Sanskrit
यस्य नाहंकृतो भावो बुद्धिर्यस्य न लिप्यते । हत्वाऽपि स इमाँल्लोकान्न हन्ति न निबध्यते ॥ १७ ॥
yasya nāhaṅkṛto bhāvo buddhir yasya na lipyate hatvāpi sa imāḻ lokān na hanti na nibadhyate
Translation
He who is free from the egoistic notion, whose Reason is not affected, though he slay these peoples, he slayeth not, nor is bound.
Annie Besant · The Bhagavad-Gita, translated by Annie Besant (4th ed., 1922) — Wikisource · Public Domain
Explanation
The payoff is the famous line: one free from egoism, whose intellect isn’t stained, does not truly kill or become bound even in killing. This isn’t a license for violence so much as the logical endpoint of verse 16 — if the isolated Self was never the doer to begin with, acting from ego-free intellect can’t implicate that Self in bondage, which is exactly the argument Krishna used to justify Arjuna fighting at all back in chapter 2. The chapter’s sharpest line, and a direct return to BG 2.19–BG 2.21: one whose state is not ego-made (na ahaṅkṛto bhāvaḥ) “slays and is not bound.” The whole battlefield problem, answered by the absence of “I did it”.
Study deeper
Word by word
- yasya nāhaṅkṛto bhāvoयस्य नाहङ्कृतो भावो
- one whose state is free of ego (yasya + na + ahaṅkṛtaḥ + bhāvaḥ)
- buddhir yasya na lipyateबुद्धिः यस्य न लिप्यते
- whose intellect is not tainted (buddhiḥ + yasya + na + lipyate)
- hatvāpi sa imāḻ lokānहत्वापि स इमांल् लोकान्
- even slaying these worlds (hatvā + api + saḥ + imān + lokān)
- na hanti na nibadhyateन हन्ति न निबध्यते
- he does not slay, nor is he bound (na + hanti + na + nibadhyate)
Commentary
Site Commentary
Read on its own, this verse is almost dangerous — “though he slay, he slayeth not” can sound like a license for anyone convinced of their own detachment. But the claim only holds up as the logical conclusion of verse 16’s premise, that the true Self was never actually the doer of anything; strip that premise away and what’s left is a slogan anyone could borrow to excuse harm. The paradox is only safe to state after the argument that earns it.
Original commentary written for this site · © Amit Singh — original commentary
Concepts
Apply this verse
Lessons
Personal
- Be wary of borrowing this verse's conclusion — 'I did it without attachment, so it doesn't count against me' — to excuse hurting someone, unless you've actually done the deeper work of ego-freedom the claim depends on. The slogan is only honest after the substance is real, not before.
Professional
- Watch for 'I was just executing the process, it wasn't personal' being used to excuse a harmful call without the actual detachment or care that would make it true. Citing non-attachment as a defense is only legitimate when the underlying ego-free intent is real, not a shortcut around accountability.
Family & Social
- If you say 'I didn't mean it personally' after a hurtful comment to someone close to you, check whether that's actually true or just a convenient excuse — claiming detachment you didn't really have doesn't undo the effect the words had.
Ask yourself
A few ways to take this verse past reading. Ticks and the note stay in this browser.
Reflect on this verse
Keep exploring
Topics