SrI: SrImathE satakOpAya nama: SrImathE rAmAnujAya nama: SrImadh varavaramunayE nama:
sUthram 10
உணர்ந்தவன் “ஸுக2மாக உறங்கினேன்” என்கையாலே ஸுக2ரூபமாகக் கடவது
(uNarndhavan “sukhamAga uRanginEn” engaiyAlE sukha rUpamAgak kadavadhu)
Meaning: The self must be of the nature of bliss because, upon waking, a person says, “I slept happily”.
Proof for the blissful nature of the self
In the previous sUthram, it was established that the self is of the nature of bliss (Anandha rUpa).
The commentator now gives a proof for this.
He points to an experience common to everyone.
When a person wakes up from deep sleep, he naturally says:
“ஸுகமாக உறங்கினேன்”
(“sukhamAga uRanginEn”)
“I slept happily.”
The commentator cites this recognition as evidence that the self is of the nature of bliss.
Why is this statement important?
The commentator says that this recognition after waking is itself proof.
This recognition is called:
ப்ரத்யபிஜ்ஞை
(prathyabhijgyai)
Recognition of a previously experienced state.
When a person wakes up, he does not merely say:
“I slept.”
He says:
“I slept happily.”
This shows that happiness was experienced during sleep.
The happiness experienced in deep sleep
During deep sleep, external objects are not experienced.
The senses are inactive.
The mind is inactive.
There is no contact with worldly objects.
Yet, on waking, a person remembers:
“I slept happily.”
Therefore, the happiness recollected after waking cannot be traced to any external object.
The commentator concludes that the happiness experienced there must belong to the nature of the self itself.
What is actually remembered?
A question may arise.
Does the statement:
“I slept happily”
simply mean:
“I slept in such a way that happiness arose later after waking”?
The commentator rejects this interpretation.
The statement itself does not support such a meaning.
A person does not say:
“I slept in a manner that later produced happiness.”
He directly says:
“I slept happily.”
Happiness is connected to the sleeping state itself.
Therefore the happiness recollected after waking must have been experienced during sleep.
Support from the SrI bhAshyam
The commentator cites the explanation of bhAshyakArar.
एवं हि सुप्तोत्थितः परामृशति — सुखमहम् अस्वाप्सम्, न किञ्चिदवेदिषम् इति
(Evam hi supthOththitha: parAmruSathi — sukham aham asvApsam, na kinchidh avEdhisham ithi)
“One who has arisen from sleep recollects: ‘I slept happily; I knew nothing.'”
bhAshyakArar explains that through this recollection two things become known:
1. The self, experienced happiness.
2. The self, existed as the knower even during sleep.
The meaning of the recollection
bhAshyakArar further explains:
अनेन प्रत्यवमर्शनेन तानीमप्यहमर्थस्यैव आत्मनः सुखित्वं ज्ञातृत्वं च ज्ञायते
(anEna prathyavamarSanEna thAnIm api aham-arthasyaiva Athmana: sukhithvam gyAthruthvam cha gyAyathE)
“Through this recollection, the happiness and knowerhood of the self denoted by the word ‘I’ during that state are understood.”
Thus the recollection does not teach that happiness arose later.
It teaches that the self itself was happy during sleep.
Why must the self be blissful?
The commentator next gives another argument.
If the self were not naturally agreeable to itself, it could never become the object of supreme love.
Every person naturally loves oneself.
This universal self-love is possible only because the self is intrinsically favourable and blissful.
Therefore, bliss belongs to the very nature of the self.
Scriptural support
The commentator strengthens the conclusion through scriptural references.
The self is wonderful
आश्चर्यवत् पश्यति कश्चिदेनम्
(AScharyavath paSyathi kaSchidh Enam) SrI bhagavath gIthA 2.29
“Some behold this self as a wonder.”
This passage highlights the extraordinary nature of the self.
The self is of the nature of peace
आर्द्रं ज्वलति
(Ardhram jvalathi) thaiththirIya upanishath
and
निर्वाणमय एवायमात्मा
(nirvANamaya EvAyam AthmA)
“This self is indeed of the nature of peace and freedom.”
The commentator cites these passages to show that the self is not associated with sorrow by nature.
The self is knowledge and bliss
The scriptures further declare:
ज्ञानानन्दमयः सदात्मा
(gyAnAnandhamaya: sadhAthmA) SrI bhAgavatham
“The true self is of the nature of knowledge and bliss.”
And:
ज्ञानानन्दैकलक्षणम्
(gyAnAnandhaika lakshaNam) vishvaksEna samhithA
“The defining characteristic of the self is knowledge and bliss.”
These passages explicitly establish the blissful nature of the self.
Refutation of wrong views
The commentator concludes this section by pointing out what has already been refuted.
Earlier, by teaching that the self is:
प्रकृतेः परः
(prakruthE: para:)
“beyond prakruthi”
the view that the body itself is the self was rejected.
Now, by teaching:
· अजडत्वम् (ajadathvam) — non-inertness,
· आनन्दरूपत्वम् (Anandha rUpathvam) — blissful nature,
the view that the self is merely an inert substance is also rejected.
Thus both forms of misunderstanding are removed.
Conclusion
The statement:
“ஸுகமாக உறங்கினேன்”
(“sukhamAga uRanginEn”)
“I slept happily”
is accepted as valid evidence for the blissful nature of the self.
The happiness recollected after waking cannot be attributed to external objects because none were experienced during deep sleep.
Therefore, that happiness must belong to the self itself.
Scripture, experience, and the words of bhAshyakArar all confirm that the self is of the nature of knowledge and bliss.
adiyen vAsudhEva rAmAnuja dhAsan
archived in https://granthams.koyil.org
pramEyam (goal) – https://koyil.org
pramANam (scriptures) – https://granthams.koyil.org
pramAthA (preceptors) – https://acharyas.koyil.org
SrIvaishNava education/kids portal – https://pillai.koyil.org