na hi duḥkhitasyakadācidapi śāntiḥ hi duḥkhena sahodīteva sā
“For a distressed person, peace does not arise even once; it only accompanies sorrow.”
Structure
na hi duḥkhitasyakadaacidapi saantiḥ hi duḥkhena sahodīteva saā
na hi (no indeed) duḥkhitasyaka (of the distressed person) kadaacit (ever) api (also) saantiḥ (peace) hi (indeed) duḥkhena (with sorrow) eva (only) sahodīta (born) iva (like) saa (that)
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| duḥkhitasy | duḥkhitasy | noun | genitive · singular · masculine | of the afflicted one |
| akadaacid | akadaacid | indeclinable | — | at any time |
| api | api | indeclinable | — | also, even |
| saantiḥ | śāntiḥ | noun | nominative · singular · feminine | peace |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| duḥkhena | duḥkhena | noun | instrumental · singular · neuter | with sorrow |
| sahodīteva | sahodīteva | compound | karmadhāraya · "sahodī + iva" | like a companion |
| sā | sā | pronoun | nominative · singular · feminine | she, it |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): This verse underscores the notion that for one suffering, peace is elusive. Śaṅkarācārya would likely interpret this as an illustration of the non-dual nature of reality, where the distinction between sorrow and peace is transcended in the ultimate reality of Brahman. The coexistence of duḥkha (sorrow) and śānti (peace) as described can be seen as reflecting the intertwined yet ultimately illusory nature of these dualities in the phenomenal world. In his commentaries on the Upaniṣads and the Bhagavad Gītā, Śaṅkarācārya often highlights the need to look beyond such dualities to realize the identity of Brahman and ātman, where true peace is not a state that arises or ceases but is the fundamental nature of reality. Thus, the verse points to the impermanence of worldly experiences, including sorrow and peace, guiding the seeker towards the eternal and unchanging Brahman-ātman.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): In the Vaiṣṇava perspective, this verse can be understood as reflecting the inherent dependency of the jīva (individual self) on Īśvara (the Lord). Rāmānujācārya, in his Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta, might view the inability of the distressed to find peace as an indication of the jīva's separation from Īśvara, emphasizing the need for bhakti (devotion) to bridge this gap. Madhvācārya, from a Dvaita perspective, could see this as a demonstration of the real distinction between the independent Īśvara and the dependent jīva, where peace for the jīva is contingent upon Īśvara's grace. Both would likely see the coexistence of sorrow and peace as a call to devotion, underscoring that true peace can only be achieved through a loving relationship with the divine, highlighting the importance of bhakti in the pursuit of lasting peace and liberation.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): Swami Vivekānanda and S. Rādhākrishnan, exponents of Neo-Vedānta, would likely interpret this verse in a universal and practical light, applicable to contemporary human experience. Vivekānanda, in his lectures and writings, often emphasized the inner strength and resilience that can be developed through spiritual practice, which can help one navigate life's challenges, including suffering, with equanimity. Rādhākrishnan, known for his synthesis of Eastern and Western thought, might see this verse as underscoring the psychological insight that true peace is not the absence of suffering but the ability to find peace within it, a concept that resonates with modern existential and humanistic psychology. Both would encourage individuals to look inward, cultivating inner peace and detachment as a means to navigate life's dualities, thereby making the verse relevant to the everyday struggle for peace and happiness in modern life.