Sanskrit
ऋषिभिर्बहुधा गीतं छन्दोभिर्विविधैः पृथक् । ब्रह्मसूत्रपदैश्चैव हेतुमद्भिर्विनिश्चितैः ॥
ṛṣibhir bahudhā gītaṃ chandobhir vividhaiḥ pṛthak brahmasūtrapadaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥ
Translation
Rishis have sung in manifold ways, in many various chants, and in decisive Brahma-sûtra verses full of reasonings.
Annie Besant · The Bhagavad-Gita, translated by Annie Besant (4th ed., 1922) — Wikisource · Public Domain
Explanation
Krishna grounds what follows in prior authority — rishis (seers), Vedic chants, and the terse aphoristic “Brahma-sutra” verses — before he’s said a word of the actual content. It’s a rhetorical move he uses elsewhere too, invoking prior sages rather than claiming pure originality, and it signals that the kshetra/kshetrajna framework about to be laid out is being presented as received wisdom, consistent with the Samkhya-style enumeration that follows in verses 6-7.
Study deeper
Word by word
- ṛṣibhir bahudhā gītaṃऋषिभिः बहुधा गीतं
- sung by the sages in many ways (ṛṣibhiḥ + bahudhā + gītam)
- chandobhir vividhaiḥ pṛthakछन्दोभिः विविधैः पृथक्
- in the various Vedic chants, separately (chandobhiḥ + vividhaiḥ + pṛthak)
- brahmasūtrapadaiś caivaब्रह्मसूत्रपदैश् चैव
- and in the aphoristic verses on Brahman (brahma-sūtra-padaiḥ + ca + eva)
- hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥहेतुमद्भिः विनिश्चितैः
- well-reasoned and conclusive (hetu-madbhiḥ + viniścitaiḥ)
Commentary
Site Commentary
Elsewhere the Gita’s authority is largely self-referential — Krishna states a thing and his own claimed divinity is the proof. Verse 5 breaks that pattern: before laying out the field/knower framework, he cites rishis, chants, and Brahma-sutra aphorisms as if the content needs corroboration a divine declaration alone wouldn’t supply. The one place he reaches outside himself for authority is exactly the place about to get the most systematically analytical content yet.
Original commentary written for this site · © Amit Singh — original commentary
Concepts
Apply this verse
Lessons
Personal
- When you're about to lay out something systematic and analytical rather than a conviction you hold personally, it's fine to lean on existing sources and established thinking rather than presenting it as pure personal insight — citing your basis strengthens a rigorous claim, it doesn't weaken it.
Professional
- When proposing something highly structured — a new label schema, a reference architecture — ground it explicitly in established prior art and existing standards before adding your own synthesis; borrowed authority for the systematic part of the argument is a strength, not an admission your own judgment isn't enough.
Family & Social
- When advising family on something that calls for systematic analysis rather than gut feeling — a health decision, a financial plan — cite the outside expertise you're drawing on rather than presenting it as pure personal certainty; naming your sources makes the advice easier to trust.
Ask yourself
A few ways to take this verse past reading. Ticks and the note stay in this browser.