StudyVedanta
Skip to the verse
V.414.404.42
Read slowly

Actions do not bind the one whose doubt is cut and whose stand is placed in the Self.

It sounds like a formula for stopping. Read closely, it is a formula for continuing, unbound, once the doubt about who is really acting has been cut clean away.

41Chapter 4
The verseSpoken by Krishna
Voices6 commentators · 5 schools · modern voices
The readingAbout 5 minutes, unhurried
योगसंन्यस्तकर्माणं ज्ञानसंछिन्नसंशयम्। आत्मवन्तं न कर्माणि निबध्नन्ति धनञ्जय
yoga-sannyasta-karmāṇaṁ jñāna-sañchhinna-sanśhayam ātmavantaṁ na karmāṇi nibadhnanti dhanañjaya

Actions do not bind the one whose actions have been renounced through yoga, whose every doubt has been cut away by knowledge, and who is thus settled in the Self, O Dhananjaya.

Bhagavad Gita 4.41
0:00 / 0:00

Saved for this reading session

Three movements · tap a label to switch

Sanskrit recitation by Swami Brahmānanda

Audio from the Gītā Supersite, IIT Kanpur

The reading read whole, as one unhurried piece

Where it stands

Krishna is closing the long teaching of this chapter, on knowledge, on sacrifice, on the fire that burns up the results of action. Here he draws it all into a single picture: a person still doing the work, whom the work no longer binds.

The teaching

The work goes on. What used to bind it has already let go.

Three things are named together, and then the result is stated. Action has been renounced by yoga. Doubt has been cut by knowledge. The person is atmavan, settled in the Self. These are not three separate prizes collected one after another; they are one condition, described from three angles. Renouncing action by yoga does not mean the work stops. It means the grip that action used to have on the inside has already let go, while the hands keep moving exactly as before. Doubt is the deeper target here. It is not the kind of thing that resolve or willpower can settle, because it is a fault of understanding, not of effort, and only knowledge, direct seeing of what is actually true, can cut it so cleanly that it does not come back. And being settled in the Self names a standing condition, watchful, firmly fixed, not a single bright moment that might later dim. Because of all this, the very same action that would otherwise start a new body, wished, unwished, or mixed, now starts nothing at all. It continues in the world. Its power to bind has already been cut, at the root, before the deed is even finished.

The doubt that rises

If my hands are doing exactly what they did yesterday, what has actually changed inside me, and how would I know the difference between believing I am free and actually being free?

Where the paths divide

Advaita Vedanta

Read as the seeing of self and Lord as one.

Shankara reads the knowledge that cuts doubt as the seeing that the individual self and the Lord are not two things but one. The yoga of action wears away impurity as it is practiced, and as that wearing-away completes itself, it ripens into this very knowledge. Once impurity is gone, doubt is severed, and the person's actions become no more than the play of the three qualities acting on each other, giving rise to no fruit able to bind him.

Vishishtadvaita

Read from a single dense statement, kept close to its own scope.

What survives of Ramanuja's comment here is brief: action renounced by yoga means the action itself has taken the form of knowledge, not that work has been physically dropped. The doubt cut is doubt about the self, removed by the knowledge of the self as this teaching gives it. Such a person is thoughtful, firmly fixed on what he has learned, and the past's endless deeds no longer bind a mind held that steady.

Dvaita

Honestly flagged: the source is silent here.

The published record states plainly that Madhvacharya offers no comment on this verse, not even a short fragment. Any Dvaita extension offered here, that the competence to renounce action and the knowledge that cuts doubt are themselves dependent on the Lord's sanction, is a conditional inference from his framework elsewhere in the Gita, not a reading of 4.41 that his surviving work actually gives.

Kashmir Shaivism

Read from a brief remark that points backward.

What survives from Abhinavagupta here is short and mostly points at what the chapter has already said: the meaning spread across it is told in summary by two closing verses, of which this is one. The one claim he does make is narrow, that renunciation of action holds good only by yoga and in no other way. A fuller reading of freedom and recognition, drawn from his broader work, would go beyond this particular remark.

Bhakti

Read as worship offered into the Lord.

Sridhara reads yoga as worship, action fully offered into the Lord so its fruit cannot return to bind the one who acted. The doubt he sees as needing to be cut is the deepest confusion there is, mistaking oneself for the body, a fault he treats as grave enough to block faith and eclipse the intellect until it is conquered. Cut by knowledge and offered in worship, works are said to depart from the person by that very knowledge.

Modern

Read as one discipline completing itself.

Madhusudana treats this verse as the closing move of a single discipline, knowledge and action united as devotion to Brahman across its earlier and later stages, not as two competing paths. Renunciation by yoga is either the even-minded worship that offers action into the Lord, or the direct seeing of the highest truth; either way, the chain running from deed to rebirth is cut at its root, whatever kind of action, weighty or merely habitual, continues.

All six readings agree the change described here is inward, and that the work itself need not stop. They part on what, exactly, does the cutting, and on how much can honestly be said. Shankara and Madhusudana find a rich, developed answer in knowledge understood in slightly different registers; Ramanuja and Sridhara point to specific, if brief, mechanisms, action-as-knowledge and worship; Abhinavagupta's actual words here are few, mostly a gesture back at the chapter as a whole; and Madhva's voice is simply absent from this verse, a silence this page keeps rather than fills. The forks stay open, and so does the honest gap.

A question to carry

Tomorrow you will do much of the same work you did today. What, precisely, would have to shift inside you, not in your hands, for that same work to stop being able to hold you?

So carry on with the work in front of you. Let your hands do what they were already doing, and let the doubt about who is really doing it be met, quietly, with the knowledge this chapter has been offering all 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.

This is one of two verses that close the fourth chapter, gathering knowledge, action, and devotion into a single picture of the person whom work no longer chains.

Where they agreethe convergence

Three things ripen together, action renounced by yoga, doubt cut by knowledge, a stand placed in the Self, and because of this the very same actions a person keeps doing no longer bind him.

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

3schools

The freeing marks are named together, not as a checklist to complete in order but as one condition seen from three sides at once.

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

The verse names three things in a single breath and then states their result: action renounced by yoga, doubt cut by knowledge, and being atmavan, settled in the Self; because of these together, actions no longer bind. The commentators treat these not as three separate accomplishments to be checked off but as one ripened condition, described from three angles at once.

Asked in question 1, below
3schools

Renouncing action by yoga is inward. Nothing needs to stop outwardly; what lets go is the grip attachment once had from the inside.

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

Renouncing action by yoga is read as inward, never as the outward stopping of work. A person may remain fully active, even publicly busy, while the grip that action once had on the inside has already let go. Nothing about the deed needs to change; what changes is the person's relationship to it.

Asked in question 2, below
3schools

Doubt is the deeper target of the verse. It cannot be resolved by resolve alone; only knowledge, direct seeing, cuts it so it does not return.

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

Doubt is treated as the deeper problem the verse is really solving, not a minor loose end. It cannot be resolved by willpower or resolution alone, because it is a defect of understanding, and only knowledge, the direct seeing of what is actually true, can cut it so that it does not return.

Asked in question 3, below
2schools

Being settled in the Self is a standing condition, watchful and firmly fixed, not a single insight left to fend for itself afterward.

Across Advaita, ViśiṣṭādvaitaŚaṅkara · Rāmānuja · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, and 1 others’ words

Being atmavan, possessed of the Self, names a settled, watchful condition rather than a single flash of insight that might later fade. The commentators who address it describe a person who is vigilant, free of carelessness, and firmly fixed on what has been understood, not merely someone who once had a doubt-free moment.

Asked in question 4, below
2schools

Because the inner stand has shifted, the same action that would otherwise bind now starts no new fruit at all, whether it seems large or merely habitual.

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

Because such a person's inner stance has shifted, the very same actions that would otherwise start a new body of wished, unwished, or mixed result now start nothing at all. The deed continues in the world; its power to bind has already been cut at the root, before the deed is even finished.

Asked in question 5, 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 action no longer binds a still-active person, is it because doubt about the self has been resolved into knowledge, because the deed itself has become an act of knowledge or worship, or is the verse, for at least one reader, mainly a signpost pointing back at teaching already given rather than a fresh claim of its own?
The traditional commentators
Advaita Vedāntasee this school across the GītāŚaṅkara
The doubt is cut by seeing the self and the Lord as not two; action then becomes only the play of the qualities among themselves, giving rise to no binding fruit.
On Shankara's reading that liberating knowledge is the non-difference of self and Brahman.
Viśiṣṭādvaitasee this school across the GītāRāmānuja
Action itself takes the form of knowledge; nothing outward is dropped, but the sense of oneself as an independent agent is given up, and the past's binding deeds fall away.
Ramanuja's comment here is a single dense statement, kept to its own actual scope.
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words

Ramanuja's surviving comment is a single dense statement: action renounced by yoga means action itself has taken the form of knowledge, not that work is physically set down. The doubt cut is doubt about the self, removed by the knowledge of the self as this teaching gives it, and the past's endless binding deeds no longer bind a mind now firmly fixed on what it has learned.

Rāmānuja
Dvaitasee this school across the GītāMadhva
No sourced Madhva commentary on this verse survives at all; only a clearly labeled, conditional Dvaita extrapolation from his general framework can be offered here.
Honestly flagged as absent, not merely thin.
Dvaita, in their fuller words

The published source states plainly that Madhvacharya offers no comment on this verse; there is no fragment, not even a short one, to draw on. A Dvaita extension, clearly conditional and not his recorded word, would read any competence to renounce action or cut doubt as granted and sustained by the Lord's will rather than possessed independently, but this is inference from his framework elsewhere, not a Dvaita reading of 4.41 itself.

Madhva
Kashmir Śaivasee this school across the GītāAbhinavagupta
The surviving remark treats the verse mainly as the chapter's own brief summary, with one narrow claim: renunciation of action holds good only by yoga.
Abhinavagupta's comment here is brief and backward-pointing rather than a developed doctrine.
BhaktiŚrīdhara
Yoga is worship, actions offered fully into the Lord so their fruit cannot bind; the doubt cut is the root confusion of mistaking oneself for the body.
Sridhara reads this doubt as the gravest fault, to be conquered before anything else.
Bhakti, in their fuller words

Sridhara reads yoga as worship, actions fully offered into the Lord so their fruit cannot bind, and reads the cut doubt as the deepest confusion of all, the mistaking of the body for the self, which he treats as the gravest fault there is, eclipsing faith and intellect alike until it is conquered. Once cut, works depart from the person by means of that very knowledge.

Śrīdhara
Modern voices teachers of the last two centuries, read together; they stand apart from the classical schools
A modern readingMadhusūdana
Knowledge and action are one discipline seen at earlier and later stages; renunciation by yoga, whether as worship or as direct seeing, severs the causal chain from deed to rebirth at its root.
Madhusudana reads the verse as the concluding move of the two chapters' twofold teaching.
A modern reading, in their fuller words

Madhusudana frames the verse as the closing move of a twofold discipline, knowledge and action united as devotion to Brahman across earlier and later stages rather than as rival paths. Renunciation by yoga is either the even-minded worship that offers action into the Lord, or the direct seeing of the highest truth; either way, the causal chain from deed to rebirth is severed at its root, whether the actions in question are world-sustaining or merely idle motion.

Madhusūdana
Sit with these

A few questions to carry

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

1
What three things does the verse name together as freeing a person from the bond of action?
2
For someone still fully active in daily work, what does 'renounced by yoga' actually mean?
3
Why does the verse insist that knowledge, specifically, is what cuts the doubt?
4
What does being atmavan, possessed of the Self, describe according to the commentators who address it?
5
If your outward actions look exactly the same as before, how would you know whether this verse's freedom actually applies to you?
For a second sitting7 more questions
6
For Shankara, what specifically is the knowledge that cuts doubt in this verse?
7
What is distinctive in Ramanuja's brief, surviving comment on 'action renounced by yoga'?
8
What does the published Dvaita source actually say about Madhva's comment on this verse?
9
What is the actual scope of Abhinavagupta's surviving remark on this verse?
10
For Sridhara, what is the doubt that must be cut, and how serious does he consider it?
11
How does Madhusudana frame the relationship between knowledge and action in this verse?
12
Why do several commentators insist the change this verse describes happens 'from inside,' not through any outward act of stopping?

Carry this with youwhat stays

Notice, today, one action you are still doing, some ordinary task you have not set down. Rather than asking whether to stop doing it, ask only where your mind rests while you do it: on the deed itself, or already reaching ahead toward what it will bring you. Let the doubt about whether this is enough be met, for a moment, not with more resolve to act differently, but with a quieter attention to what is actually true about the doer and the deed.

So keep doing the work in front of you, and let the question of who is doing it, and what it is owed to, be answered quietly from within, until the doing no longer asks anything more of you than itself.

योगसंन्यस्तकर्माणं ज्ञानसंछिन्नसंशयम्।yoga-sannyasta-karmāṇaṁ jñāna-sañchinna-sanśhayam

Read deeper

Everything a full study holds, folded below.

Word by word9 terms
yoga-sannyasta-karmāṇamthose who renounce ritualistic karm, dedicating their body, mind, and soul to Godjñānaby knowledgesañchhinnadispelledsanśhayamdoubtsātma-vantamsituated in knowledge of the selfnanotkarmāṇiactionsnibadhnantibinddhanañjayaArjun, the conqueror of wealth
All the commentary, woven togetherevery voice, in one place

The commentary, woven together

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

he verse names three things in a single breath and then states their result: action renounced by yoga, doubt cut by knowledge, and being atmavan, settled in the Self; because of these together, actions no longer bind. The commentators treat these not as three separate accomplishments to be checked off but as one ripened condition, described from three angles at once.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Renouncing action by yoga is read as inward, never as the outward stopping of work. A person may remain fully active, even publicly busy, while the grip that action once had on the inside has already let go. Nothing about the deed needs to change; what changes is the person's relationship to it.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Doubt is treated as the deeper problem the verse is really solving, not a minor loose end. It cannot be resolved by willpower or resolution alone, because it is a defect of understanding, and only knowledge, the direct seeing of what is actually true, can cut it so that it does not return.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Being atmavan, possessed of the Self, names a settled, watchful condition rather than a single flash of insight that might later fade. The commentators who address it describe a person who is vigilant, free of carelessness, and firmly fixed on what has been understood, not merely someone who once had a doubt-free moment.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Because such a person's inner stance has shifted, the very same actions that would otherwise start a new body of wished, unwished, or mixed result now start nothing at all. The deed continues in the world; its power to bind has already been cut at the root, before the deed is even finished.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Divergence

Advaita Vedānta

Shankara reads the cutting knowledge as the seeing that the individual self and the Lord are not two, the non-difference of the self and Brahman. Yoga, understood as the discipline of action that wears away impurity, ripens into this knowledge; once impurity is gone, doubt is severed, and the freed person's actions become no more than the play of the three qualities acting upon each other, giving rise to no fruit that could bind him.

Śaṅkarācārya

Viśiṣṭādvaita

Ramanuja's surviving comment is a single dense statement: action renounced by yoga means action itself has taken the form of knowledge, not that work is physically set down. The doubt cut is doubt about the self, removed by the knowledge of the self as this teaching gives it, and the past's endless binding deeds no longer bind a mind now firmly fixed on what it has learned.

Rāmānujācārya

Dvaita

The published source states plainly that Madhvacharya offers no comment on this verse; there is no fragment, not even a short one, to draw on. A Dvaita extension, clearly conditional and not his recorded word, would read any competence to renounce action or cut doubt as granted and sustained by the Lord's will rather than possessed independently, but this is inference from his framework elsewhere, not a Dvaita reading of 4.41 itself.

Madhvācārya

Kashmir Śaiva

Abhinavagupta's surviving remark on this verse is brief and points backward rather than developing new doctrine: the meaning of the whole chapter is told in summary by two concluding verses beginning with yoga, and the one substantive claim made is that renunciation of action holds good only by yoga and in no other way. A fuller Kashmir Shaiva reading, extending entitlement and freedom themes found elsewhere in his work, would be a flagged extrapolation beyond what this particular remark states.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

Sridhara reads yoga as worship, actions fully offered into the Lord so their fruit cannot bind, and reads the cut doubt as the deepest confusion of all, the mistaking of the body for the self, which he treats as the gravest fault there is, eclipsing faith and intellect alike until it is conquered. Once cut, works depart from the person by means of that very knowledge.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Modern

Madhusudana frames the verse as the closing move of a twofold discipline, knowledge and action united as devotion to Brahman across earlier and later stages rather than as rival paths. Renunciation by yoga is either the even-minded worship that offers action into the Lord, or the direct seeing of the highest truth; either way, the causal chain from deed to rebirth is severed at its root, whether the actions in question are world-sustaining or merely idle motion.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

A Seeker Asks

If I am still doing all the same work as before, what has actually changed, and how would I know the difference between merely believing I am free and actually being free?

The commentators agree the change is not visible from outside. The work looks the same because it is the same; what has shifted is the inner relationship to it, described as the grip of attachment having let go rather than any outward gesture of renunciation.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya

The test the verse itself offers is not a feeling but a result: such actions no longer start a new binding fruit, wished, unwished, or mixed. This is stated as a consequence of the doubt having been cut by knowledge, not as a separate claim to be taken on faith alone.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śaṅkarācārya

Sridhara's answer points to what remains unresolved rather than resolved: he names doubt about one's own identity, taking oneself for the body, as the very thing that must be conquered first, which suggests the honest test is whether that particular confusion has actually loosened, not whether one merely wishes it had.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Contemplation

Notice, today, one action you are still doing, some ordinary task you have not set down. Rather than asking whether to stop doing it, ask only where your mind rests while you do it: on the deed itself, or already reaching ahead toward what it will bring you. Let the doubt about whether this is enough be met, for a moment, not with more resolve to act differently, but with a quieter attention to what is actually true about the doer and the deed.

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