StudyVedanta
Skip to the verse
V.195.185.20
Read slowly

A mind at rest in sameness has already won, here, the whole round of birth and death.

It is tempting to hear even-sight as a call to blur every real difference between people. The verse asks something more exact: see the one faultless reality beneath the differences, and let that seeing itself be the freedom.

19Chapter 5
The verseSpoken by Krishna
Voices6 commentators · 5 schools · modern voices
The readingAbout 5 minutes, unhurried
इहैव तैर्जितः सर्गो येषां साम्ये स्थितं मनः। निर्दोषं हि समं ब्रह्म तस्माद्ब्रह्मणि ते स्थिताः
ihaiva tair jitaḥ sargo yeṣhāṁ sāmye sthitaṁ manaḥ nirdoṣhaṁ hi samaṁ brahma tasmād brahmaṇi te sthitāḥ

Here and now, in this very life, those whose mind rests in sameness toward all beings have already conquered the round of birth and death. Brahman is flawless and the same everywhere, so a mind settled in that sameness is a mind established in Brahman itself.

Bhagavad Gita 5.19
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 has just described the renouncer who neither hates nor desires, whose mind has given up every claim to being the doer. Now he names the sign of that state plainly: a mind settled in sameness toward all beings has, right here, conquered samsara.

The teaching

Rest your mind in sameness, and the round of birth and death is already won.

When your mind comes to rest in sameness, an even regard toward every being, you have already conquered the round of birth and death. Not later. Here itself, while you are still living in the body. The reason lies in what Brahman is. Brahman is faultless and the same in all beings, and because your mind rests in that even Brahman, you are established in Brahman itself; to stand in the sameness of all selves and to stand in Brahman are two names for a single state. Hold the faultlessness carefully. Brahman dwells equally in every being, even in an outcaste, a dog-cooker, yet it is never stained by what it dwells in, untouched the way space is untouched, holding everything and soiled by nothing. A thing can be spoiled in one of two ways, by touching something already foul, or by being foul in itself; Brahman fails both tests. So when your mind abides in that spotless sameness, not even a trace of fault reaches you. A real objection presses here. The dharma-texts warn that whoever mismatches honor to a person's true worth, treating the unequal and the equal alike in the matter of worship, falls from wealth and from dharma. If sameness is praised, does this verse simply overturn that warning? The commentators who address this directly answer by scope, not by denial. The old rule binds one still standing in the worshipper's place, still weighing whose honor should be greater or less. This verse describes one who has already passed, in this very life, beyond that ground entirely; his even vision rests on the one truth beneath all such distinctions, not on erasing the distinctions themselves. The two teachings therefore occupy separate domains rather than standing in real conflict. It is worth being honest, too, about how unevenly the classical record itself speaks here. Shankara, Ramanuja, Sridhara, and Madhusudana all give this verse careful, extended attention. Madhva's surviving word is a single line calling it praise. Abhinavagupta's text is simply silent. That unevenness is itself part of the truth this page reports, rather than a gap to be quietly filled with invented commentary.

The doubt that rises

If even vision means treating everyone the same, am I being told to ignore real differences in character and conduct, the very indiscriminateness the dharma-texts warn against? And when the classical record itself thins out this sharply for two of its own great voices, how much confidence should any single reading of this verse actually carry?

Where the paths divide

Advaita Vedanta

Read as the strict oneness of the Self with Brahman, for the egoless knower.

What you rest in is undivided Brahman, and you are not other than it. Brahman is not split by differences of its own qualities, because consciousness itself has no qualities; desire and its kin belong to the field, to the inner organ, not to the Self, which is beginningless and without properties. No fine mark divides one embodied self from another, so Self and Brahman are one, and your faultlessness follows directly from that oneness: being non-different from faultless Brahman, you are faultless too. The Gautama rule about equal and unequal worship is fenced in by its own words, in the matter of worship, and binds only one who still holds a self tied to some quality; it has no purchase on you, since the whole passage this verse belongs to concerns the renunciation of all mental action.

Vishishtadvaita

Read as the sameness of all selves, with the conquest happening now, within the practice of the means.

The sameness meant here is the likeness of all embodied selves, not a featureless dissolving of one self into another. The self-substance, once freed from the fault of contact with matter, is the same in every being, and that very sameness is Brahman; to rest in it is already to stand in Brahman, and that standing is itself the conquest of transmigration, not a promise redeemed only later. Those who dwell in this sameness, whose whole form has become knowledge, are the freed ones themselves. This is how, for one walking the path of action, that very discipline ripens into the sight of sameness.

Dvaita

Read cautiously as praise, since only a single line survives from this commentator.

The extant record preserves only one sentence here: that Krishna's words here itself are praise for the state just described. Read beside the wider tradition this commentator represents, that caution makes sense. The very next teaching still treats even-sight as a means to a further liberation, and an earlier passage allows even a knower another birth, so a flat claim that the embodied self is already wholly free would sit uneasily against the doctrine of continuing dependence on the Lord. Praise permits an exalting overstatement that a plain doctrinal claim would not.

Kashmir Shaivism

Offered only as a labeled, conditional extension, since no comment on this verse survives.

No comment on this verse survives at all from this tradition's Gita commentator; his fragmentary surviving text is simply silent here, and nothing is invented to fill that silence with words presented as his own. What follows is offered only as a clearly marked extrapolation from his method elsewhere: on such a reading, samya, the even mind, might be taken as the recognition of one's own unbounded, self-luminous awareness, in which the apparent unevenness among beings, worthy and unworthy alike, is seen as varied form taken by a single consciousness that itself carries no stain. This remains a conditional extension, not this master's stated word.

Bhakti

Read as the Gautama objection answered by scope: the old rule binds only the still-worshipping.

Here itself, even while still living in the body, the round of birth and death has already been set aside by whoever's mind stands in evenness, because Brahman itself is even and faultless, and to see with an even eye is to be established in Brahman alone, to have reached the very state of being Brahman. The Gautama rule against uneven worship applies only before that state is reached, since its own text speaks of one still standing in the worshipper's posture, still weighing whose honor should be greater or less. That rule does not bind one who has, in this very life, already passed into Brahman; the two teachings occupy separate ground rather than standing in contradiction.

Modern

Read for a portable test of corruption, useful beyond its original doctrinal setting.

A thing is spoiled in one of two ways: by contact with something already foul, the way Ganga water is fouled by falling into a foul pit, or by being foul in itself, the way urine is foul on its own account. Present equally even in the lowest of beings, Brahman fails both tests, untouched by what it dwells in, unattached like the sky, and carrying no fault of its own, since desire and its kin belong only to the inner organ. This distinction travels well outside its original setting: ask, of any claim to purity or corruption you meet today, whether it is a matter of contact or of nature, and notice how much clearer the question becomes once those two are kept apart.

The confident readings agree on the shape of the claim, that a mind at rest in sameness has, here and now, conquered the round of birth and death, because Brahman itself is faultless and the same in all. They part on how literally to take here itself, whether as strict identity already realized, as sameness of selves ripening within practice, as praise admitting overstatement, or as a state reached and then defended against an old rule that no longer applies. And for two of the six voices this page draws on, the honest fact is that very little, or nothing, survives to read at all. This page does not resolve any of that into one confident answer, and neither does it pretend the thin sources are fuller than they are.

A question to carry

Where in your own life do you still quietly rank people by how much honor or attention each one deserves, and what would it cost you to rest your attention, even briefly, on the one sameness beneath that ranking instead?

So let your mind settle, even for a few breaths, into the sameness that asks nothing of anyone's rank or worth, and trust that this resting is not a means to some later freedom, but, the sources insist, already the freedom itself.

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 has just praised the renouncer who has given up all mental grasping; here he names the mark of that state directly, a mind so settled in sameness that it has already conquered samsara.

Where they agreethe convergence

Wherever the sources speak with confidence, they agree: this sameness is Brahman's own faultless nature recognized in every being, and a mind that rests there has already won what death cannot take.

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 conquest is present tense: here itself, while still living in the body, not a fruit deferred to some future ripening.

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

The verse makes a bold, present-tense claim: those whose mind rests in sameness toward all beings have already conquered the whole round of birth and death, here itself, while still alive in the body, not at some later point after death. The freedom described is not a fruit ripening in the distance; it is lived now, by a mind that has actually come to rest in this evenness.

Asked in question 1, below
3schools

The reason is Brahman's own faultless, even nature; to rest the mind there is already to be established in Brahman.

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

The reason given for this is Brahman's own nature. Brahman is faultless and the same in all beings, and because the mind is settled in that even Brahman, the person is thereby established in Brahman itself. Standing in the sameness of all selves and standing in Brahman are read as two names for a single state, not two separate achievements.

Asked in question 2, below
1school

Brahman is untouched by what it dwells in, the way space holds everything and is soiled by nothing.

Across AdvaitaŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana
In Śaṅkara and Madhusūdana’s words

Brahman's faultlessness is explained with care: though Brahman dwells equally even in degraded beings, an outcaste, a dog-cooker, it is never stained by what it dwells in, untouched the way space holds everything yet is soiled by nothing. Because the even-seer's mind rests in that spotless sameness, not even a trace of fault reaches such a person.

Asked in question 3, below
2schools

The dharma-texts' warning against treating the unequal as equal binds only the still-worshipping mind, not the one who has already passed beyond that ground.

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

Several commentators set the verse against the same sharp objection from the dharma-texts: Gautama's law warns that mismatching honor to a person's worth, treating the unequal and the equal alike in worship, ruins a man's own standing and his dharma. The reply in every case turns on scope, not on denying the rule. That rule binds the ritual agent still standing in the worshipper's place; this verse speaks of one who has already passed beyond that place entirely.

Asked in question 4, below
4schools

Where the record itself thins to a single line, or falls silent, that honest thinness is reported rather than papered over with invented commentary.

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

Even where the surviving record thins out sharply, as it does for two of the six acaryas this page draws on, what remains still points the same direction: the verse is read as high praise for a mind that has stopped drawing lines where Brahman draws none, whether that praise is taken as literal liberation-in-the-body or, more cautiously, as an exalting overstatement of a real and present freedom from affliction.

This is the shared ground; it can be carried as it is. Below is where they differ.

Where they differthe divergence

The question they answer differently
When the verse calls the even-seeing mind's victory over birth and death complete here itself, is that a literal claim of liberation already lived in this very body, or an exalting overstatement of a real, present freedom, and how does that claim survive the dharma-texts' warning against treating the unequal as equal?
The traditional commentators
Advaita Vedāntasee this school across the GītāŚaṅkara
The seer is non-different from faultless Brahman, so by that very identity he is faultless and has already conquered birth and death.
Read as the renunciation of all action; the Gautama rule has no purchase on the egoless knower this passage concerns.
Viśiṣṭādvaitasee this school across the GītāRāmānuja
Sameness means the likeness of all selves, freed from contact with matter; resting in that sameness is already standing in Brahman, and that is itself the conquest.
The conquest happens within the very practice of the means, not as a fruit deferred to later.
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words

Ramanuja reads sameness as the likeness of all embodied selves rather than an undifferentiated unity. The self-substance, once freed from the fault of contact with matter, is the same in every being, and that very sameness is Brahman; to rest in it is already to stand in Brahman, and that standing is itself the conquest of transmigration, not a promise redeemed later. He calls those who dwell in this sameness, whose whole form has become knowledge, the freed ones themselves, and frames the verse as showing how the discipline of action, rightly practiced, ripens directly into this sight.

Rāmānuja
Dvaitasee this school across the GītāMadhva
Only a single line survives from Madhva: the here-and-now language is praise, not a flat claim that the embodied self is already wholly liberated.
An honestly thin source, read alongside the tradition's caution against overstating literal liberation-in-the-body.
Dvaita, in their fuller words

The extant record preserves only a single line from Madhva, that Krishna's words here itself are offering praise. Read alongside the wider tradition he stands in, this caution makes sense: the very next teaching still treats even-sight as a means to a further liberation, and an earlier passage allows even a knower another birth, so a flat claim of literal liberation-in-the-body would sit uneasily beside Madhva's own doctrine of the self's continuing dependence on the Lord. Praise permits an overstatement that a plain doctrinal claim would not.

Madhva
Shaivasee this school across the GītāAbhinavagupta
No comment on this verse survives from Abhinavagupta; a labeled extension only would read samya as recognizing one's own unbounded, self-luminous awareness.
Clearly marked as this page's own conditional extrapolation, never presented as his stated word.
Shaiva, in their fuller words

No comment on this verse survives from Abhinavagupta; his fragmentary Gitartha-samgraha is simply silent here, and nothing is invented in his name to fill that gap. Offered only as a labeled, conditional extension of his method elsewhere, not as his stated word: a Kashmir Shaiva reading might take samya, the even mind, as the recognition of one's own unbounded, self-luminous awareness, in which the apparent unevenness among beings is seen as varied form taken by a single consciousness that itself carries no stain.

Abhinavagupta
BhaktiŚrīdhara
The Gautama rule binds only the still-worshipping; the even-seer has already passed, in this life, into Brahman, where that rule no longer applies.
Read as praise for a mind that has moved from the worshipper's ground to the ground of Brahman itself.
Bhakti, in their fuller words

Sridhara stages the verse as a direct answer to Gautama's objection: the rule against uneven worship binds only one still standing in the worshipper's posture, still weighing who deserves more or less honor. This verse describes one who has already passed, in this very life, into Brahman, whose even vision is simply what remains once the worshipper's ground itself has fallen away. Ritual discrimination and even-sightedness therefore occupy separate domains rather than standing in contradiction.

Śrīdhara
Modern voices teachers of the last two centuries, read together; they stand apart from the classical schools
A modern readingMadhusūdana
A thing is spoiled either by contact with the foul or by being foul in itself; Brahman fails both tests, which is why even-sight is clarity, not indiscrimination.
The twofold corruption-test read as a portable, reusable diagnostic beyond its original doctrinal setting.
A modern reading, in their fuller words

Read for its own precision rather than only its Advaita commitments, Madhusudana's twofold account of corruption, by contact with the foul or by being foul in itself, offers a portable test still usable today: ask whether a thing (or a person, or an institution) is stained by what it touches or corrupt in its own nature, and treat those as two different diagnoses. On his reading, Brahman fails both tests, remaining untouched like the sky even while present in the lowest of beings, which is exactly why the equal-seer's vision is not indiscriminate but clear-sighted.

Madhusūdana
Sit with these

A few questions to carry

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

1
When does this verse say the even-seeing mind conquers the round of birth and death?
2
Why is the even-seeing mind said to be established in Brahman?
3
How can Brahman dwell even in degraded beings and still remain faultless?
4
What objection from the dharma-texts do several commentators raise against praising the even-seer?
5
How is the Gautama objection actually answered, rather than ignored?
For a second sitting7 more questions
6
For Ramanuja, what exactly is meant by sameness in this verse?
7
How much does the extant record actually preserve of Madhva's comment on this verse?
8
What does this page offer in place of a genuine Abhinavagupta reading of this verse?
9
According to Sridhara, when does the Gautama rule about equal and unequal worship stop applying to a person?
10
What twofold test does Madhusudana offer for how a thing becomes spoiled?
11
Why does treating everyone the same, on this verse's own terms, not mean ignoring real differences of conduct?
12
Why is it honest to note that two of the six acaryas leave very little on this verse?

Carry this with youwhat stays

Notice where your own mind still keeps score, quietly ranking people by how much honor or attention each one deserves. The verse does not ask you to pretend those differences of conduct and character are not there; it asks whether you can see, underneath the ranking, one and the same faultless awareness looking out through every face you meet, undiminished by what it happens to be looking through. Practice resting your attention there for a few breaths today, on the sameness rather than the score, and notice whether anything in you relaxes.

So let your mind rest, even for a moment, in the one faultless sameness beneath every face you meet today, and notice that this resting is itself the freedom the verse describes.

इहैव तैर्जितः सर्गो येषां साम्ये स्थितं मनः।ihaiva tair jitaḥ sargo yeṣhāṁ sāmye sthitaṁ manaḥ

Read deeper

Everything a full study holds, folded below.

Word by word16 terms
iha evain this very lifetaiḥby themjitaḥconquersargaḥthe creationyeṣhāmwhosesāmyein equanimitysthitamsituatedmanaḥmindnirdoṣhamflawlesshicertainlysamamin equalitybrahmaGodtasmātthereforebrahmaṇiin the Absolute Truthtetheysthitāḥare seated
All the commentary, woven togetherevery voice, in one place

The commentary, woven together

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

he verse makes a bold, present-tense claim: those whose mind rests in sameness toward all beings have already conquered the whole round of birth and death, here itself, while still alive in the body, not at some later point after death. The freedom described is not a fruit ripening in the distance; it is lived now, by a mind that has actually come to rest in this evenness.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

The reason given for this is Brahman's own nature. Brahman is faultless and the same in all beings, and because the mind is settled in that even Brahman, the person is thereby established in Brahman itself. Standing in the sameness of all selves and standing in Brahman are read as two names for a single state, not two separate achievements.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Brahman's faultlessness is explained with care: though Brahman dwells equally even in degraded beings, an outcaste, a dog-cooker, it is never stained by what it dwells in, untouched the way space holds everything yet is soiled by nothing. Because the even-seer's mind rests in that spotless sameness, not even a trace of fault reaches such a person.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Several commentators set the verse against the same sharp objection from the dharma-texts: Gautama's law warns that mismatching honor to a person's worth, treating the unequal and the equal alike in worship, ruins a man's own standing and his dharma. The reply in every case turns on scope, not on denying the rule. That rule binds the ritual agent still standing in the worshipper's place; this verse speaks of one who has already passed beyond that place entirely.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Even where the surviving record thins out sharply, as it does for two of the six acaryas this page draws on, what remains still points the same direction: the verse is read as high praise for a mind that has stopped drawing lines where Brahman draws none, whether that praise is taken as literal liberation-in-the-body or, more cautiously, as an exalting overstatement of a real and present freedom from affliction.

Śaṅkarācārya · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Divergence

Advaita Vedānta

Shankara reads the verse as teaching the strict oneness of the individual self and Brahman. Brahman is not split by any difference of its own qualities, since consciousness itself is without qualities; desire and its kin belong to the field, never to the Self, which is beginningless and free of properties. No fine mark divides one embodied self from another, so Self and Brahman are one and the same, and the seer who rests in that sameness is, by that very identity, as faultless as Brahman is. The Gautama rule about equal and unequal worship is fenced in by its own words, in the matter of worship, and binds only one who still holds a self tied to some quality; it has no purchase on the egoless knower this whole passage, from the renunciation of all mental action onward, actually concerns.

Śaṅkarācārya

Viśiṣṭādvaita

Ramanuja reads sameness as the likeness of all embodied selves rather than an undifferentiated unity. The self-substance, once freed from the fault of contact with matter, is the same in every being, and that very sameness is Brahman; to rest in it is already to stand in Brahman, and that standing is itself the conquest of transmigration, not a promise redeemed later. He calls those who dwell in this sameness, whose whole form has become knowledge, the freed ones themselves, and frames the verse as showing how the discipline of action, rightly practiced, ripens directly into this sight.

Rāmānujācārya

Dvaita

The extant record preserves only a single line from Madhva, that Krishna's words here itself are offering praise. Read alongside the wider tradition he stands in, this caution makes sense: the very next teaching still treats even-sight as a means to a further liberation, and an earlier passage allows even a knower another birth, so a flat claim of literal liberation-in-the-body would sit uneasily beside Madhva's own doctrine of the self's continuing dependence on the Lord. Praise permits an overstatement that a plain doctrinal claim would not.

Madhvācārya

Kashmir Śaiva

No comment on this verse survives from Abhinavagupta; his fragmentary Gitartha-samgraha is simply silent here, and nothing is invented in his name to fill that gap. Offered only as a labeled, conditional extension of his method elsewhere, not as his stated word: a Kashmir Shaiva reading might take samya, the even mind, as the recognition of one's own unbounded, self-luminous awareness, in which the apparent unevenness among beings is seen as varied form taken by a single consciousness that itself carries no stain.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

Sridhara stages the verse as a direct answer to Gautama's objection: the rule against uneven worship binds only one still standing in the worshipper's posture, still weighing who deserves more or less honor. This verse describes one who has already passed, in this very life, into Brahman, whose even vision is simply what remains once the worshipper's ground itself has fallen away. Ritual discrimination and even-sightedness therefore occupy separate domains rather than standing in contradiction.

Śrīdhara Svāmī

Modern

Read for its own precision rather than only its Advaita commitments, Madhusudana's twofold account of corruption, by contact with the foul or by being foul in itself, offers a portable test still usable today: ask whether a thing (or a person, or an institution) is stained by what it touches or corrupt in its own nature, and treat those as two different diagnoses. On his reading, Brahman fails both tests, remaining untouched like the sky even while present in the lowest of beings, which is exactly why the equal-seer's vision is not indiscriminate but clear-sighted.

Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

A Seeker Asks

If I am asked to see everyone as the same, am I being told to ignore real differences in character and conduct, the very indiscriminateness the dharma-texts warn against?

The commentators raise this exact worry and answer it by scope, not by denial. The old rule genuinely binds someone still standing as a worshipper, still weighing whose honor should be greater or less. This verse speaks of one who has already stepped entirely out of that posture; the rule was never written for him, so there is no real clash, only two teachings addressed to two different people.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

Sameness here does not mean blindness to who is learned and who is not, who acts well and who acts badly. It means seeing one faultless reality present beneath all those differences, the way someone who sees only gold still knows a necklace is shaped differently than a coin. You are not asked to deny the shapes; you are pointed toward what all the shapes are made of.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī

And the reason this even-sight does not corrupt the one who holds it is Brahman's own purity, untouched by what it dwells in, the way space holds everything and is soiled by nothing. Resting your mind there, you take on no fault from the real unevenness around you; the record is honestly thin for two of the acaryas here, but where it speaks, it speaks with one voice on this point.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrīdhara Svāmī

Contemplation

Notice where your own mind still keeps score, quietly ranking people by how much honor or attention each one deserves. The verse does not ask you to pretend those differences of conduct and character are not there; it asks whether you can see, underneath the ranking, one and the same faultless awareness looking out through every face you meet, undiminished by what it happens to be looking through. Practice resting your attention there for a few breaths today, on the sameness rather than the score, and notice whether anything in you relaxes.

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