Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.8.42
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
patiḥ
—
husband
From √pā (to protect). The verse uses pati ironically — Nanda 'protects' her in Yoga-māyā's stage-set, but the actual protector is Kṛṣṇa. Gauḍīya: every loka-pati is a stand-in for the eternal jagat-pati.
-
me sutaḥ
—
is my son
Me (my) + sutaḥ (son). The very claim the chapter has been building toward and now dismantles. Yaśodā speaks aloud the sentence she has been living, and in saying it discovers it as the central kumati.
-
yat - māyayā
—
by whose māyā
Yat (whose) + māyā (illusion-arranging power), instrumental. The verse names the cause of the kumati: Bhagavān's own māyā has been arranging the very illusion she is now seeing through. Gauḍīya: this is Yoga-māyā in Vraja, not māyā-śakti in saṁsāra — the same root, different application.
-
kumatiḥ
—
wrong understanding (that they are my possessions)
Ku (bad) + mati (cognition). The verse-name for the relational ownership-claim. Gauḍīya: kumati is not 'thinking I am Brahman' (Advaitin's enemy) but 'thinking I own relationships'. Different diagnosis, different cure.
-
saḥ me gatiḥ
—
He is my (only) shelter, my destination
Saḥ (He) + me (my) + gatiḥ (destination, refuge). The verse's resolution. Gati = 'where one goes', also 'the goal'. Yaśodā arrives at prayojana-tattva in a single line: Kṛṣṇa is not her son; He is her gati.
Following in the footsteps of mother Yaśodā, everyone should follow this mentality of renunciation. Whatever wealth, opulence or whatever else we may possess belongs not to us but to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the ultimate shelter of everyone and the ultimate owner of everything. As stated by the Lord Himself in Bhagavad-gītā (5.29) : bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānāṁ jñātvā māṁ śāntim ṛcchati “The sages, knowing Me as the ultimate purpose of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attain peace from the pangs of material miseries.” We should not be proud of our possessions. As expressed by mother Yaśodā herein, “I am not the owner of possessions, the opulent wife of Nanda Mahārāja. The estate, the possessions, the cows and calves and the subjects like the gopīs and cowherd men are all given to me.” One should give up thinking of “my possessions, my son and my husband” ( janasya moho ’yam ahaṁ mameti ). Nothing belongs to anyone but the Supreme Lord. Only because of illusion do we wrongly think, “I am existing” or “Everything belongs to me.” Thus mother Yaśodā completely surrendered unto the Supreme Lord. For the moment, she was rather disappointed, thinking, “My endeavors to protect my son by charity and other auspicious activities are useless. The Supreme Lord has given me many things, but unless He takes charge of everything, there is no assurance of protection. I must therefore ultimately seek shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” As stated by Prahlāda Mahārāja ( Bhāg. 7.9.19 ), bālasya neha śaraṇaṁ pitarau nṛsiṁha: a father and mother cannot ultimately take care of their children. Ato gṛha-kṣetra-sutāpta-vittair janasya moho ’yam ahaṁ mameti ( Bhāg. 5.5.8 ). One’s land, home, wealth and all of one’s possessions belong to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, although we wrongly think, “I am this” and “These things are mine.”
"The Lord is my son’s maintainer and protector. If that is so, then what is the use of my ignorant concept of I and mine?" Giving up her false conceptions and surrendering the Lord, Yasoda speaks. "I think that I am the protector of Nanda’s wealth. I think I am the queen of all the cowherd men and women and the cows. I think I am the mother of this child who is the life of the residents of Vraja, I am his nourisher, and by worship of devas and brahmanas through meditation and charities, by daily worship of Visnu, I by myself can give protection to my son. This is all misconception. As all of Vraja’s wealth is given by the mercy of Visnu, I should not be proud. Similarly since by his mercy the child was protected at every moment from the demons like Putana, I should not think that I, as a mother among the common cowherds, with impure sentiments, am his protector." This type of logic is temporary, not permanent in Yasoda. It is similar to the temporary desire of the confirmed materialist to give up wife and family because of some temporary spiritual urge.
Therefore I surrender to him. Examining her external conditions, she strengthens her belief about her natural position in three lines. In the fourth line she examines her internal position and in fear, surrenders to the Lord. I see my son as high or low because of my bad intelligence (kumatiḥ), caused by the Lord’s inconceivable māyā. Therefore I should surrender to him since I have no bhakti. Or, if I am in illusion, I must surrender to him. All her words by astonishment and other emotions simply nourish her prema, just as everything turns salty by being in the ocean.
Therefore I surrender to him.
All her knowledge has been created by the Lord’s māyā. After confirming his powers, she surrendered to the Lord to destroy her illusion. Considering the real truth, all relationships are temporary. Understanding these relationships were false, she indicated her foolishing (kumatiḥ). Or rejecting the three options starting with a dream, she accepted the fourth option. But then to destroy that idea she surrendered to the lord of the universe. By directly perceiving relations, the first three options (dream, devatās illusion and bewilderment of intelligence) are discarded. Thinking him to be the supreme lord with the universe within him (the fourth option), is also illusion. That is my bad thought. The Lord is my goal. The Lord should remove this bad thought and confirm that Kṛṣṇa is my son.
- Name three things you call 'mine' today (a relationship, a possession, a role) and aloud re-offer each to Kṛṣṇa as His property entrusted to your care.
- When anxiety rises about protecting someone you love, stop and admit: 'I cannot ultimately protect them — Kṛṣṇa is their śaraṇa,' and then act without the panic of ownership.
- Refuse the inner sentence 'this is mine' the next time it surfaces about money or status, and replace it with Yaśodā's bhāva: 'He has given it; He may take it.'
A custodian who has been calling 'mine' over a treasury entrusted to her care suddenly reads the deed and sees the owner's name was never hers. Yaśodā in this moment reads the deed — Nanda is not her husband, Kṛṣṇa is not her son, the cows are not her wealth — and discovers the only true owner is also the only true shelter.
Emperor Bharata, son of Ṛṣabhadeva, ruled the earth with such skill that the planet still bears his name — and when his time came he walked into the forest leaving everything to his sons, fixing his heart on the Lord (SB 5.7). His leave-taking was not loss; it was the discovery that he had never owned anything to begin with.
Yaśodā's verse 'asau patiḥ… ittham kumatiḥ' is the same realization arriving as a flash. The custodian releases the ledger to its rightful owner.
My note
Source: vedabase.io