Q: How would we define the happiness we experience in the world?
A: The Tarka-saṅgraha definition is:

sarveṣām anukūlatayā vedanīyaṁ sukham
Happiness (sukham) is that object of cognition (vedanīyam=jñāna-viṣayaḥ) which is qualified by favorability (anukūlatva-prakāraka) for everyone (sarveṣām).

All cognition has some viṣaya or object. Every cognition has a viṣaya, an object. For example, when we cognize “a pot on the ground,” that cognition involves:

the relation between them.

the qualifier (the pot),

the qualified (the ground), and

In the definition above, cognition of an object, qualified by favorability, is called happiness. Just as we say, “there is a pot on the ground” on the basis of our cognition, we say “I am happy” based on our cognition of happiness.

In the winter, suppose someone sits next to a fire and gets some relief from the cold. If we exclude the word ‘sarveṣām’, ‘for everyone’ from the above definition, then the definition of happiness would apply to fire also! However, in the summer, sitting next to the fire may cause discomfort to someone else; instead, sitting next to a fan might offer relief. Then the fan would meet the definition of happiness as it is the object of cognition, and it is qualified by favorability.

To resolve this fault of ati-vyāpti, the word sarveṣām, “for everyone”, is used in the definition, recognizing that both the persons above experienced happiness. That is, happiness is that object of cognition which is qualified by favorability for everyone. This way, fire is excluded, because its experience is not favorable for everyone (e.g. in the summer) and the fan is also excluded, because it is also not favorable for everyone (e.g. in the winter).

The definition of unhappiness simply exchanges the word anukūlatayā (qualified by favorability) with pratikūlatayā (qualified by unfavorability) —

sarveṣām pratikūlatayā vedanīyaṁ duḥkham
Happiness (sukham) is that object of knowledge (vedanīyam=jñāna-viṣayaḥ) qualified by favorability (anukūlatva-prakāraka) for everyone (sarveṣām).

Q: But I have heard that there is no happiness in the world. How do we reconcile this with the above definition of happiness?
A: The Bhagavad-gītā does not agree that there is no happiness in the world. It uses the word ‘sukham’ to denote this happiness, and in fact, classifies it into three types: sāttvika, rājasika and tāmasika (check B.G. 18.36-39).

Q: Then why does the Bhagavad-gītā say duḥkha-ālayam aśāśvatam — “the world is a place of suffering”?
A: This statement does not deny the existence of sukha. It means:

• worldly happiness is temporary, and
• because it is temporary, it inevitably leads to suffering.

Another important point is that sukha is not independent of duḥkha.

Q: What does that mean?
A: In the definition of sukha, anukūlatā (favorability) should be understood more precisely as a reduction of unfavorability (pratikūla-nyūnatā). All favorable experiences, are considered favorable, because they reduce unfavorability.

Suppose you had an ‘unhappiness-meter’. Imagine it like a thermometer, with the level of the fluid indicating the level of unhappiness. When the level drops, we consider that we have become happy. However, the level drops for a very short time, and mostly it is high. The reason for this is that there are many ways to be miserable in this world, while only a few ways to be happy. Also, when the unhappiness level drops, we are experiencing the change as happiness. Needless to say, when the unhappiness level drops and becomes stable, we do not experience any ‘happiness’. This is why, we must create some new trouble for ourselves- some mental disturbance – that raises the level, and we then try to drop it again, so we can experience the ‘change’ as a new happiness.

In this way, it is true that ultimately, everything in this world is suffering.

Conclusion

From an ultimate standpoint, it is correct to say that everything in the world culminates in suffering.
But that does not mean sukha does not exist. It exists:

• as a cognition,
• as a temporary reduction of duḥkha,
• and as something real but unstable.

The world is not free of happiness. It is simply incapable of sustaining it.