यज्ञशिष्टामृतभुजो यान्ति ब्रह्म सनातनम् ।नायं लोकोऽस्त्ययज्ञस्य कुतोऽन्यः कुरुसत्तम॥
yajña-śiṣṭāmṛta-bhujo yānti brahma sanātanamnāyaṃ loko ’styayajñasya kuto ’nyaḥ kuru-sattama
Word by word
The verse says
Those who eat what is left after the offering go to what lasts. For the one who offers nothing, this world does not work - let alone any other.
In plain words
The closing argument of the catalogue, and it is blunt.
Eat the remainder and you go toward what does not end. The image is from 3.13.
And then: na ayaṁ loko 'sti ayajñasya - this world does not even work for the one who gives nothing. Never mind the next one.
Where you've felt this · in community
Your neighbour has lived entirely inside his own arrangements for thirty years. Nothing has gone wrong - the bills are paid and the flat is tidy. There is simply nobody who would notice if he stopped answering the door.
Going deeper
The sharpness here is aimed at a specific idea: that giving is optional, something added to a life that would otherwise be complete.
Krishna's claim is that a life without it does not function - not that it is punished, but that it does not work. Na ayaṁ lokaḥ asti - this world is not, for such a person.
That is the same structural argument as 3.16, where the man who does not turn the wheel mogham jīvati, lives in vain. Not condemned. Structurally empty.
Amṛta-bhujaḥ - eaters of what does not die. The remnant of the offering is called nectar, which is a striking upgrade for leftovers.
And there is a logic in it that survives the ritual frame. What you keep, you consume and it is gone. What passes through you continues. The Gita is saying the second is the part you actually get to keep.