Bhagavad Gita · Karma YogaChapter 3, Shloka 1 (3.1)

Arjuna's argument. Two statements seem to clash for him: (1) buddhi is superior to action (2.49), and (2) "fight" (2.18, 2.37). The word "ghora" deserves attention — Shankaracharya: ghore krūre hiṃsā-lakṣaṇe — a cruel deed whose nature is violence. Arjuna has still not come out of his fear of killing his own kin.

Shankaracharya — refuting samuccaya. Shankaracharya comments on this verse at length: if Krishna had taught knowledge and action as a single means practised together (samuccaya), then Arjuna's statement "buddhi is superior to action" would itself make no sense — how could one call buddhi "separate and superior" to something (action) that is part of that very means? Therefore, according to Shankara, Arjuna has understood correctly that knowledge and action are separate, and that buddhi is superior.

Acharya Ramanuja — Arjuna's real dilemma. According to Ramanuja, Arjuna's argument is this: you have said that the means to the vision of the self is jnana-nishtha (steadfastness in knowledge), which comes about when all the senses cease their dealings with their objects. Then why not free me from all actions and set me to jnana-nishtha — why engage me in action, which involves the activity of all the senses and is opposed to the vision of the self?