vikāra-śabdān neti cen na prācuryāt: He who is filled with limitless bliss

When Brahman is described as "ānanda-maya", Brahman is the object, and ānanda is His essential characteristic or essence. Limitless bliss is the very essence of the Absolute Truth.

« Vedānta-sūtra: The Govinda-bhāṣya of Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

Sūtra 1.1.13 - The suffix -māyā

vikāra-śabdān neti cen na prācuryāt

vikāra-śabdān: from the word indicating transformation (the suffix -māyā); na: not; iti: thus; cet: if objected; na: not so; prācuryāt: because (here the suffix -māyā) denotes abundance.

If it is argued that the Supreme Brahman cannot be the ānanda-māyā because the word implies transformation, I say it is not so, because the suffix -māyā denotes abundance, not modification.

Commentary: The Vedānta-sūtra is also called Sariraka-sūtra. Sarira means form, and thus Sariraka-sūtra means sūtras glorifying the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who has a form. The form of the Lord is not only emphasized in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Upaniṣads but is directly described in the Brahma-sūtras as well. It’s only with great effort that one may be able to hide it.

One may argue that the term ānanda-māyā in the passage of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad discussed in the previous session does not refer to the Supreme Brahman, and that only the word brahma-puccham refers to Brahman, giving the idea that Brahman is the foundation, but not the ānanda-māyā.

This appears to be supported by the line “ānanda ātmā, brahma puccham pratiṣṭhā” from Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.5. Taken out of context, this line can be interpreted as “The Self is bliss, and Brahman is its foundation”. This interpretation could then be extrapolated into the whole session, leading to the conclusion that the ānanda-māyā described in the passage is the individual soul, and that Brahman is referred to in the passage only in the words “brahma-puccham” (Brahman is the foundation). One could thus conclude that we are the ānanda-māyā, we are bliss, and we are all one with Brahman. Sri Baladeva comments that this proposal is not very intelligent.

Another argument that could be raised, this one more credible, is that the word ānanda-māyā can’t refer to the Supreme Brahman because the suffix -māyā means “transformation”. Taking this meaning, ānanda-māyā would mean “transformation of bliss”. Based on this, one could then argue that it cannot refer to the Supreme Brahman, since Brahman is not a transformation of some pre-existing state of happiness, and from there, argue that the word ānanda-māyā must refer to the individual soul, and not Brahman.

To this, Vyasadeva replies: vikāra-śabdān neti cen na prācuryāt. The Lord is the ānanda-māyā puruṣa, because the suffix -māyā does not indicate transformation; it means abundance. In this way, ānanda-māyā does not mean “he who is a transformation of bliss”, but “He who is filled with limitless bliss”.

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa argues that the rules of Sanskrit grammar from the Panini-sūtras (mayaṭ prācurye ‘ṇvarthe, and dvyacaś chandasi) state that the affix māyā can’t be used to mean “transformation” in vaidika words of more than two syllables.

How does it work? In cases where the noun is short and concrete, -māyā may mean transformation, like in “anna-māyā” (made of food) or “kṣīra-māyā” (made of milk). The word “ānanda”, however, is a longer word of abstract meaning, and therefore it must be interpreted as meaning “abundance” and not “transformation”. With this, the real meaning of the term is revealed.

The term ānanda-māyā also does not just mean “absence of sorrow”, as someone could argue; it is a positive attribute. It indicates that the Supreme Brahman is not merely free from all suffering but filled with limitless bliss.

This is confirmed in the Subāla Upaniṣad:

eṣa sarva-bhūtāntarātmāpahata-pāpmā divyo deva eko nārāyaṇaḥ

“There is one Supreme Personality of Godhead: Lord Narāyana. He is the transcendental Supersoul in the hearts of all living entities, the resplendent One, completely free from all sin.”

And also in the Viṣṇu Purana:

parāḥ parāṇām sakalā na yatra kleśādayaḥ santi parāvareśaḥ

“He is the highest of the high, the Supreme Being. In Him, all miseries and the like do not exist. He is the Lord of both the higher and lower realms.

Another meaning of the suffix māyā, meaning abundance (pracura), is that it also indicates the essential nature of an object. For example, when we call the Sun “jyotir-māyā” (jyotir means “light”), the affix -māyā is understood to mean “essential nature”. In this way, the word jyotir-māyā means “that of which the essential nature is light”, indicating a positive attribute of the Sun.

In the same way, when Brahman is described as “ānanda-māyā”, Brahman is the object, and ānanda is His essential characteristic or essence. Limitless bliss is the very essence of the Absolute Truth. All of this makes it clear that the word ānanda-māyā does not refer to the jīva.

Sūtra 1.1.14 - The giver of happiness

tad-hetu-vyapadeśāc ca

tat: of that (ānanda, bliss); hetu: the origin, cause, source; vyapadesat: because of the description (in the sastra); ca: also (adding support to the previous sūtra).

The ānanda-māyā is not the jīva, for the scriptures declare that He is the source of bliss for others.

Commentary: The previous sūtra clarified that the ānanda-māyā is the Supreme Lord and not the jīva by explaining the meaning of the suffix -māyā. This verse brings an additional argument: The ānanda-māyā is not the jīva but the Supreme Brahman, because the Lord is the source of bliss for the jīvas. This not only establishes the Lord as the source of bliss, but also our dependent position towards Him.

This is confirmed later in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.7):

ko hy evānyāt kaḥ prāṇyāt, yad eṣa ākāśa ānando na syāt, eṣa hy evānandayāti

“Who could exist without the Supreme Lord, who is filled with limitless bliss? He is the source of bliss for all jīvas.”

Because the Lord gives happiness and the jīvas receive happiness, the Supreme Brahman and the individual souls must be different persons. They cannot be identical. This is yet another proof that the ānanda-māyā is the Supreme Lord and not the jīva. It can be noted in this connection that the word “ānando” mentioned in the verse has the same meaning as the word “ānanda-māyā” mentioned in the previous passages.

According to the acintya-bhedābheda-tattva philosophy of Sri Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the ātmā, or individual soul, is simultaneously equal and different from Brahman. The soul is equal because we are made from the same spiritual substance as the Supreme Brahman, and thus qualitatively we are one, just like a drop of water from the ocean will have the same chemical characteristics as the ocean. However, there is a great difference between the volume of water in the ocean and the water contained in one drop. Brahman is infinite, and we are infinitesimal. In other words, Brahman is infinitely big, and we are infinitely small.

Although we have free will and a minute degree of independence, we can’t be truly independent, since we are, by nature, dependent on the Supreme Brahman. Perfection for us means being reconnected with this unlimited source of bliss. Only when this connection is re-established are we able to experience the bliss we hanker for.

The line ko hy evānyāt quoted by Sri Baladeva is part of a larger passage of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, which composes verse 2.7:

asad vā idam agra āsīt, tato vai sad ajāyata

tad ātmānam svayam akuruta, tasmāt tat-sukṛtam ucyata iti

yad vai tat sukṛtam raso vai saḥ

rasam hy evāyam labdhvā ’nandī bhavati

ko hy evānyāt kaḥ prāṇyāt, yad eṣa ākāśa ānando na syāt

eṣa hy evānandayāti

yadā hy evaiṣa etasminn adṛśye’nātmye’nirukte’nilayane’bhayam pratiṣṭhām vindate, atha so’bhayam gato bhavati

yadā hyevaiṣa etasminn udaram antaram kurute

atha tasya bhayam bhavati, tat tv eva bhayam viduṣo’manvānasya

tad apy eṣa śloko bhavati

This is quite a cryptic verse, but in his purport to Bg 14.27, Śrīla Prabhupāda gives the translation of “raso vai saḥ, rasam hy evāyam labdhvānandī bhavati” as “When one understands the Personality of Godhead, the reservoir of pleasure, Kṛṣṇa, he actually becomes transcendentally blissful.” In SB 5.19.20, he gives the translation of “eṣa hy evānandayati yadā hy evaiṣa etasmin na dṛśye ‘nātmye anirukte ‘nilayane ‘bhayam pratiṣṭhām vindate ‘tha so ‘bhayam gato bhavati“ as “A living entity becomes established in spiritual, blissful life when he fully understands that his happiness depends on spiritual self-realization, which is the basic principle of ānanda (bliss), and when he is eternally situated in the service of the Lord, who has no other lord above Him.”

Following these guidelines, the complete verse can be translated, in the context, as:

“In the beginning, the creation was non-existent. It was not yet defined by forms and names. From the unmanifest was born whatever exists. The Lord created it by His own potency; therefore, He is called sukṛta: non-dual and fully independent. When one understands the Personality of Godhead, the reservoir of pleasure, Kṛṣṇa, he truly becomes transcendentally blissful. Who could exist without the Supreme Lord, who is filled with limitless bliss?

A living entity becomes established in spiritual, blissful life when he fully understands that his happiness depends on spiritual self-realization, which is the basic principle of ānanda (bliss), and when he is eternally situated in the service of the Lord, who has no other lord above Him.

By understanding the Personality of Godhead, the reservoir of pleasure, Kṛṣṇa, one becomes truly transcendentally blissful. For one who deviates from it, however, taking shelter in the false ego, there is great fear. This fear exists only for the one who thinks himself wise, and not for the true sage.”

Sūtra 1.1.15 - The ānanda-māyā is not the jīva

māntra-varṇikam eva ca gīyate

māntra: in the māntra portion; varnikam: that which is described (the subject described in the mantras); eva: certainly; ca: and, also; giyate: is sung, declared, described.

Moreover, Brahman is described in the mantra section of the same Upaniṣad as the ānanda-māyā person.

Commentary: The mantra referred to in this sūtra is the mantra 2.1.2 from the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, satyam jñānam anantam brahma: The Supreme Brahman has no limits. He is eternal and full of knowledge.

The same Supreme Brahman described in this mantra is referred to as the ānanda-māyā in the later verses of the Taittirīya Upanisad. This is yet another argument that proves that the ānanda-māyā is not the jīva since the qualities described in the mantra can be applied only to the Supreme Brahman, and not to the individual living entity.

The Taittirīya Upanisad also explains:

brahma-vid apnoti param

“One who knows Brahman attains the Supreme.”

This verse explains that the living entity attains the association of the Supreme Brahman by worshiping Him and hearing about His transcendental characteristics and pastimes, similar to what Kṛṣṇa says on Bg 4.9: “One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna.”

In this way, the same Supreme Brahman described in the mantra “satyam jñānam anantam brahma” is the Supreme Brahman described by the word ānanda-māyā, and of course, the same Supreme Lord who spoke the Bhagavad-gītā and said that one who knows Him does not take another birth in this material world.

Because the Supreme Brahman is the object of attainment for the individual spirit soul, He must be different from the jīva, since the object of attainment and the seeker must be two distinct entities. Since the Supreme Brahman and the individual living entities must be distinct persons, it’s clear that the word ānanda-māyā refers to the Supreme Lord, and not to the jīva.

This discussion is important because, as soon as the ānanda-māyā is defined as being the Supreme Lord, the simultaneous oneness and difference between the Lord and the jīva is established. The Lord is defined as the source of bliss and the object of worship, and the jīva is defined as dependent on Him. As soon as these conclusions are established, the message of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad is clearly defined as devotional service to the Supreme Lord, who is the source of bliss.

In this way, this 15th sūtra offers additional support to the theistic conclusion, by establishing the proper conclusion of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad. This argument centered around this specific verse will continue in the next sūtras.

Śankarācārya avoids this whole discussion in his commentary by interpreting this whole section in the direction of Brahman being the cause of the universe, rejecting pradhāna, the jīva, or inert matter as candidates, thus defeating the atheistic Sānkhya and the Vaiśeṣika philosophies. This again shows his mission of reestablishing the Vedas in the face of these atheistic philosophies, and not in revealing the ultimate understanding of the absolute truth. His commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra was provisional, aimed at simply creating a bridge between Buddhism and other atheistic philosophies and the proper theistic understanding of the scriptures, which would be established later by the Vaiṣnava ācāryas led by Rāmānuja.

« Vedānta-sūtra: The Govinda-bhāṣya of Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa