Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.80.7
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
yadṛcchayā
—
of its own accord
Adverb from yat (which) + ṛcchā (coming). The technical term for sustenance that arrives without one's own striving — a recognized mode of brāhmaṇa-jīvana in śāstra. Gauḍīyas read it as practical śaraṇāgati.
-
gṛha - āśramī
—
in the household order of life
Compound: gṛha (house) + āśrama (order). Sudāmā is a gṛhastha, not a sannyāsī — and yet exemplifies the renunciation Kṛṣṇa praises. Gauḍīyas note that āśrama is no obstacle to bhakti when the heart is right.
-
ku - cailasya
—
who was poorly dressed
Compound: ku (bad, poor) + caila (cloth). The epithet returns in verse 23 — Kṛṣṇa's poor-clothed friend is honored by Lakṣmī herself. The verse plants the ku-caila image that will be inverted at Dvārakā.
-
bhāryā
—
the wife
From √bhṛ (to support). The wife in dharma-śāstra is the partner in gṛhastha-dharma. Her role in this chapter is pivotal: she sends Sudāmā to Kṛṣṇa — Gauḍīyas read her as a hidden bhakta who turns the līlā.
-
kṣut
—
from hunger
Nominal stem for hunger. The Bhāgavatam does not soften — the wife is literally starving. Gauḍīyas refuse to spiritualize away the material suffering; it is the pressure that drives the līlā forward.
Sudāmā’s chaste wife was also poorly dressed, and whatever food she obtained she gave to her husband. Thus she remained fatigued from hunger.
His wife had similar qualities such as toleration of hunger (ksut ksama) among many qualities (ca). She tolerated even more than he, because whatever she received as food she served to him.
Though a householder, he subsisted on whatever arrived near him without effort. He had a wife who was dressed in badly colored, worn out, soiled cloth. The verb āsīt is understood from the previous sentence. She had qualities similar to his.
A vine that produces no fruit will still flower in the spring rain: Sudāmā's household runs on yadṛcchayā, on whatever the Lord sends without solicitation. The wife's hunger is real, the cloth is poor — and the vine flowers anyway, because the gardener has not forgotten the root.
Having abandoned wealth and ministerial position to follow Mahāprabhu, Rūpa and Sanātana Gosvāmīs lived in Vṛndāvana on dry rotis begged from door to door — and on those they wrote the theology of the entire sampradāya.
Gauḍīyas read Sudāmā's poverty in the same register: yadṛcchayā-vṛtti, accepting whatever comes, is not a failure of provision but a higher mode of dependence on Kṛṣṇa.
My note
Source: vedabase.io