“I have sons, I have wealth” — thus the fool frets. He does not even possess himself; whence then sons, whence wealth?

Puttā matthi dhanammatthi — “I have sons, I have wealth”: the fool identifies with possessions and relationships as if they belonged to him. This projected identification is the root of suffering: the “having” that can never secure what it promises.

Attā hi attano natthi — he does not even possess himself. This philosophical statement is radical. If there is no fixed self that owns anything, it cannot own its relationships or goods either. The doctrine of anattā applied here has concrete practical consequences.

Kuto puttā kuto dhanaṃ — whence then sons, whence wealth? If the very basis is insubstantial, everything built on it is also. It is not that sons do not exist — it is that the relationship of possession is a fiction that generates suffering.

This verse does not advocate abandoning family but a different relationship with it: love without possession, care without compulsive attachment. Family as transitory grace, not permanent property.