na ca dehāgni hi kasīdati na cādhi juhoti kasya cit . annena dehāgnir yasya na juhoti sa vṛthā mṛtaḥ . 80
“The bodily fire does not digest nor properly metabolize another's food, and one who does not digest his own food is as good as dead.”
Structure
na ca dehāgniḥ kasīdati na ca adhijuhoti kasya cit . annena dehāgniḥ yasya na juhoti sa vṛthā mṛtaḥ
na ca (not) dehāgniḥ (body's digestive fire) kasīdati (grows weak) na ca (not) kasya cit (anyone's) adhijuhoti (overcooks) . yasya (whose) dehāgniḥ (digestive fire) annena (by food) na juhoti (does not cook) saḥ (that person) vṛthā (in vain) mṛtaḥ (dies)
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| ca | ca | indeclinable | — | and |
| dehāgniḥ | dehāgniḥ | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | the digestive fire of the body |
| kasīdati | kasīdati | verb | √kasī · present · third | is enfeebled or grows weak |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| ca | ca | indeclinable | — | and |
| adhijuhoti | adhijuhoti | verb | √hu · present · third | burns up excessively or strongly |
| kasya | kasya | pronoun | genitive · singular · masculine | of whom |
| cit | cit | indeclinable | — | at all, any |
| annen | annen | noun | instrumental · singular · neuter | with food |
| dehāgniḥ | dehāgniḥ | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | the digestive fire of the body |
| yasya | yasya | pronoun | genitive · singular · masculine | of whom |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| juhoti | juhoti | verb | √hu · present · third | burns up or digests |
| saḥ | saḥ | pronoun | nominative · singular · masculine | he |
| vṛthā | vṛthā | indeclinable | — | in vain, uselessly |
| mṛtaḥ | mṛtaḥ | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | dead |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): In his commentary on the Brahma Sutras, Adi Shankara emphasizes the non-dual nature of reality. This verse, 'na ca dehāgni hi kasīdati na cādhi juhoti kasya cit', suggests that the bodily fire, symbolizing the individual self, does not truly digest or metabolize another's food, implying a deeper, non-physical reality. Shankara's reasoning on related passages, such as the Chandogya Upanishad, highlights the illusoriness of the physical world and the ultimate identity of Brahman and Atman. This verse points to the limitation of the physical body and its functions, underscoring the importance of realizing the true, unchanging Self beyond bodily processes. By extension, it supports the Advaita Vedanta notion that the Atman, or individual self, is not distinct from Brahman, the ultimate reality, but rather an illusion of separation. This understanding frees the individual from the constraints of the physical world, allowing for the realization of the unity of all existence.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): The Vaiṣṇava tradition, as represented by Rāmānujācārya and Madhvācārya, interprets this verse through the lens of devotion and the relationship between the jīva (individual soul) and Īśvara (the Supreme Lord). Ramanuja, in his commentary on the Brahma Sutras, would likely view this verse as emphasizing the dependence of the jīva on Īśvara for all aspects of existence, including the basic bodily functions like digestion. The inability of the bodily fire to digest another's food symbolizes the unique, personal relationship each jīva has with Īśvara, where the sustenance for both body and soul comes from the divine. Madhva, on the other hand, might focus on the distinction between the jīva and Īśvara, using this verse to illustrate that even in the most fundamental physical processes, there is a clear separation between the individual's capabilities and the divine will. This verse, in the Vaiṣṇava context, underscores the importance of recognizing and worshiping the Supreme Lord as the source of all sustenance and life.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): Swami Vivekananda and S. Radhakrishnan, key figures in Neo-Vedanta, would interpret this verse in a manner that emphasizes its universal and practical applications. Vivekananda, known for his lectures on the practical applications of Vedanta, might see this verse as a call to introspection and self-realization. He could argue that just as the bodily fire cannot digest another's food, so too must each individual find their own path to spiritual nourishment, which cannot be borrowed or imposed from outside. Radhakrishnan, with his philosophical background, might view this verse as an allegory for the human condition, where true fulfillment and sustenance come from within. Both would likely emphasize the importance of personal experience and realization over mere intellectual understanding or external imposition. This verse, in the context of contemporary life, reminds us of the need for individual effort and self-awareness in our spiritual journeys, highlighting the unique and personal nature of spiritual growth and realization.