back to questions
Bhagavad-Gītā with Śaṅkara's bhāṣya · 2.5
gurūn ahatvā hi mahānubhāvāñ śreyo bhoktuṃ bhaikṣyam apīha loke | hatvārtha-kāmāṃs tu gurūn ihaiva bhuñjīya bhogān rudhira-pradigdhān
Translation. For, without killing the venerable teachers (gurus)—men of great dignity—
it is better even to eat mendicant fare (bhaikṣya) here in this world;
but, having killed the wealth-desiring teachers,
I would enjoy, right here, pleasures smeared with blood.
Grammar check: 18 words pass / 0 flagged / 1 beyond the checkerPāṇini-verified
Every word's claimed grammar is re-derived with vidyut-prakriya, software implementing Pāṇini's rules. Flags are shown, never hidden; some are the text taking epic or Vedic liberties the classical rules do not generate.
Word by word
| surface | lemma | grammar |
|---|
| gurūn | guru | pass |
| ahatvā | han | unsupported |
| hi | hi | pass |
| mahānubhāvān | mahānubhāva | pass |
| śreyaḥ | śreyas | pass |
| bhoktum | bhuj | pass |
| bhaikṣyam | bhaikṣya | pass |
| api | api | pass |
| iha | iha | pass |
| loke | loka | pass |
| hatvā | han | pass |
| artha-kāmān | artha-kāma | pass |
| tu | tu | pass |
| gurūn | guru | pass |
| iha | iha | pass |
| eva | eva | pass |
| bhuñjīya | bhuj | pass |
| bhogān | bhoga | pass |
| rudhira-pradigdhān | rudhira-pradigdha | pass |
How the commentary settled it
Where the verse alone is ambiguous, the reading follows Śaṅkara's commentary; the deciding lines are quoted below each decision.
Read ahatvā as one negative absolutive, not as an independent particle a followed by an inflected noun hatvā.
→ The privative construction a-hatvā, “without killing,” is required by Sanskrit morphology and by its object gurūn.
Analyze mahānubhāva as a bahuvrīhi characterizing the gurus.
→ Bahuvrīhi: mahān anubhāvo yeṣām. Mahat supplies “great” [MW s.v. mahat, 794,2], while anubhāva can mean “dignity, authority, consequence” [MW s.v. anubhāva, 36,3]. The accusative plural compound agrees with gurūn.
Take śreyaḥ as a neuter nominative predicate and bhoktum as an infinitive governing bhaikṣyam.
→ The construction means “to eat mendicant fare is better.” This matches the comparative sense “preferable, better” of śreyas [MW s.v. śreyas, 1102,2]. Bhaikṣyam is accusative as the object of the infinitive; api most naturally marks that fare as an extreme concession, “even mendicant fare.”
Construe iha loke as one locative expression and eva as strengthening the second iha.
→ The first phrase is “here in this world,” a sense explicitly available for iha [MW s.v. iha, 169,3]. In ihaiva, adjacency and vowel sandhi favor eva strengthening iha, hence “right here” or “here and now” [MW s.v. eva, 232,2].
Take artha-kāma as an adjectival bahuvrīhi agreeing with gurūn.
→ The bahuvrīhi gives the syntactically coherent phrase artha-kāmān gurūn, “teachers desirous of wealth.” Wealth and desires cannot coherently be the objects of “having killed.” Artha can denote advantage or material interest [MW s.v. artha, 90,3], and kāma denotes desire or an object of desire [MW s.v. kāma, 271,3].
Analyze bhuñjīya as first-person singular kartari optative rather than an indicative or future form.
→ Its VidhiLiṅ morphology gives the hypothetical consequence “I would enjoy,” with bhogān as its direct object.
Analyze rudhira-pradigdha as an instrumental tatpuruṣa qualifying bhogān.
→ The relation is rudhireṇa pradigdhāḥ: the substance used in the smearing is expressed instrumentally. The verbal member derives from pra-√dih, “to smear over, besmear” [MW s.v. pradih, 680,1].
Preserve the discourse contrast marked by hi and tu.
→ Hi introduces the rationale, “for,” consistent with its explanatory use [MW s.v. hi, 1297,3]; tu contrasts the bloodstained consequence with the preferable life on alms, hence “but.”
Render substantival guru as “venerable teacher (guru)” rather than merely “heavy” or “great.”
→ The masculine accusative plural denotes persons who stand in an authoritative instructional relation; “venerable teachers (gurus)” preserves both the contextual sense and the Sanskrit term.