HomeBhagavad GitaCh. 1Shloka 33

Shloka 33

Arjuna Vishada YogaThe Yoga of Arjuna's Despondency

Bhagavad Gita 33 illustration

येषामर्थे काङ्क्षितं नो राज्यं भोगा: सुखानि च | त इमेऽवस्थिता युद्धे प्राणांस्त्यक्त्वा धनानि च ॥ १.३३ ॥

yeṣām arthe kāṅkṣitaṃ no rājyaṃ bhogāḥ sukhāni ca | ta ime'vasthitā yuddhe prāṇāṃs tyaktvā dhanāni ca || 1.33 ||

—those for whose sake we desired kingdom, enjoyments, and pleasures, those very persons stand here in battle, having renounced life and wealth.

…they for whose sake we desired kingdom, enjoyments and pleasures—those very persons stand here in the conflict, having set aside life and wealth.

…those for whose sake sovereignty, enjoyments, and pleasures were desired by us—those people are stationed here in battle, relinquishing life and possessions.

Tyaktvā (“having relinquished”) can be read as ‘risking’ or ‘renouncing’ life and wealth. The emphasis is on the tragic irony: the intended beneficiaries are themselves participants.

येषाम्of whom / for whom (those whose)
येषाम्:
Rootयद्
अर्थेfor the sake (in the matter)
अर्थे:
Adhikarana
Rootअर्थ
काङ्क्षितम्desired / longed for
काङ्क्षितम्:
Rootकाङ्क्ष्
नःour
नः:
Rootअस्मद्
राज्यम्kingdom
राज्यम्:
Karma
Rootराज्य
भोगाःenjoyments
भोगाः:
Karma
Rootभोग
सुखानिpleasures / happinesses
सुखानि:
Karma
Rootसुख
and
:
Root
तेthey
ते:
Karta
Rootतद्
इमेthese
इमे:
Karta
Rootइदम्
अवस्थिताःstanding / stationed
अवस्थिताः:
Rootअव√स्था
युद्धेin battle
युद्धे:
Adhikarana
Rootयुद्ध
प्राणान्lives / vital breaths
प्राणान्:
Karma
Rootप्राण
त्यक्त्वाhaving abandoned / sacrificing
त्यक्त्वा:
Root√त्यज्
धनानिwealth / possessions
धनानि:
Karma
Rootधन
and
:
Root
Arjuna
Attachment (rāga)Compassion (dayā)Tragic conflict of duties
Irony of goalsFamily and social obligationCrisis of purpose

FAQs

Arjuna recognizes a contradiction between motive and outcome: striving for communal benefit becomes incoherent when the community itself is divided and endangered, producing paralysis.

The verse sets up the later teaching that action cannot be justified solely by desired outcomes; it must align with dharma and a clearer understanding of self and duty.

It completes the thought begun in 1.32: the very elders and relatives for whom prosperity was desired are present in the opposing ranks.

It cautions against pursuing goals ‘for others’ without their consent or against their welfare, and highlights the need for ethical means, not only intended ends.