Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 13, Verse 12: Krishna to Arjuna — Kṣetra-Kṣetrajña-Vibhāga-Yoga

Bhāṣyakāra purports

• Śaṅkaraadvaita

  I shall declare what is to be known, knowing which one attains immortality: it is beginningless, the supreme Brahman, and it is called neither sat (being) nor asat (non-being). Some split the words as 'anādi mat-param', 'having Me, the power named Vāsudeva, as supreme', but showing Brahman as possessing a special power contradicts the very negation of all attributes that follows, so 'anādimat' stands, its suffix merely filling the metre. Brahman is not denoted by 'is' or 'is not' because words signify through genus, action, quality or relation, and Brahman, being without genus, attributeless, actionless, one and the very Self, is reached by none of these, as 'neti neti' and 'whence words turn back' teach.

  divergence: Śaṅkara rejects the 'mat-param' parse as a reading that would give Brahman a śakti, and argues from the theory of word-meaning (jāti, kriyā, guṇa, sambandha) that Brahman is beyond both affirmation and negation.

• Rāmānujaviśiṣṭādvaita

  What is to be known and attained by the means beginning with amānitva is the nature of the pratyag-ātman, knowing which one attains the self as immortal, free of birth, old age and death; it is beginningless and has no end, and it is 'mat-param' - having Me as its supreme, since the self is of one essence as the Lord's body and śeṣa (subservient). It is called Brahman because of its bṛhattva (greatness), being in itself unlimited by the body, its bodily limitation being due to karma. It is called neither sat nor asat because, free of the two states of effect and cause, the pure self is not denoted by words that apply to its karma-bound conditions as named god-forms or as subtle undifferentiated cause.

  divergence: Rāmānuja's decisive divergence: the 'jñeya' here is the individual self (pratyag-ātman), not the supreme Brahman; he splits 'anādi mat-param' and reads 'brahma' as the jīva by its greatness, and 'neither sat nor asat' as transcending karma-made effect/cause states - directly contrary to Śaṅkara.

• Madhvadvaita

  'Supreme Brahman' answers what was promised as 'who He is' in 13.4, and the rest answers 'what His power is'. 'Anādimat' means devoid of a body that has a beginning - otherwise the text would have said only 'anādi'.

  divergence: Madhva reads the verse as fulfilling the 13.4 promise, and gives 'matup' real meaning - 'without a beginning-having body' - whereas Śaṅkara treats it as metrical filler; Brahman here is Hari with a non-originated form, not attributeless.

• Vallabhaśuddhādvaita

  He describes the nature of the knowable in six verses by its own qualities: the knowable is what the wise attain through scripture, and its fruit is immortality. He points to it by name and form: the beginningless supreme Brahman taught by all Vedānta - or, 'that from which I am higher', the Akṣara. And it is the abode of contradictory properties, both being and non-being, for, as the Bhāgavata says, there is no contradiction in the Lord whose qualities are countless.

  divergence: Vallabha reverses Śaṅkara: 'na sat na asat' signals not attributelessness but that Brahman is the viruddha-dharmāśraya (seat of contradictory attributes), holding both sat and asat; he also allows a reading where Kṛṣṇa is higher than this Akṣara.

• Śrīdharabhakti

  What is to be known through these means I shall declare, and to win the hearer's regard He shows its fruit: knowing it, one attains mokṣa. It is beginningless, supreme, Brahman - the 'mat' being Vedic usage - or, read as two words, 'anādi' and 'mat-param', Brahman is the supreme attributeless form of Me, Viṣṇu. It is called neither sat nor asat, for the object of affirmative means is called sat and of negation asat, but this differs from both, not being an object.

  divergence: Śrīdhara accepts both parses, and on the second makes Brahman the nirviśeṣa form of Viṣṇu - an attributeless Brahman that is still 'Mine', bridging Śaṅkara's negation and a devotional referent.

• Madhusūdanaadvaita-bhakti

  I shall clearly declare what the seeker of liberation must know, knowing which one is freed from saṃsāra: the beginningless supreme Brahman, unlimited in every way; some read 'mat-param', meaning the attributeless form beyond Me as saguṇa Brahman, but 'having Me, Vāsudeva, as supreme power' is a mis-explanation, since power cannot be predicated of the attributeless. It is neither sat, the substrate of being, nor asat, the substrate of non-being, being self-luminous consciousness, and since words function only through genus, action, quality or relation - and śruti negates each in turn: 'one without a second', 'attributeless, actionless', 'unattached', 'neti neti' - it is not denoted by any word in its primary sense - so 'I shall declare' must be taken as indicated by lakṣaṇā (secondary signification), as explained at 'one sees it as a wonder'.

  divergence: Madhusūdana accepts 'mat-param' only as 'beyond Me as saguṇa Brahman', calls the śakti reading an apavyākhyāna, extends Śaṅkara's four-fold word theory to cover proper names and space, and resolves 'I shall declare' through lakṣaṇā.