Scriptural context
Verse 18.66 belongs to the closing movement of the Gita
Bhagavad Gita 18.66 occurs near the end of Krishna’s teaching, after a long synthesis of action, knowledge, devotion, renunciation, discernment and the qualities shaping human conduct. The immediate sequence matters. Verse 18.61 speaks of the Lord dwelling in the heart of beings; the verses that follow direct Arjuna toward refuge, reflection and an exercise of discernment. By 18.65, Krishna asks Arjuna to fix his mind on Him, become devoted, worship and bow. Verse 18.66 intensifies that movement through the language of relinquishment and sole refuge.
That position makes it risky to isolate the first phrase, sarvadharmān parityajya, from the rest of the verse. The sentence does not end with relinquishment. It continues toward mām ekaṃ śaraṇaṃ vraja, a direct instruction to take Krishna alone as refuge, and then to an assurance followed by mā śucaḥ, “do not grieve.” Whatever interpretation a tradition gives to “all dharmas,” the verse itself holds relinquishment, refuge, assurance and freedom from grief together.
The next verse, 18.67, begins instructions about to whom this teaching should or should not be communicated. That shift is another clue that 18.66 functions as part of the Gita’s culminating instruction, not as a free-floating inspirational sentence. SlokaSandra therefore records the nearby sequence rather than presenting the verse as a shortcut detached from Chapter 18.
Learn carefully
Break the verse into four sense units
- सर्वधर्मान्परित्यज्यsarvadharmān parityajya
- मामेकं शरणं व्रजmām ekaṃ śaraṇaṃ vraja
- अहं त्वा सर्वपापेभ्यो मोक्षयिष्यामिahaṃ tvā sarvapāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi
- मा शुचःmā śucaḥ
Audio status: awaiting verified recitation.No recitation is published on this page. SlokaSandra does not present generated or unreviewed pronunciation as authoritative. If pronunciation-reviewed audio is added later, the normal experience will remain in-site listening with controls such as play, slow and repeat — not an audio download feature.
Named commentaries do not reduce “relinquish all dharmas” to one universal formula
Ramanuja: the Sanskrit commentary displayed by the IIT Kanpur Gita Supersite explains relinquishment while the practitioner continues Karma, Jñāna and Bhakti disciplines according to qualification. The relinquishment concerns the sense of agency, possessiveness and claim to fruits, while Krishna is understood as agent, object of worship, means and end. This is a Viśiṣṭādvaita reading and should not be relabelled as a neutral dictionary definition of the verse.
Shankaracharya: the Gita Supersite’s Sanskrit Śaṅkara commentary frames the instruction through renunciation of actions and refuge in the Lord understood in an Advaita context. The commentary connects the verse to release from the bondage represented by dharma and adharma and to the recognition of the Self/Lord. That doctrinal framing differs materially from Ramanuja’s account of continuing disciplines with relinquished agency and fruits.
Madhvacharya: the displayed Madhva note is terse but explicit: it identifies the abandonment of dharma here with abandonment of fruits and points back to 18.11, asking how the command to fight would otherwise make sense. SlokaSandra records that as a distinct Dvaita-associated reading rather than using it to erase the differences between Ramanuja and Shankara.
These three readings overlap in their attention to refuge and liberation, but their metaphysical and practical explanations are not interchangeable. A provenance-first reference should make that difference visible. Readers who study within a lineage should consult the full commentary and qualified teachers rather than relying on a short web summary as a substitute.