Shloka 5
Liberation and Truth — Chanakya Niti
पिता रत्नाकरो यस्य लक्ष्मीर्यस्य सहोदरा ।
शङ्खो भिक्षाटनं कुर्यान्न दत्तमुपतिष्ठते ॥
pitā ratnākaro yasya lakṣmīr yasya sahodarā |
śaṅkho bhikṣāṭanaṃ kuryān na dattam upatiṣṭhate ||
Even if one’s father were the jewel-bearing ocean (Ratnākara) and Lakṣmī were one’s own sister, one would still have to go begging; what has not been given does not come to one’s aid.
FAQs
In many premodern South Asian settings, livelihood could depend on patronage, gifts, and reciprocal obligations rather than on abstract entitlement. The verse reflects a social economy in which support is framed as contingent on actual giving (dāna), even when one’s lineage or associations imply access to wealth.
The verse treats support as practical and transactional: only what is actually granted (dattam) becomes effective assistance. Lineage, symbolic proximity to wealth, or reputational advantage is portrayed as insufficient without concrete transfer or provision.
Ratnākara (‘mine of jewels’) is a conventional epithet for the ocean, evoking inexhaustible riches, while Lakṣmī personifies prosperity. The “conch” (śaṅkha) functions as metonymy for a mendicant’s alms-container, intensifying the contrast: even with emblematic sources of wealth, one may still beg if gifts are not actually received. The closing clause uses upatiṣṭhate (“stands by, supports”) to stress the difference between potential resources and realized aid.