Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.14.51
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
snehaḥ
—
affection
From √snih — to be sticky, to adhere. Affection that 'sticks'. The Gauḍīya bhakti-hierarchy uses sneha as one of the higher stages (sneha → māna → praṇaya...). Here used in its prior, general-emotional sense to be sublated.
-
sva-svaka-ātmani
—
in one's very own self
Compound: sva (own) + svaka (one's very own, intensified) + ātman (self). The doubled possessive intensifies — 'one's very own ātmā'. The ātmā that is most one's own — which Śukadeva will identify as Kṛṣṇa.
-
dehinām
—
of embodied beings
Genitive plural of dehin — embodied one. The condition of being embodied is the condition of mistaking the body for the self. Sets up verse 52's even harsher diagnosis.
-
mamatā-ālambi
—
dependent on the sense of 'mine'
Compound: mamatā (mine-ness) + ālambi (depending on). Possessions are loved through mamatā. Bhakti is the reorientation of mamatā — Kṛṣṇa is 'mine' in the fullest sense, replacing the lower mamatā.
-
rāja-indra
—
O best of kings
Compound: rāja (king) + indra (chief). Vocative — 'king of kings, O Parīkṣit'. The technical address to the dying king. The teaching is being delivered at the highest possible address — the chapter's audience-frame matters.
It is now common practice all over the world for a mother to kill her own child within the womb if the birth of that child represents any inconvenience for her. Similarly, grown children eagerly place their elderly parents in lonely institutions rather than be inconvenienced by their presence at home. These and innumerable other examples prove that people in general are more attached to their own body and self, which represent “I-ness,” than to their family and other possessions, which represent “my-ness.” Although conditioned souls are very proud of their so-called love for society, family and so forth, in reality every conditioned soul is acting on the platform of gross or subtle selfishness.
The preference for ones own self over attachment to sons, wealth or house is natural.
The negative aspect is shown. Śrīdhara Svāmī explains this in terms of ahaṅkāra. The next verse however indicates this with the words dehātma-vādinām (those who think the self is the body). Other versions of the words are not approved because of the intended statement and the mention of the body in the next verse. Mamatāvalambī can have a locative meaning since it is separated from the final clause. The objects of possessiveness have less attraction than the self. O king, you know well that even the king does not have as much affection for the kingdom as does for himself!
One has affection for one’s own ātmā in the body (sva-svaka ātmani). Śrīdhara Svāmī explains this in terms of ahaṅkāra because of the identification with the body. However it is not proper to say that ātmani means “for the body”since thinking that one is the body is explained in the next verse. For those who understand that they are ātmā, not the body (dehinān) there is affection for the ātmā. The affection for objects of possession like children is less than the affection for the self with the identity of “I.” O great king! One does not have as much affection for the kingdom as for the self. You know that.
- Where do I hide self-protection behind the language of duty or love?
- What honest self-knowledge today would make me a less subtly selfish person?
A miser loves his treasure box more than his coat; a parent loves his child more than his treasure box; but neither loves either more than his own body. Snehas radiate in concentric circles; the innermost ring is the body's selfhood. Hold this for now; the chapter will redirect the entire concentric structure to point at Kṛṣṇa.
My note
Source: vedabase.io