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

Sutra 1.1.13 - vikāra-śabdān neti cen na prācuryāt

vikāra-śabdān neti cen na prācuryāt

vikāra-śabdān: from the word indicating transformation; na: not; iti: thus; cet: if; na: not; prācuryāt: because of abundance.

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

Commentary: The Vedanta-sutra is also called Sariraka-sutra. Sarira means form, and thus Sariraka-sutra means sutras glorifying the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who has a form. The form of the Lord is not only emphasized in the Srimad Bhagavatam and the Upanisads but is directly described in the Brahma Sutras as well. It's only with great effort that one may be able to hide it.

One may argue that the term ānanda-maya 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-maya.

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-maya described in the passage is the individual soul, and that Brahman is referred to in the passage only in the words "brahma-puccham" (Brahman in the foundation). One could thus conclude that we are the ānanda-maya, we are bliss, and we are all one, in the best new-age fashion. 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-maya can't refer to the Supreme Brahman because the suffix -maya means "transformation". Taking this meaning, ānanda-maya 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-maya must refer to the individual soul, and not Brahman.

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

Srila Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa argues that the rules of Sanskrit grammar from the Panini sutras (mayaṭ prācurye 'ṇvarthe, and dvyacaś chandasi) state that the affix maya can't be used to mean "transformation" in vaidika words of more than two syllables. In cases where the noun is short and concrete, -maya may mean transformation, like in anna-maya (made of food) or kṣīra-maya (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-maya also does not just mean "absence of sorrow"; 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 parāṇāṁ 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 maya, meaning abundance (pracura), is that it also indicates the essential nature of an object. For example, when we call the Sun "jyotir-maya" (jyotir means "light"), the affix -maya is understood to mean "essential nature". In this way, the word jyotir-maya 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-maya", 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-maya does not refer to the jīva.

Sutra 1.1.14 - tad-hetu-vyapadeśāc ca

tad-hetu-vyapadeśāc ca

tat: of that (bliss); hetu: the origin, cause; vyapadesat: because of the description; ca: also (adding support to the previous sutra).

Also, the ānanda-maya puruṣa is not the jīva, because it is mentioned that the ānanda-maya is the source of bliss for others.

Commentary: The previous sutra clarified that the ānanda-maya is the Supreme Lord and not the jīva by explaining the meaning of the suffix -maya. This verse brings an additional argument: The ānanda-maya 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-maya 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-maya" mentioned in the previous passages.

According to the acintya-bheda-abheda 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, Srila Prabhupada 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."

Sutra 1.1.15 - māntra-varṇikam eva ca gīyate

māntra-varṇikam eva ca gīyate

mantra: by the mantra; varnikam: that which is described, eva: certainly; ca: also; giyate: is sung, described.

And also, because Brahman is described in the mantra section [of the same Upaniṣad] as the ānanda-maya person.

Commentary: The mantra referred to in this sutra 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-maya in the later verses of the Taittirīya Upanisad. This is yet another argument that proves that the ānanda-maya 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 Krsna 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-maya, 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-maya refers to the Supreme Lord, and not to the jīva.

This discussion is important because, as soon as the ānanda-maya is defined as being the Supreme Lord, the simultaneous oneness and difference between the Lord and the jīva are 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 sutra 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 sutras.

Śaṅkarācārya 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 Sankhya 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 Vedanta Sutra 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 Vaishnava ācāryas led by Rāmānuja.

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