Krishna speaks16.15

आढ्योऽभिजनवानस्मि कोऽन्योऽस्ति सदृशो मया।यक्ष्ये दास्यामि मोदिष्य इत्यज्ञानविमोहिताः॥

āḍhyo ’bhijanavān asmi ko ’nyo ’sti sadṛśo mayāyakṣye dāsyāmi modiṣya ity ajñāna-vimohitāḥaneka-citta-vibhrāntā moha-jāla-samāvṛtāḥprasaktāḥ kāma-bhogeṣu patanti narake ’śucau

Word by word
āḍhyaḥ - wealthyabhijana-vān - having highly placed relativesasmi - mekaḥ - whoanyaḥ - elseasti - issadṛśaḥ - likemayā - to meyakṣye - I shall perform sacrificesdāsyāmi - I shall give almsmodiṣye - I shall rejoiceiti - thusajñāna - ignorancevimohitāḥ - deluded aneka-manycitta - imaginingsvibhrāntāḥ - led astraymoha - delusionjāla - meshsamāvṛtāḥ - envelopedprasaktāḥ - addictedkāma-bhogeṣu - gratification of sensuous pleasurespatanti - descendnarake - to hellaśucau - murky

The verse says

I am rich. I come from good people. Who else is my equal? I will make offerings, I will give to the poor, I will enjoy myself. So they talk, fooled by not knowing.

In plain words

Here is the part that is genuinely uncomfortable.

Two of the three things he promises are good things. He will make offerings. He will give to the poor.

Giving was listed as a divine quality twelve verses ago. So what has changed? Nothing about the act. Only what it is for, and it has become one more item on the list of what makes him impressive.

Where you've felt this · in relationships

Sudha, an old friend of the bride's family, tells four people at the wedding what she has arranged for them. All of it is true and all of it was generous. The bride's mother is standing nearby and thanks her, and something in the air goes slightly wrong, though nobody could say what. The gift was real and it was generous. It had also already done a second job, as something to tell people about, before the family ever heard of it.

Going deeper

Generosity appears in both lists in this chapter, and this is where you find out what separates them.

Giving was named as a divine quality. Here the same man promises to give and it is counted against him. The act is identical. What differs is the direction it faces. One kind of giving is aimed at the person receiving. The other is aimed at an audience, and the person receiving is a prop in it.

This is the sharpest idea in the chapter, and it ought to make a reader uneasy rather than comfortable. You cannot sort people by what they do. Two men write the same cheque and only one of them has given anything away.

It also means the line drawn here does not run between people. It runs through the middle of each one, and it moves about during the day.