na hi dattam asṛpyāsti na dattam na pratigraham | yat svayaṁ nāsti kim asya dānena ‖
“If a thing is not with us, it cannot be given; and if we do not receive it, it cannot be accepted; what use then is there of giving what we have not?”
Structure
na hi - dattam - asṛpyāsti - na - dattam - na - pratigraham - yat - svayam - nāsti - kim - asya - dānena
na hi (no) dattam (given) asṛpyāsti (is to be taken) na (not) dattam (given) na (nor) pratigraham (acceptance) | yat (what) svayam (self) nāsti (does not exist) asya (of this) dānena (by giving) kim (what is the use)
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| dattam | dattam | noun | nominative · singular · neuter | what is given |
| asṛpyāsti | asṛpyāsti | verb | √sṛp · present · third | is not given |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| dattam | dattam | noun | nominative · singular · neuter | what is given |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| pratigraham | pratigraham | noun | accusative · singular · masculine | acceptance |
| yat | yat | pronoun | nominative · singular · neuter | what |
| svayaṁ | svayaṁ | indeclinable | — | of oneself, one's own |
| nāsti | nāsti | verb | √as · present · third | is not |
| kim | kim | indeclinable | — | what?, why? |
| asya | asya | pronoun | genitive · singular · masculine | of this |
| dānena | dānena | noun | instrumental · singular · neuter | by giving |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): This verse underscores the non-dual nature of reality, suggesting that the notion of giving or receiving is predicated on a false assumption of duality. Shankara's commentary on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (2.5.19) highlights the illusory nature of the giver, the gift, and the recipient. In the context of this verse, if what we have is not truly ours to give, then the act of giving itself becomes an exercise in futility, pointing to the ultimate reality of Brahman-ātman identity. The identity of the self (ātman) with the absolute (Brahman) renders the transactional relationships implied by giving and receiving irrelevant, as all distinctions are subsumed by the unity of existence.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): Ramanuja's perspective on this verse might focus on the concept of prapatti, or self-surrender, where the individual acknowledges their dependency on Īśvara (the Lord) and surrenders their ego and desires. The inability to give what one does not possess speaks to the inherent limitation of the jīva (individual self) and its complete reliance on Īśvara for all things, including the capacity for generosity. Madhva, on the other hand, might interpret this verse through the lens of the difference (bheda) between the Lord and the individual souls, emphasizing that true giving and receiving occur within the context of this relationship, with Īśvara as the ultimate giver and sustainer of all existence.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): Swami Vivekananda, in his lectures on karma yoga, often emphasized the importance of selfless action without attachment to the fruits of one's labor. This verse can be seen as a metaphysical underpinning for such a practice, suggesting that true giving is not about transferring something from one entity to another but about recognizing the interconnectedness of all existence. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, in discussing the concept of dāna (charity) in Hindu thought, might relate this verse to the ethical imperative of generosity, noting that the act of giving, even when we feel we have nothing to give, is a recognition of our shared humanity and a step towards transcending the ego's limitations, thereby fostering a sense of universal brotherhood.