StudyVedanta
Skip to the verse
V.76.66.8
Read slowly

When you have won yourself, the supreme Self stays steady through every pair of opposites.

The verse does not ask you to stop feeling cold, pain, or insult. It describes a person in whom the body, senses, and mind no longer give the orders, so that what arrives still arrives, but it no longer governs him.

7Chapter 6
The verseSpoken by Krishna
Voices19 commentators · 7 schools · modern voices
The readingAbout 6 minutes, unhurried
जितात्मनः प्रशान्तस्य परमात्मा समाहितः। शीतोष्णसुखदुःखेषु तथा मानापमानयोः
jitātmanaḥ praśhāntasya paramātmā samāhitaḥ śhītoṣhṇa-sukha-duḥkheṣhu tathā mānāpamānayoḥ

For the one who is self-controlled and at peace, the supreme Self stays steady through cold and heat, pleasure and pain, honor and dishonor.

Bhagavad Gita 6.7
—:—— / —:——

Saved for this reading session

Three movements · tap a label to switch

Sanskrit recitation by Swami Brahmānanda

Audio from the Gītā Supersite, IIT Kanpur

Just before this, the self was called either your best friend or your worst enemy depending on whether it has been conquered, and here the verse turns to what the conquered self opens onto: a steady presence of the supreme Self.

Where they agreethe convergence

When the body, senses, and mind are brought under control and the pulls of attachment and aversion settle, the cold and heat, pleasure and pain, honor and dishonor no longer shake you.

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

Notice who the verse is ready for: not someone who has crushed his nature, but one who has brought body, senses, and mind under his own hand, so they no longer drag him about.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, Dvaita, Bhakti, and the modern voicesŚaṅkara · Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana · Rāmānuja · Madhva · Śrīdhara · Viśvanātha · Baladeva · Ramsukhdas
In Śaṅkara, Ānandagiri, and 7 others’ words

The verse names the person who is ready: the one of 'conquered self' (jitatma). Almost every commentator unpacks this the same way. It does not mean someone who has crushed his nature. It means someone who has brought the body, the senses, and the mind under control, so that they no longer drag him about. Shankara reads jitatma as 'one by whom the aggregate of effect and instrument has been conquered,' meaning the body and all the inner and outer instruments. Anandagiri, Madhva, Ramanuja, and the Bhakti commentators echo this: the body-and-mind complex is subdued, the senses are mastered. Ramsukhdas gives the sharpest contemporary gloss: the jitatma is the one who forms no 'I' and 'mine' with the body or any material object, who counts on none of them for help, and who therefore behaves as a friend toward himself rather than an enemy. This claim picks up the immediately preceding verse (6.5 to 6.6), where the self is either one's best friend or worst enemy depending on whether it has been conquered.

Asked in question 1, below
5schools

To that mastery a deeper quiet is added; the inner turbulence settles, the pulls of liking and disliking grow still, and what remains is a serene and unhurried peace.

Across Advaita, Kashmir Śaiva, Bhakti, Dvaita, ViśiṣṭādvaitaŚaṅkara · Madhusūdana · Abhinavagupta · Śrīdhara · Viśvanātha · Baladeva · Jayatīrtha · Rāmānuja · Ānandagiri
In Śaṅkara, Madhusūdana, and 7 others’ words

To this conquered state the verse adds a second condition: 'prashanta,' deeply at peace. The commentators treat this peace as the settling of all inner turbulence. Shankara calls it 'serene inner instrument.' Madhusudana and Sridhara specify that this peace is freedom from attachment (raga) and aversion (dvesha), the two pulls that keep the mind in motion. Abhinavagupta puts it in his own terms: 'wholly at peace' means free of the I-sense, so that the intelligence sees no difference between others and oneself, and feels neither passion nor aversion. Several commentators note that conquering the self and being at peace are closely linked. Jayatirtha even raises the objection that they might be the same thing, and works carefully to show that the peace is the fruit, the settled result, of having conquered the self.

Asked in question 3, below
5schools

For such a person the supreme Self stands gathered and steadily present; when the lower self is subdued and the mind stops running outward, the higher reality is no longer lost again and again to distraction.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, Dvaita, Śuddhādvaita, BhaktiŚaṅkara · Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana · Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati · Rāmānuja · Madhva · Vallabha · Puruṣottama · Śrīdhara · Viśvanātha · Baladeva · Jñāneśvar
In Śaṅkara, Ānandagiri, and 11 others’ words

For such a person, the supreme Self is 'samahita,' fully composed, gathered, established in steady absorption (samadhi). This is the heart of the verse, and the commentators read it as the reward of the inner conquest. When the lower self is subdued and the mind has stopped running outward, the higher reality becomes steadily present and available. Shankara says the supreme Self 'stands present in the very form of the Self in direct realisation.' Madhva says it is 'present near in his heart,' so that the person becomes one of direct knowledge. Anandagiri stresses that this Self is no longer overcome again and again by distraction; it shines continually in the mind. Several note that this is liberation while still alive: Dhanapati calls the person 'liberated while alive' (jivanmukta). The common thread is that the inner victory does not merely calm the mind; it opens steady access to the supreme reality.

6schools

And the outward sign is simple: cold and heat, pleasure and pain, the regard or scorn of others arrive as before, yet they no longer shake him, for this is steadiness within the senses, not the absence of all feeling.

Across Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, Dvaita, Śuddhādvaita, Kashmir Śaiva, Bhakti, and the modern voicesŚaṅkara · Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana · Rāmānuja · Vedānta Deśika · Dhanapati · Madhva · Vallabha · Puruṣottama · Abhinavagupta · Śrīdhara · Viśvanātha · Baladeva · Sivananda · Jñāneśvar
In Śaṅkara, Ānandagiri, and 13 others’ words

The verse then gives the outward, testable marks of this person: he stays equal (sama) amid three pairs of opposites, the dvandvas. These are cold and heat (physical sensation), pleasure and pain (felt experience), and honor and dishonor, which Shankara and Madhusudana expand to 'worship and contempt,' the regard or scorn of other people. The commentators agree these pairs are precisely the things that normally scatter and disturb the mind, and that the mark of the realized yogi is that they no longer shake him. Importantly, the steadiness is not numbness. Vedantadeshika says plainly that 'the equality is not stoic insensitivity, but the steady inward address of the self-vision, which does not consult the pull of the outer pairs.' Dhanapati makes the same point against a misreading: when the senses are awake the contacts of course still occur, so the real condition described is the unshakenness of the inner organ in their presence, not the absence of sensation.

Asked in question 2, 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 the verse says "the supreme Self" (paramatma), does it mean one's own inner Self now realized, a higher indwelling Lord distinct from the seeker, or the purified mind itself settled in absorption?
The traditional commentators
Advaita VedāntaŚaṅkara, Madhusūdana, Tilak
The supreme Self is your own inner Self, now realized directly when the inner battle is won.
Madhusudana adds a reading where the bare, attributeless Self stands collected for the conqueror alone; Tilak refuses to split 'param' from 'atma'.
Advaita Vedānta, in their fuller words

The Advaita reading takes 'paramatma' as the one true Self, identical with the inner Self of the seeker, now realized directly. Shankara reads it as the supreme Self standing 'in the very form of the Self in direct realisation.' Madhusudana offers a notable alternative: the word 'param' (supreme) can be read separately, so that the line means it is for the conqueror of the self, and for him alone, that 'the Self alone, the bare Self, stands collected, and not for another.' On this reading the verse stresses that the bare, attributeless Self becomes the object of absorption only for the one who has won the inner battle. Nilakantha reads the very 'citta,' the mind purified into unchanging modifications, as supremely set in samadhi. Tilak, drawing this school into modern terms, argues the verse identifies paramatma with the atman itself: the atman in the body, ordinarily engrossed in pain and happiness, becomes the 'paramatman' once that turmoil is conquered. He cites Gita 13.22 and 13.31 and a Mahabharata verse to insist the Paramatman is not a substance different from the atman, and he explicitly rejects splitting the word into 'param' plus 'atma' as a doctrinally motivated stretch.

Śaṅkara · Madhusūdana · Tilak · Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati
ViśiṣṭādvaitaRāmānuja, Vedānta Deśika
The supreme Self is genuinely higher than you, the inner ruler, now steadily concentrated in the heart of the one at peace.
Also frames the verse as marking the candidate fit to begin the actual practice of yoga.
Viśiṣṭādvaita, in their fuller words

For this school the 'paramatma' is the supreme Self that is genuinely higher than, and the inner ruler within, the individual self. Ramanuja explains that the inner self, abiding in its own form, is here called 'supreme Self' because it is the topic under discussion and because, relative to each lower state, it is supreme; the supreme Self is well concentrated in the mind of the one at peace. Vedantadeshika carries this forward and offers a devotional option within the reading: the paramatma stands composed in the heart as the self-form, or, for the bhakti-reading, as the supreme Self present as the antaryamin, the indwelling ruler, now in steady availability. This school also frames the verse functionally: it marks the candidate who is fit to begin the actual procedure of yoga.

Rāmānuja · Vedānta Deśika
DvaitaMadhva, Jayatīrtha
The supreme Self stands well set, present near in the heart, and the calmed person becomes one of direct knowledge.
Madhva grounds it in vijnana, the distinct seeing of Vishnu's specific traits; Jayatirtha defends the handed-down text.
Dvaita, in their fuller words

Madhva reads the verse as stating the fruit for the one whose self is conquered, who becomes wholly calmed so that his mind no longer goes out to objects; then the supreme Self stands well set, present near in his heart, and he becomes a man of direct knowledge. Madhva grounds the steadiness in a fuller textual reading: the person's self is 'contented with knowledge (jnana) and discernment (vijnana), his senses conquered,' and he is 'kutastha,' changeless, like a peak that stands fixed. He distinguishes vijnana as the knowledge of particulars, the distinct seeing of Vishnu's specific traits, against general knowledge. Jayatirtha defends this traditional reading at length, including a pointed dispute over the text itself: he charges that another commentator, not finding the grammatical construction, abandoned the handed-down reading 'the Supreme Self is in equipoise' and devised a variant, 'in supreme selves the mind is equal'; Jayatirtha argues this contrivance makes other Gita phrases redundant and so should be rejected.

Madhva · Jayatīrtha
BhedābhedaJayatīrtha
An alternative wording reads the line as 'in supreme selves the mind is equal,' supplying the missing construction.
Attributed to Bhaskara but reaching us only secondhand through Jayatirtha's report and dispute.
Bhedābheda, in their fuller words

The presence of an alternative textual reading attributed to Bhaskara is preserved here only through Jayatirtha's report, since Bhaskara's own text is not supplied for this verse. According to that report, Bhaskara, not seeing how the locative case construes with 'paramatma samahitah,' set aside the traditional reading and proposed instead that the line be construed as 'in supreme selves the mind is equal,' supplying the construction of the locative. This is recorded as a genuine variant reading of the verse, distinct from both the Advaita and the devotional Vedanta constructions, even though it reaches us secondhand.

Jayatīrtha
ŚuddhādvaitaVallabha, Puruṣottama
The supreme Self is the Lord as inner ruler, whose indwelling presence now comes through the self-conquered unbroken.
Purushottama adds union and separation from the beloved Lord to the pairs, the devotee free of pride and of blame.
Śuddhādvaita, in their fuller words

Here 'paramatma' is firmly the Lord as antaryamin, the inner ruler who dwells in every jiva. Vallabha explains that the Lord, the inner regulator of every individual self, is for the self-conquered no longer occluded by the dvandvas of body and circumstance; the 'cit'-portion in the person has been steadied enough that the Lord's indwelling presence comes through unbroken, standing as if in samadhi within him. Purushottama deepens the devotional coloring: he reads the pairs as including 'union and separation' from the beloved Lord, with the devotee free in union from pride in his own good fortune and free in separation from blaming the beloved, and honor and dishonor 'received from Bhagavan' alike to him. For such a one the Purushottama stands collected and ready, 'alert in the granting of service'; the Lord's bestowing presence answers to the equanimity in the devotee's own breast.

Vallabha · Puruṣottama
Kashmir ŚaivaAbhinavagupta
Being wholly at peace is freedom from the I-sense, so the intelligence sees no difference between self and others.
The equality amid the pairs is rooted in a non-dual seeing where the self-other distinction has fallen away.
Kashmir Śaiva, in their fuller words

Abhinavagupta reads the verse very tersely and turns it inward to the dissolution of difference. 'Wholly at peace' is glossed as freedom from the I-sense. The mark of such a person is that 'toward others and toward oneself, and toward cold, heat and the rest, his intelligence sees no difference; there is no passion or aversion.' The equality amid the pairs is thus rooted in a non-dual seeing in which the self-other distinction itself has fallen away.

Abhinavagupta
BhaktiŚrīdhara, Viśvanātha, Baladeva
The two readings come down to the same thing: where the lower self is subdued, the higher Self is at home.
Jnaneshwari likens it to gold purified by burning off the alloy, the soul already one with the Supreme.
Bhakti, in their fuller words

The Bhakti commentators largely hold the two readings together rather than forcing a choice. Sridhara explicitly lets both stand: the supreme Self 'alone' stands composed, fixed in the person's own self (the self-standing reading), or, taken otherwise, the Paramatman stands established in his heart (the indwelling reading); he says the two come down to the same thing, since where the lower self is subdued the higher Self is at home. Vishvanatha leans toward reading 'the self, that is the mind' as supremely composed in samadhi, framing the verse as the signs of one who has ascended to yoga. Jnaneshwari gives the most vivid devotional-nondual picture: as gold becomes pure when the alloy is burned away, the finite soul becomes the Supreme Soul once the mind drops its fanciful notions of worldly being; like the space inside a shattered pitcher merging with infinite space, the soul is already one with the Supreme. Such a one feels no cold or heat, no pleasure or pain, no honor or dishonor; whatever he meets becomes absorbed into him, as a place is flooded with light wherever the sun goes, and good and evil no more touch him than rain pierces the sea.

Śrīdhara · Viśvanātha · Baladeva · Jñāneśvar
Modern voices teachers of the last two centuries, read together; they stand apart from the classical schools
A modern readingSivananda, Tilak, Ramsukhdas
It describes a stable, achievable poise: rooted in the Self, you stay adamant amid Nature's changing conditions.
Ramsukhdas reframes it around the friend-or-enemy contrast: take no own-ness with body or things.
A modern reading, in their fuller words

The modern commentators emphasize the practical and psychological meaning. Sivananda reads the verse as describing a stable, achievable state: the self-controlled yogi, rooted in the Self, keeps poise amid the dvandvas; when the senses are subdued, the mind balanced under all conditions, and all actions renounced, 'the Highest Self really becomes his own Self,' and he stands 'as adamant in the face of the changing conditions of Nature.' Tilak (within his Advaita commitment) reads the verse as the inner sense conquered and the atman acquiring the form of paramatman. Ramsukhdas, a non-sectarian devotional Vedantin, reframes the whole verse around the friend-or-enemy contrast: the jitatma takes no relation of own-ness with body, senses, mind, intellect, or any material object, and so 'does his own hita' (welfare) and through him a great good of the world is also done.

Sivananda · Tilak · Ramsukhdas
Sit with these

A few questions to carry

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

1
The verse opens by naming the jitatma, the one of conquered self. What does that conquest mean here?
2
What outward sign does the verse give for this person, the mark anyone could observe?
3
Besides conquering the self, the verse calls this person prashanta, deeply at peace. What do the commentators take that peace to be?
4
Ramsukhdas points to one doable shift that loosens the grip of the pairs. What is it?
For a second sitting7 more questions
5
Does the steadiness amid the pairs mean the realized person stops feeling cold, pain, and insult altogether?
6
How does the Advaita reading take the word paramatma, the supreme Self, in this verse?
7
Faced with the choice between the inner-Self reading and the indwelling-Lord reading, what do the Bhakti commentators do?
8
When this verse is lived, how do cold, pain, praise, and blame come to be met?
9
How does Abhinavagupta root the equality amid the pairs in his Kashmir Shaiva reading?
10
Several commentators say this steady state is not merely a future hope. What do they call the person living it?
11
This verse follows directly on 6.5 to 6.6. What contrast from those verses does Ramsukhdas say it picks up?

Carry this with youwhat stays

Ramsukhdas offers a way to live this verse that does not require you to suppress anything. Start where he starts: with the difference between treating yourself as an enemy and as a friend. The 'enemy' move is to keep saying 'I' and 'mine' about the body, the senses, the mind, the intellect, and the things they crave. Every time you stake your identity and your help on a passing object, you hand it the power to disturb you, and that is how a person brings about his own downfall. The 'friend' move is the opposite: to quietly stop counting on these material things as your own, to form not even the slightest relation of own-ness with them. You do not have to fight the body or numb the senses. You only have to loosen the false claim that they are you. As that claim relaxes, cold and heat, pleasure and pain, praise and blame still arrive, but they arrive as weather, not as wounds, because they are happening to what you no longer mistake for yourself. Ramsukhdas adds a quiet encouragement: the one who lives this way does his own true welfare, and through such a person a very great good of the world is also done.

Today, loosen the quiet claim that the body and its cravings are you; then cold and heat, praise and blame still come, but they come as weather, not as wounds.

जितात्मनः प्रशान्तस्य परमात्मा समाहितः।jitātmanaḥ praśhāntasya paramātmā samāhitaḥ

Read deeper

Everything a full study holds, folded below.

Word by word11 terms
jita-ātmanaḥone who has conquered one’s mindpraśhāntasyaof the peacefulparama-ātmāGodsamāhitaḥsteadfastśhītain colduṣhṇaheatsukhahappinessduḥkheṣhuand distresstathāalsomānain honorapamānayoḥand dishonor
All the commentary, woven togetherevery voice, in one place

The commentary, woven together

machine-assisted draft, pending review

Convergence

he verse names the person who is ready: the one of 'conquered self' (jitatma). Almost every commentator unpacks this the same way. It does not mean someone who has crushed his nature. It means someone who has brought the body, the senses, and the mind under control, so that they no longer drag him about. Shankara reads jitatma as 'one by whom the aggregate of effect and instrument has been conquered,' meaning the body and all the inner and outer instruments. Anandagiri, Madhva, Ramanuja, and the Bhakti commentators echo this: the body-and-mind complex is subdued, the senses are mastered. Ramsukhdas gives the sharpest contemporary gloss: the jitatma is the one who forms no 'I' and 'mine' with the body or any material object, who counts on none of them for help, and who therefore behaves as a friend toward himself rather than an enemy. This claim picks up the immediately preceding verse (6.5 to 6.6), where the self is either one's best friend or worst enemy depending on whether it has been conquered.

Braided from 9 commentators

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Swami Ramsukhdas

To this conquered state the verse adds a second condition: 'prashanta,' deeply at peace. The commentators treat this peace as the settling of all inner turbulence. Shankara calls it 'serene inner instrument.' Madhusudana and Sridhara specify that this peace is freedom from attachment (raga) and aversion (dvesha), the two pulls that keep the mind in motion. Abhinavagupta puts it in his own terms: 'wholly at peace' means free of the I-sense, so that the intelligence sees no difference between others and oneself, and feels neither passion nor aversion. Several commentators note that conquering the self and being at peace are closely linked. Jayatirtha even raises the objection that they might be the same thing, and works carefully to show that the peace is the fruit, the settled result, of having conquered the self.

Braided from 9 commentators

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Ācārya Abhinavagupta · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Śrī Jayatīrtha · Rāmānujācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri

For such a person, the supreme Self is 'samahita,' fully composed, gathered, established in steady absorption (samadhi). This is the heart of the verse, and the commentators read it as the reward of the inner conquest. When the lower self is subdued and the mind has stopped running outward, the higher reality becomes steadily present and available. Shankara says the supreme Self 'stands present in the very form of the Self in direct realisation.' Madhva says it is 'present near in his heart,' so that the person becomes one of direct knowledge. Anandagiri stresses that this Self is no longer overcome again and again by distraction; it shines continually in the mind. Several note that this is liberation while still alive: Dhanapati calls the person 'liberated while alive' (jivanmukta). The common thread is that the inner victory does not merely calm the mind; it opens steady access to the supreme reality.

Braided from 13 commentators

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri · Rāmānujācārya · Madhvācārya · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Sant Jñāneśvar

The verse then gives the outward, testable marks of this person: he stays equal (sama) amid three pairs of opposites, the dvandvas. These are cold and heat (physical sensation), pleasure and pain (felt experience), and honor and dishonor, which Shankara and Madhusudana expand to 'worship and contempt,' the regard or scorn of other people. The commentators agree these pairs are precisely the things that normally scatter and disturb the mind, and that the mark of the realized yogi is that they no longer shake him. Importantly, the steadiness is not numbness. Vedantadeshika says plainly that 'the equality is not stoic insensitivity, but the steady inward address of the self-vision, which does not consult the pull of the outer pairs.' Dhanapati makes the same point against a misreading: when the senses are awake the contacts of course still occur, so the real condition described is the unshakenness of the inner organ in their presence, not the absence of sensation.

Braided from 15 commentators

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika · Dhanapati Sūri · Madhvācārya · Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama · Ācārya Abhinavagupta · Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Swami Sivananda · Sant Jñāneśvar

Divergence

Advaita Vedānta

The Advaita reading takes 'paramatma' as the one true Self, identical with the inner Self of the seeker, now realized directly. Shankara reads it as the supreme Self standing 'in the very form of the Self in direct realisation.' Madhusudana offers a notable alternative: the word 'param' (supreme) can be read separately, so that the line means it is for the conqueror of the self, and for him alone, that 'the Self alone, the bare Self, stands collected, and not for another.' On this reading the verse stresses that the bare, attributeless Self becomes the object of absorption only for the one who has won the inner battle. Nilakantha reads the very 'citta,' the mind purified into unchanging modifications, as supremely set in samadhi. Tilak, drawing this school into modern terms, argues the verse identifies paramatma with the atman itself: the atman in the body, ordinarily engrossed in pain and happiness, becomes the 'paramatman' once that turmoil is conquered. He cites Gita 13.22 and 13.31 and a Mahabharata verse to insist the Paramatman is not a substance different from the atman, and he explicitly rejects splitting the word into 'param' plus 'atma' as a doctrinally motivated stretch.

Śaṅkarācārya · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Lokmanya Tilak · Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha · Dhanapati Sūri

Viśiṣṭādvaita

For this school the 'paramatma' is the supreme Self that is genuinely higher than, and the inner ruler within, the individual self. Ramanuja explains that the inner self, abiding in its own form, is here called 'supreme Self' because it is the topic under discussion and because, relative to each lower state, it is supreme; the supreme Self is well concentrated in the mind of the one at peace. Vedantadeshika carries this forward and offers a devotional option within the reading: the paramatma stands composed in the heart as the self-form, or, for the bhakti-reading, as the supreme Self present as the antaryamin, the indwelling ruler, now in steady availability. This school also frames the verse functionally: it marks the candidate who is fit to begin the actual procedure of yoga.

Rāmānujācārya · Vedānta Deśika

Dvaita

Madhva reads the verse as stating the fruit for the one whose self is conquered, who becomes wholly calmed so that his mind no longer goes out to objects; then the supreme Self stands well set, present near in his heart, and he becomes a man of direct knowledge. Madhva grounds the steadiness in a fuller textual reading: the person's self is 'contented with knowledge (jnana) and discernment (vijnana), his senses conquered,' and he is 'kutastha,' changeless, like a peak that stands fixed. He distinguishes vijnana as the knowledge of particulars, the distinct seeing of Vishnu's specific traits, against general knowledge. Jayatirtha defends this traditional reading at length, including a pointed dispute over the text itself: he charges that another commentator, not finding the grammatical construction, abandoned the handed-down reading 'the Supreme Self is in equipoise' and devised a variant, 'in supreme selves the mind is equal'; Jayatirtha argues this contrivance makes other Gita phrases redundant and so should be rejected.

Madhvācārya · Śrī Jayatīrtha

Bhedabheda

The presence of an alternative textual reading attributed to Bhaskara is preserved here only through Jayatirtha's report, since Bhaskara's own text is not supplied for this verse. According to that report, Bhaskara, not seeing how the locative case construes with 'paramatma samahitah,' set aside the traditional reading and proposed instead that the line be construed as 'in supreme selves the mind is equal,' supplying the construction of the locative. This is recorded as a genuine variant reading of the verse, distinct from both the Advaita and the devotional Vedanta constructions, even though it reaches us secondhand.

Śrī Jayatīrtha

Śuddhādvaita

Here 'paramatma' is firmly the Lord as antaryamin, the inner ruler who dwells in every jiva. Vallabha explains that the Lord, the inner regulator of every individual self, is for the self-conquered no longer occluded by the dvandvas of body and circumstance; the 'cit'-portion in the person has been steadied enough that the Lord's indwelling presence comes through unbroken, standing as if in samadhi within him. Purushottama deepens the devotional coloring: he reads the pairs as including 'union and separation' from the beloved Lord, with the devotee free in union from pride in his own good fortune and free in separation from blaming the beloved, and honor and dishonor 'received from Bhagavan' alike to him. For such a one the Purushottama stands collected and ready, 'alert in the granting of service'; the Lord's bestowing presence answers to the equanimity in the devotee's own breast.

Vallabhācārya · Śrī Puruṣottama

Kashmir Shaivism

Abhinavagupta reads the verse very tersely and turns it inward to the dissolution of difference. 'Wholly at peace' is glossed as freedom from the I-sense. The mark of such a person is that 'toward others and toward oneself, and toward cold, heat and the rest, his intelligence sees no difference; there is no passion or aversion.' The equality amid the pairs is thus rooted in a non-dual seeing in which the self-other distinction itself has fallen away.

Ācārya Abhinavagupta

Bhakti

The Bhakti commentators largely hold the two readings together rather than forcing a choice. Sridhara explicitly lets both stand: the supreme Self 'alone' stands composed, fixed in the person's own self (the self-standing reading), or, taken otherwise, the Paramatman stands established in his heart (the indwelling reading); he says the two come down to the same thing, since where the lower self is subdued the higher Self is at home. Vishvanatha leans toward reading 'the self, that is the mind' as supremely composed in samadhi, framing the verse as the signs of one who has ascended to yoga. Jnaneshwari gives the most vivid devotional-nondual picture: as gold becomes pure when the alloy is burned away, the finite soul becomes the Supreme Soul once the mind drops its fanciful notions of worldly being; like the space inside a shattered pitcher merging with infinite space, the soul is already one with the Supreme. Such a one feels no cold or heat, no pleasure or pain, no honor or dishonor; whatever he meets becomes absorbed into him, as a place is flooded with light wherever the sun goes, and good and evil no more touch him than rain pierces the sea.

Śrīdhara Svāmī · Śrīla Viśvanātha · Śrīla Baladeva · Sant Jñāneśvar

Modern

The modern commentators emphasize the practical and psychological meaning. Sivananda reads the verse as describing a stable, achievable state: the self-controlled yogi, rooted in the Self, keeps poise amid the dvandvas; when the senses are subdued, the mind balanced under all conditions, and all actions renounced, 'the Highest Self really becomes his own Self,' and he stands 'as adamant in the face of the changing conditions of Nature.' Tilak (within his Advaita commitment) reads the verse as the inner sense conquered and the atman acquiring the form of paramatman. Ramsukhdas, a non-sectarian devotional Vedantin, reframes the whole verse around the friend-or-enemy contrast: the jitatma takes no relation of own-ness with body, senses, mind, intellect, or any material object, and so 'does his own hita' (welfare) and through him a great good of the world is also done.

Swami Sivananda · Lokmanya Tilak · Swami Ramsukhdas

A Seeker Asks

Does this verse promise the impossible, that I should stop feeling cold, pain, or insult, or is it describing something I can actually live, where the feeling comes but no longer governs me?

It is describing something you can live, not a demand to stop feeling. Two commentators say this almost directly. Vedantadeshika insists the equality 'is not stoic insensitivity, but the steady inward address of the self-vision, which does not consult the pull of the outer pairs.' In other words, the senses still register cold and heat; what changes is that the inner attention no longer takes its orders from them.

Vedānta Deśika

Dhanapati makes the same point as a correction of a misreading. He rejects the interpretation that the verse means 'though heat and cold are present, he is equal' as if equality were something added on top of feeling. His reason is plain: as long as the senses are awake, the contacts of course occur; the real condition the verse describes is 'the unshakenness of the inner organ in their presence.' So the sensation is expected; the steadiness is in the mind that meets it.

Dhanapati Sūri

What makes that steadiness possible is the inner conquest the verse names first. When the body, senses, and mind are brought under control and the pulls of attachment and aversion settle, the supreme Self stands composed and steadily present, no longer overcome again and again by distraction. The dualities lose their grip not because they vanish but because something steadier has become the center of gravity within you.

Śaṅkarācārya · Śrī Ānandagiri · Madhusūdana Sarasvatī · Ācārya Abhinavagupta

And the change is gradual and real, not a sudden superhuman feat. Ramsukhdas locates it in a single, doable shift: stop forming 'I' and 'mine' with the body and material things, stop counting on them for your help. As that false ownership relaxes, the pairs of opposites land on what you no longer mistake for yourself, and so they stop governing you.

Swami Ramsukhdas

Contemplation

Ramsukhdas offers a way to live this verse that does not require you to suppress anything. Start where he starts: with the difference between treating yourself as an enemy and as a friend. The 'enemy' move is to keep saying 'I' and 'mine' about the body, the senses, the mind, the intellect, and the things they crave. Every time you stake your identity and your help on a passing object, you hand it the power to disturb you, and that is how a person brings about his own downfall. The 'friend' move is the opposite: to quietly stop counting on these material things as your own, to form not even the slightest relation of own-ness with them. You do not have to fight the body or numb the senses. You only have to loosen the false claim that they are you. As that claim relaxes, cold and heat, pleasure and pain, praise and blame still arrive, but they arrive as weather, not as wounds, because they are happening to what you no longer mistake for yourself. Ramsukhdas adds a quiet encouragement: the one who lives this way does his own true welfare, and through such a person a very great good of the world is also done.

Sit with this · Swami Ramsukhdas

All the translations and commentary7 translations

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.

Where this teaching echoesin the Haripath