Not narrated in this discourse's source text; presumably the same recurring frame as the rest of this vagga
Speakers
Not named explicitly; a riddle answered by reframing its own premise
Form
A four-line riddle-question, answered by two four-line verses
Length
~30 seconds to read
Difficulty
★★☆☆☆ — the answer doesn't name what the question asked for directly
A theme running through this vagga
Food is the fourth discourse in a row in this vagga substantially concerned with giving
Why this discourse
The question is a riddle with an implied trick: both gods and humans enjoy food, so what is the name of the spirit who does not? Rather than naming a specific being, the reply reframes the whole premise: those who give with faith and a clear, confident heart partake of food's fruit in this world and the next; by implication, whoever has never given anything, never having sown that cause, is the one who goes without — not because of what kind of spirit they are, but because of what they never did.
Reading guide
A riddle that isn't answered as asked
The question asks for a name — what is this spirit called — and the reply supplies no name at all. Instead of identifying a specific being, it redirects entirely toward a cause: generosity, or its absence, as what actually determines who partakes of food's benefit and who doesn't.
Food as a stand-in for merit, not merely a meal
Read literally, the riddle sounds like it concerns actual eating; the reply's answer only makes sense once ‘food’ is understood more broadly, as the fruit of merit that follows a person into their next life. Those who give partake of that fruit ‘in this world and the next’; those who never gave have nothing of that kind waiting for them.
An implied answer, not a stated one
The reply never directly says who the spirit without food actually is. Left unstated, but strongly implied by the reply's second verse urging the hearer to dispel stinginess, is that the miserly — whether reborn human, animal, or as a hungry spirit unable to receive what is offered them — are exactly the ones who go without.
A fourth discourse on giving in a row
SN 1.41 on rescuing what's given from a burning world, SN 1.42 on what each specific gift produces, and now this discourse on who partakes of food's fruit: giving has been this vagga's central concern since its first discourse, more consistently than any earlier vagga in this collection.
Key terms
anna — “food” — this discourse's title, and the riddle's literal and figurative subject.
yakkho — “spirit” — the being the opening riddle asks to be named, left unidentified when the reply redirects the question instead.
saddhāya denti — “those who give with faith” — the reply's actual subject, replacing the question's search for a named spirit.
vippasannena cetasā — “with a clear and confident heart” — the quality of mind paired with faith in the reply's description of true givers.
macchariyamalaṁ — “the stain of stinginess” — what the reply's second verse urges dispelling, echoing the same term already met at SN 1.32.
The text
The discourse in full: a riddle about who goes without food, answered by redirecting toward generosity itself. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
§1“Both gods and humans enjoy their food. So what’s the name of the spirit who doesn’t enjoy food?”
§2“Those who give with faith and a clear and confident heart, partake of food in this world and the next. So you should dispel stinginess, overcoming that stain, and give a gift. The good deeds of sentient beings support them in the next world.”
· · ·
Self-check quiz
Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.
Question 1 of 10
What does the opening riddle ask?
Correct: A. A riddle framed as asking for a specific name.
Question 2 of 10
Does the reply actually name the spirit the question asks about?
Correct: A. A reframing of the riddle's own premise, rather than a direct answer.
Question 3 of 10
What does the reply say those who give with faith receive?
Correct: A. The actual subject the reply substitutes for the question's search for a name.
Question 4 of 10
How should 'food' likely be understood in this discourse's answer?
Correct: A. Literal reading alone doesn't make sense of the reply's actual claim.
Question 5 of 10
What is left implied, rather than stated directly, by this discourse's answer?
Correct: A. The second verse's urging to dispel stinginess strongly implies this connection.
Question 6 of 10
What earlier discourse in this collection shares the term for 'the stain of stinginess'?
Correct: A. Macchariyamalaṁ, echoed from that earlier discourse.
Question 7 of 10
How many discourses in a row does this vagga devote substantially to giving?
Correct: A. A more consistent focus on giving than any earlier vagga in this collection.
Question 8 of 10
What does 'vippasannena cetasā' mean?
Correct: A. The quality of mind paired with faith in true giving.
Question 9 of 10
Is this riddle's answer identical in form to riddles like SN 1.5 or SN 1.6?
Correct: A. A different rhetorical strategy from the earlier number-riddles.
Question 10 of 10
What is the setting of this discourse?
Correct: A. Like several discourses elsewhere in this collection, no setting is given directly.
