In plain words
Shining through the functions of all the senses yet itself free of all senses; unattached yet sustaining all; beyond the guṇas yet the experiencer of the guṇas.
Word for word
Shining through the functions of all the organs, devoid of all the organs; unattached, and yet supporting all; free of the guṇas, and the experiencer of the guṇas.
सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जितम्असक्तं सर्वभृच्चैव निर्गुणं गुणभोक्तृ च
Other commentaries
The commentators
▸Bhagavadgītābhāṣyam
उपाधिभूतपाणिपादादीन्द्रियाध्यारोपणात् ज्ञेयस्य तद्वत्ताशङ्का मा भूत् इत्येवमर्थः श्लोकारम्भः —
सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वाणि च तानि इन्द्रियाणि श्रोत्रादीनि बुद्धीन्द्रियकर्मेन्द्रियाख्यानि, अन्तःकरणे च बुद्धिमनसी, ज्ञेयोपाधित्वस्य तुल्यत्वात् , सर्वेन्द्रियग्रहणेन गृह्यन्ते । अपि च, अन्तःकरणोपाधिद्वारेणैव श्रोत्रादीनामपि उपाधित्वम् इत्यतः अन्तःकरणबहिष्करणोपाधिभूतैः सर्वेन्द्रियगुणैः अध्यवसायसङ्कल्पश्रवणवचनादिभिः अवभासते इति सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वेन्द्रियव्यापारैः व्यापृतमिव तत् ज्ञेयम् इत्यर्थः ; ‘ध्यायतीव लेलायतीव’(बृ. उ. ४ । ३ । ७) इति श्रुतेः । कस्मात् पुनः कारणात् न व्यापृतमेवेति गृह्यते इत्यतः आह — सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जितम् , सर्वकरणरहितमित्यर्थः । अतः न करणव्यापारैः व्यापृतं तत् ज्ञेयम् । यस्तु अयं मन्त्रः — ‘अपाणिपादो जवनो ग्रहीता पश्यत्यचक्षुः स शृणोत्यकर्णः’(श्वे. उ. ३ । १९) इत्यादिः, स सर्वेन्द्रियोपाधिगुणानुगुण्यभजनशक्तिमत् तत् ज्ञेयम् इत्येवं प्रदर्शनार्थः, न तु साक्षादेव जवनादिक्रियावत्त्वप्रदर्शनार्थः । ‘अन्धो मणिमविन्दत्’(तै. आ. १ । ११) इत्यादिमन्त्रार्थवत् तस्य मन्त्रस्य अर्थः । यस्मात् सर्वकरणवर्जितं ज्ञेयम् , तस्मात् असक्तं सर्वसंश्लेषवर्जितम् । यद्यपि एवम् , तथापि सर्वभृच्च एव । सदास्पदं हि सर्वं सर्वत्र सद्बुद्ध्यनुगमात् । न हि मृगतृष्णिकादयोऽपि निरास्पदाः भवन्ति । अतः सर्वभृत् सर्वं बिभर्ति इति । स्यात् इदं च अन्यत् ज्ञेयस्य सत्त्वाधिगमद्वारम् — निर्गुणं सत्त्वरजस्तमांसि गुणाः तैः वर्जितं तत् ज्ञेयम् , तथापि गुणभोक्तृ च गुणानां सत्त्वरजस्तमसां शब्दादिद्वारेण सुखदुःखमोहाकारपरिणतानां भोक्तृ च उपलब्धृ च तत् ज्ञेयम् इत्यर्थः ॥ १४ ॥
In plain words
Hands, feet, the sense organs — these make up the limiting adjunct. Lay them over the Knowable and a doubt starts up: does it really have them? So that this doubt does not arise, the verse begins —
'Appearing as though endowed with the qualities of every sense' — this covers every sense-organ, hearing and the rest, whether they gather knowledge or carry out action, and it covers the inner instrument too, both intellect and mind, because all of these share the same status: they are all, ultimately, things that can be known, not the knower. And here is something further: it is really only through the medium of the inner organ that the outer senses even count as limiting conditions at all. So by every quality belonging to every sense — the settling of judgment, the forming of intentions, hearing, speaking, and everything like them — the object of knowledge seems to shine, seems to come alive. That is exactly what 'appearing as though endowed with every sense's qualities' means: it looks as though it is actively engaged through all the senses' workings. That is the sense of it — and scripture backs this up: 'it seems to meditate, it seems to tremble' (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3.7). But then why is it not actually, literally engaged that way? Because of that very question, Kṛṣṇa immediately adds: 'devoid of all the senses' — meaning entirely without any instrument at all. So this object of knowledge is never really engaged by the activity of any organ. Now, about that other mantra — 'without hands or feet, yet swift, a grasper; without eyes, yet seeing; without ears, yet hearing' (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 3.19) — its whole purpose is simply to show that it holds the power to take on the function of every sense as needed, not to claim it literally runs or grasps with hands. Understand that mantra the way you would understand 'the blind man found the jewel' (Taittirīya Āraṇyaka 1.11) — figuratively, pointing at something real without describing it literally. Since the object of knowledge has no organs at all, it is entirely unattached, untouched by anything. And yet, at the very same time, it sustains absolutely everything. Why? Because everything, everywhere, rests on Being — even a mirage needs something real to appear against; nothing exists utterly groundless. That is what 'it sustains everything' means: it holds everything up. And here is one more way into understanding it: it has no qualities at all — goodness, passion, and dullness are the qualities, and it is free of every one of them; that is what the object of knowledge is. And yet, in the very same breath, it is also the enjoyer of those very qualities — through sound and everything like it, it is what tastes and perceives goodness, passion, and dullness as they turn into pleasure, pain, and confusion. That too is the object of knowledge. That is the whole of what is meant.
Close to the Sanskrit
Lest, from the superimposition of the hands, feet and other organs which constitute the limiting adjunct, there arise the doubt of the Knowable's possessing them — with this as its purpose is the beginning of the verse —
'Sarvendriyaguṇābhāsam' [means]: all those senses — hearing and so on, called the cognitive and active sense-organs — and, among the inner organ, both intellect and mind — because of the sameness of their status as objects of knowledge — are included by the mention of 'all senses'. Moreover, precisely through the medium of the inner organ as limiting adjunct, hearing and the other [outer senses] too have the status of a limiting adjunct; therefore, by all the qualities of the senses — which have become the limiting adjuncts of both the inner and outer organs, [namely] ascertainment, resolve, hearing, speech, and so on — it [the object of knowledge] appears to shine forth; thus [it is called] 'sarvendriyaguṇābhāsam' — [meaning] it is, as it were, engaged by the activities of all the senses — such is the meaning; from the scriptural statement 'it seems to meditate, it seems to tremble' (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3.7). Now, for what reason, again, is it not understood to be [actually] engaged? Because of this, [Kṛṣṇa] says — 'sarvendriyavivarjitam' [devoid of all senses], meaning devoid of all organs. Therefore, that object of knowledge is not [actually] engaged by the activity of the organs. As for this mantra — 'without hands or feet, yet swift, a grasper; without eyes, yet seeing; without ears, yet hearing' (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 3.19) and so on — its purpose is to show that [it] possesses the power to assume the function corresponding to each sense-organ's limiting quality; not, however, to show directly that it literally possesses actions like swiftness. The meaning of that mantra is like the meaning of the mantra 'the blind man found the jewel' (Taittirīya Āraṇyaka 1.11) and similar ones. Since the object of knowledge is devoid of all organs, therefore it is unattached, free from all contact. Even though this is so, nevertheless it also sustains everything indeed. For everything, everywhere, is grounded in Being, because of the pervasion of the notion of Being [in every cognition]. For not even mirages and the like are without a ground. Therefore it 'sustains everything' — [meaning] it supports everything — thus. There may be this further door to understanding the reality of the object of knowledge: it is without qualities — sattva, rajas, tamas are the qualities — devoid of them, that is the object of knowledge; and yet, it is also the enjoyer of the qualities — [namely] through the medium of sound and so on, it is the enjoyer, and the perceiver, of sattva, rajas, and tamas as they have transformed into the forms of pleasure, pain, and delusion — that too [is] the object of knowledge — such is the meaning.