Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 8.20.6
यद् यद्धास्यति लोकेऽस्मिन्सम्परेतं धनादिकम् ।
तस्य त्यागे निमित्तं किं विप्रस्तुष्येन्न तेन चेत् ॥ ६ ॥
yad yad dhāsyati loke ’smin
[yad yad dhaasyati loke ’smin]
samparetaṁ dhanādikam
[samparetam dhanaadikam]
tasya tyāge nimittaṁ kiṁ
[tasya tyaage nimittam kim]
vipras tuṣyen na tena cet
[vipras tushyen na tena chet]
Word-for-word
yat yat
—
whatsoever
hāsyati
—
will leave
loke
—
in the world
asmin
—
in this
samparetam
—
one who is already dead
dhana-ādikam
—
his wealth and riches
tasya
—
of such wealth
tyāge
—
in renunciation
nimittam
—
the purpose
kim
—
what is
vipraḥ
—
the brāhmaṇa who is confidentially Lord Viṣṇu
tuṣyet
—
must be pleased
na
—
is not
tena
—
by such (riches)
cet
—
if there is a possibility.
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
yad yad dhāsyati loke ’smin
yat yat
whatsoever
hāsyati
will leave
loke
in the world
samparetaṁ dhanādikam
tasya tyāge nimittaṁ kiṁ
asmin
in this
samparetam
one who is already dead
dhana-ādikam
his wealth and riches
tasya
of such wealth
tyāge
in renunciation
nimittam
the purpose
kim
what is
vipras tuṣyen na tena cet
vipraḥ
the brāhmaṇa who is confidentially Lord Viṣṇu
tuṣyet
must be pleased
na
is not
tena
by such (riches)
cet
if there is a possibility.
My lord, you can also see that all the material opulences of this world are certainly separated from their possessor at death. Therefore, if the brāhmaṇa Vāmanadeva is not satisfied by whatever gifts one has given, why not please Him with the riches one is destined to lose at death?
Purport
The word vipra means brāhmaṇa, and at the same time “confidential.” Bali Mahārāja had confidentially decided to give the gift to Lord Vāmanadeva without discussion, but because such a decision would hurt the hearts of the asuras and his spiritual master, Śukrācārya, he spoke equivocally. Bali Mahārāja, as a pure devotee, had already decided to give all the land to Lord Viṣṇu.
— A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda
Gauḍīya Ācāryas
Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura
Gauḍīya
Translation
What is the use of wealth one leaves behind on dying? Should it not be used to satisfy a brāhmaṇa?
If, by your order, a brāhmaṇa is not satisfied by charity, what is the result of that wealth which one gives up on dying anyway? Therefore I should give all my wealth for his pleasure. Though he knows Viṣṇu is his Lord, he does not give respect, obeisances and prayers to the Lord by his increased bhakti in order not to give sorrow to Śukrācārya and the demons. He addresses the Lord as a brāhmaṇa in order to hide his bhāva for the Lord.
Related lectures
Personal Guidance
Material opulences leave us at death anyway — why not please Vāmana with what we are destined to lose? Death will take it; better to give it first. The arithmetic favors giving.
Reflection Questions
- What am I clinging to that death will take anyway — and could I give it first?
- Where is reluctance to give based on imagined permanence that the Bhāgavatam denies?
My note
Source: vedabase.io