Different interpretations of the Bhagavadgita verses by different commentators often are a result of different ways of splitting the words.  A good example is: nāsato vidyate bhāvo nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ.  This is interpreted by Śaṅkara to mean that there is no bhāva for asat, and there is no abhāva for sat.  Other commentators have read the line differently by punctuating it in a different way: nāsato vidyate 'bhāvo nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ : There is no abhāva for either sat or asat.  The phrase traiguṇyaviṣayā vedaḥ nistraiguṇyo bhavārjuna has similar different readings.  One reading says that the Vedas have the three guṇas as their domain (viṣaya), but, O Arjuna, free yourself from these three guṇas.  If I remember correctly, Madhva says traiguṇya-viṣa-yā vedāḥ : traiguṇyam eva viṣam, tad yāpayanti apagamayanti.