virtues into supposed defects, reviling it rather than weighing it. This fault-finding springs from a lack of faith ('a-shraddha'), and several voices trace it further back to unbelief or even atheism. The point is that the refusal to practice is not innocent. It begins in the heart's posture toward the teaching, an envious and contemptuous looking-down, and only then issues in the refusal to act.
The verdict on such a one is severe and exact: deluded across the whole field of knowing, without the discernment that is the mind's true work, and so lost, cut off from every goal a person can seek.
Across Advaita, Bhakti, Viśiṣṭādvaita, Śuddhādvaita, and the modern voicesŚaṅkara · Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana · Dhanapati · Nīlakaṇṭha · Śrīdhara · Baladeva · Rāmānuja · Vedānta Deśika · Vallabha · Sivananda · Tilak · RamsukhdasIn Śaṅkara, Ānandagiri, and 11 others’ words
Krishna's verdict on such people is severe and threefold, and the commentators unfold each term. They are 'deluded in all knowledge' (sarva-jnana-vimudhan): confused not in one area but across the whole field of what can be known. Many gloss this field concretely as knowledge of action, knowledge of Brahman with qualities (the Lord with form), and knowledge of the formless Brahman, and as confusion regarding the very instruments of knowing: the valid means (pramana), the object known (prameya), and the purpose. They are 'achetasah': mindless, without discernment (viveka), lacking the mind's proper work, which is the sure ascertainment of truth. And they are 'nashtah': lost, ruined, fallen away from every human goal. To call someone 'lost' here is not name-calling but a precise diagnosis: cut off from the means, they are cut off from the end.
See the chain that binds it all together: refusal grows from fault-finding, delusion from refusal, ruin from delusion. A mind set against the truth has let go of its own proper work and so is lost everywhere.
Across Viśiṣṭādvaita, Śuddhādvaita, Advaita, and the modern voicesRāmānuja · Vedānta Deśika · Vallabha · Puruṣottama · Ramsukhdas · MadhusūdanaIn Rāmānuja, Vedānta Deśika, and 4 others’ words
Underlying the whole verse is a single causal chain that the commentators draw out: refusal flows from fault-finding, delusion flows from refusal, and ruin flows from delusion. Because the mind's true work is the certain grasp of reality, a mind set against the teaching has abandoned that work and so becomes 'mindless' and deluded everywhere; and being deluded, it is necessarily lost, since it has shut the very door to the goal. Several voices add a poignant note: the loss is self-inflicted. The teaching itself stands firm and unharmed; the Lord has opened the door. It is only the seeker's own unwillingness and scorn that shut him out.
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
These commentators read 'this settled judgment of Mine' with the fullest metaphysical content. Krishna's view is specifically that all of reality, every self and substance, is the Lord's own body, supported by him, subordinate to him, and set in motion by him alone. The faithful are those who, holding this truth steadily in mind, perform all their actions; the lost are those who refuse to act with this understanding. On this reading the delusion 'in all knowledge' is precisely the failure to know the real nature of the self as it stands in 'I' and 'mine' judgments, so that the true object of knowledge remains unknown. One of these voices also frames the verse as a closing seal on a larger argument: because disciplined action is easy, less prone to lapse, and self-sufficient through the self-knowledge it already contains, it is the path fit for everyone, and from the next verse onward the difficulty of the path of knowledge is what gets explained.
Dvaita, in their fuller words
This commentator reads the verse within a tight argument about what is and is not a means to liberation, set against a wrong impression that action, once withdrawn from, becomes a path to freedom just as knowledge is. He stresses that the word 'also' in the surrounding teaching means 'how much more so,' not 'in conjunction,' refusing both the idea that action is a separate independent means and the idea that knowledge and action are simply joined together. The direct, immediate means is the sight of the Lord, which seeks nothing further for liberation; and for that very reason the contrary view is set aside. The verse's condemnation thus falls on those who misread the relation of action and knowledge to the final goal.
Advaita Vedānta, in their fuller words
These commentators add a distinctive reading of the word 'sarva' in 'sarva-jnana-vimudhan.' Alongside the usual sense of 'all knowledge,' they take 'sarva' as a name of the Lord himself, by the etymology 'you reach all completely, therefore you are sarva (the All).' On this reading the lost are those deluded in the very knowledge of the Lord, fixed in the body alone, fallen from both heaven and liberation. The condemnation is sharpened: their core failure is not knowing the Lord who is the All.
Śuddhādvaita, in their fuller words
These commentators highlight the role of the Lord's command and inner intent. The lost are those who, abandoning the true character of the Lord's command, take work itself as the cause of its fruit and act for the fruit knowingly, or who envy the Lord's view and grasp it crookedly. The stress falls on a striking image: the divinely established boundary or order (maryada) itself cannot save those who scorn its inner intent and refuse the very door the Lord has opened. The defect is a hardening of heart against the grace already extended.
Bhakti, in their fuller words
This commentator dwells vividly on the inner state of the fault-finder. Gripped by deluding Maya, such people surrender to the senses, treat the teaching contemptuously as idle talk, and are pictured as drunk on the wine of infatuation, poisoned by sense-objects, and stuck in the mire of ignorance. A chain of images presses the point home: the teaching is wasted on them as jewels are wasted in a corpse's hand, as morning light is lost on the blind, as moonlight means nothing to a crow, as a moth flies into the very flame that consumes it. The pursuit of sense-pleasure is itself their self-destruction. The commentator even counsels that such people should not be talked to of spiritual matters, since it only wearies them.
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
The most freeing thing to notice in this verse is where the loss actually comes from. The teaching is not fragile. It stands on its own and stays true whether or not anyone accepts it. What shuts a person out is not some failure in the path but the person's own unwillingness. Watch, then, for the quiet move that begins all the trouble: the self-seeking wish that every good thing arrive for me alone, on my terms, and the faultfinding that follows when a teaching asks something else of me. The carping is not neutral. It is the door pulling itself shut from the inside. The remedy is correspondingly simple. The same door opens again the moment the unwillingness softens into willingness to practice. You are never as far from the path as the harsh words suggest, because the only thing barring you is a posture of the heart that you yourself can set down.
You are never as far from the path as the harsh words suggest, for the only thing barring the door is a posture of the heart that you yourself can set down.
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 is the dark mirror of the one before it. Having just praised those who faithfully follow his teaching on action, Krishna now turns to describe their opposite. The Sanskrit particle 'tu' ('but') is the hinge: it marks the shift from faith to unbelief, from those who accept to those who refuse. The people now in view are those who find fault with Krishna's settled teaching and, on that basis, do not practice it. The structure is deliberate: praise of the faithful, then warning to the faithless, so that the seeker sees the full stakes of accepting or rejecting the path of disciplined action.
Braided from 12 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrī Jayatīrtha · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Swami Ramsukhdas · Lokmanya Tilak
The fatal first move is fault-finding, named by the word 'abhyasuyantah' (caviling, carping, disparaging). The commentators stress that this is not honest inquiry but a hostile disposition: the carper attaches faults even where none exist, twisting the teaching's virtues into supposed defects, reviling it rather than weighing it. This fault-finding springs from a lack of faith ('a-shraddha'), and several voices trace it further back to unbelief or even atheism. The point is that the refusal to practice is not innocent. It begins in the heart's posture toward the teaching, an envious and contemptuous looking-down, and only then issues in the refusal to act.
Braided from 10 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrī Puruṣottama · Sant Jñāneśvar · Swami Ramsukhdas · Lokmanya Tilak · Vedānta Deśika
Krishna's verdict on such people is severe and threefold, and the commentators unfold each term. They are 'deluded in all knowledge' (sarva-jnana-vimudhan): confused not in one area but across the whole field of what can be known. Many gloss this field concretely as knowledge of action, knowledge of Brahman with qualities (the Lord with form), and knowledge of the formless Brahman, and as confusion regarding the very instruments of knowing: the valid means (pramana), the object known (prameya), and the purpose. They are 'achetasah': mindless, without discernment (viveka), lacking the mind's proper work, which is the sure ascertainment of truth. And they are 'nashtah': lost, ruined, fallen away from every human goal. To call someone 'lost' here is not name-calling but a precise diagnosis: cut off from the means, they are cut off from the end.
Braided from 13 commentators
Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Dhanapati Sūri · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Baladeva · Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Vallabhācārya · Swami Sivananda · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas
Underlying the whole verse is a single causal chain that the commentators draw out: refusal flows from fault-finding, delusion flows from refusal, and ruin flows from delusion. Because the mind's true work is the certain grasp of reality, a mind set against the teaching has abandoned that work and so becomes 'mindless' and deluded everywhere; and being deluded, it is necessarily lost, since it has shut the very door to the goal. Several voices add a poignant note: the loss is self-inflicted. The teaching itself stands firm and unharmed; the Lord has opened the door. It is only the seeker's own unwillingness and scorn that shut him out.
Braided from 6 commentators
Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Swami Ramsukhdas · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Divergence
Viśiṣṭādvaita
These commentators read 'this settled judgment of Mine' with the fullest metaphysical content. Krishna's view is specifically that all of reality, every self and substance, is the Lord's own body, supported by him, subordinate to him, and set in motion by him alone. The faithful are those who, holding this truth steadily in mind, perform all their actions; the lost are those who refuse to act with this understanding. On this reading the delusion 'in all knowledge' is precisely the failure to know the real nature of the self as it stands in 'I' and 'mine' judgments, so that the true object of knowledge remains unknown. One of these voices also frames the verse as a closing seal on a larger argument: because disciplined action is easy, less prone to lapse, and self-sufficient through the self-knowledge it already contains, it is the path fit for everyone, and from the next verse onward the difficulty of the path of knowledge is what gets explained.
Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika
Dvaita
This commentator reads the verse within a tight argument about what is and is not a means to liberation, set against a wrong impression that action, once withdrawn from, becomes a path to freedom just as knowledge is. He stresses that the word 'also' in the surrounding teaching means 'how much more so,' not 'in conjunction,' refusing both the idea that action is a separate independent means and the idea that knowledge and action are simply joined together. The direct, immediate means is the sight of the Lord, which seeks nothing further for liberation; and for that very reason the contrary view is set aside. The verse's condemnation thus falls on those who misread the relation of action and knowledge to the final goal.
Śrī Jayatīrtha
Advaita Vedānta
These commentators add a distinctive reading of the word 'sarva' in 'sarva-jnana-vimudhan.' Alongside the usual sense of 'all knowledge,' they take 'sarva' as a name of the Lord himself, by the etymology 'you reach all completely, therefore you are sarva (the All).' On this reading the lost are those deluded in the very knowledge of the Lord, fixed in the body alone, fallen from both heaven and liberation. The condemnation is sharpened: their core failure is not knowing the Lord who is the All.
Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri
Śuddhādvaita
These commentators highlight the role of the Lord's command and inner intent. The lost are those who, abandoning the true character of the Lord's command, take work itself as the cause of its fruit and act for the fruit knowingly, or who envy the Lord's view and grasp it crookedly. The stress falls on a striking image: the divinely established boundary or order (maryada) itself cannot save those who scorn its inner intent and refuse the very door the Lord has opened. The defect is a hardening of heart against the grace already extended.
Śrī Puruṣottama · Vallabhācārya
Bhakti
This commentator dwells vividly on the inner state of the fault-finder. Gripped by deluding Maya, such people surrender to the senses, treat the teaching contemptuously as idle talk, and are pictured as drunk on the wine of infatuation, poisoned by sense-objects, and stuck in the mire of ignorance. A chain of images presses the point home: the teaching is wasted on them as jewels are wasted in a corpse's hand, as morning light is lost on the blind, as moonlight means nothing to a crow, as a moth flies into the very flame that consumes it. The pursuit of sense-pleasure is itself their self-destruction. The commentator even counsels that such people should not be talked to of spiritual matters, since it only wearies them.
Sant Jñāneśvar
A Seeker Asks
Why does Krishna pronounce such a harsh sentence, calling people lost and mindless, simply for not following his teaching, and is this condemnation or a clear-eyed diagnosis?
Read closely, the verse is diagnosis more than denunciation. The harsh words describe a real causal chain, not an arbitrary punishment. The trouble does not start with disagreement but with 'abhyasuyantah,' a hostile fault-finding that attaches defects even where none exist; this is not honest inquiry but a heart already set against the teaching. From that refusal to practice, delusion follows, and from delusion, ruin.
Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Ānandagiri · Śrīdhara Svāmī
The terms are precise rather than abusive. To be 'mindless' (achetasah) means lacking the mind's proper work, which is the certain ascertainment of truth; a mind set against reality has abandoned that work, so it really is, by definition, undiscerning and deluded everywhere. To be 'lost' (nashtah) simply means cut off from the goal, and that follows necessarily once the means is refused.
Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Śrīla Baladeva
Most reassuring of all, the loss is self-inflicted and therefore reversible. The teaching itself remains whole and the door stands open; it is only the seeker's own scorn and unwillingness that shut him out. So the severity is not the Lord slamming a gate but an honest warning about what we do to ourselves when we carp instead of practice. The same unwillingness, once set down, lets the path open again.
Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Swami Ramsukhdas
Contemplation
The most freeing thing to notice in this verse is where the loss actually comes from. The teaching is not fragile. It stands on its own and stays true whether or not anyone accepts it. What shuts a person out is not some failure in the path but the person's own unwillingness. Watch, then, for the quiet move that begins all the trouble: the self-seeking wish that every good thing arrive for me alone, on my terms, and the faultfinding that follows when a teaching asks something else of me. The carping is not neutral. It is the door pulling itself shut from the inside. The remedy is correspondingly simple. The same door opens again the moment the unwillingness softens into willingness to practice. You are never as far from the path as the harsh words suggest, because the only thing barring you is a posture of the heart that you yourself can set down.
Sit with this · Swami Ramsukhdas
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, tap a name in The seating.