FolioCorpusŚrīmad-Bhāgavatam

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 6.16.7

नित्यस्यार्थस्य सम्बन्धो ह्यनित्यो द‍ृश्यते नृषु । यावद्यस्य हि सम्बन्धो ममत्वं तावदेव हि ॥ ७ ॥
nityasyārthasya sambandho
[nityasyaarthasya sambandho]
hy anityo dṛśyate nṛṣu
[hy anityo drishyate nrishu]
yāvad yasya hi sambandho
[yaavad yasya hi sambandho]
mamatvaṁ tāvad eva hi
[mamatvam taavad eva hi]
nityasya — of the eternal arthasya — thing sambandhaḥ — relationship hi — indeed anityaḥ — temporary dṛśyate — is seen nṛṣu — in human society yāvat — as long as yasya — of whom hi — indeed sambandhaḥ — relationship mamatvam — ownership tāvat — that long eva — indeed hi — certainly.
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
nityasyārthasya sambandho
nityasya
of the eternal
arthasya
thing
sambandhaḥ
relationship
hy anityo dṛśyate nṛṣu
yāvad yasya hi sambandho
hi
indeed
anityaḥ
temporary
dṛśyate
is seen
nṛṣu
in human society
yāvat
as long as
yasya
of whom
mamatvaṁ tāvad eva hi
hi
indeed
sambandhaḥ
relationship
mamatvam
ownership
tāvat
that long
eva
indeed
hi
certainly.
A few living entities are born in the human species, and others are born as animals. Although both are living entities, their relationships are impermanent. An animal may remain in the custody of a human being for some time, and then the same animal may be transferred to the possession of other human beings. As soon as the animal goes away, the former proprietor no longer has a sense of ownership. As long as the animal is in his possession he certainly has an affinity for it, but as soon as the animal is sold, the affinity is lost.

Aside from the fact that the soul transmigrates from one body to another, even in this life the relationships between living entities are impermanent, as exemplified in this verse. The son of Citraketu was named Harṣaśoka, or “jubilation and lamentation.” The living entity is certainly eternal, but because he is covered by a temporary dress, the body, his eternity is not observed. Dehino ’smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā: “The embodied soul continually passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age.” Thus the bodily dress is impermanent. The living entity, however, is permanent. As an animal is transferred from one owner to another, the living entity who was the son of Citraketu lived as his son for some time, but as soon as he was transferred to another body, the affectionate relationship was broken. As stated in the example given in the previous verse, when one has a commodity in his hands he considers it his, but as soon as it is transferred it becomes someone else’s commodity. Then one no longer has a relationship with it; he has no affection for it, nor does he lament for it.

— A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda
Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura Gauḍīya
Translation
It is seen that the relationships of one object with many people are temporary. As long as the relationship lasts, one has possessiveness of the object. For some time I was the son of Citraketu and for that time he showed affection for me. Afterwards I will be the son of someone else, and that person will show affection for me. This is illustrated by making a particular case to make a general statement. One object like a coin goes to another person’s hand in one day during trading. Then it becomes his and no one else’s for some time. The relationship is temporary.
A few are born human, others as animals — both are living entities, but their relationships are impermanent; an animal-and-human bond may briefly arise. Cross-species and cross-class relationships are as real and as fleeting.
Reflection Questions
  • Which 'unequal' relationship have I underestimated as a real relationship?
  • How might temporariness inform tenderness?
📝 My note

← Read full Chapter 16