The Concept of Happiness: Eternal Quest and Universal Obscurity

Amruta Belapurkar Sharma

Assistant Professor – Interdisciplinary Sciences, Symbiosis University of Applied Sciences,
Indore. Email id: toamrutasharma@gmail.com/amruta.sharma@suas.ac.in
Dr. Ashutosh Dubey
Professor and HOD – Department of English Literature, Mata JijaBai Govt. Girls P.G.
College. Email id: ashudubey63@gmail.com

Abstract: The concept formation of this research paper has been done to understand the abstract
nature of the phenomenon of happiness. This research paper analyzes and studies the definitions
of happiness by several famous philosophers from different space and time in the world.
Knowing these definitions – questioning and contemplating on them can help one to know the
nature of his or her own happiness and understand in concrete terms the meaning of his or her
happiness. The study aims to weave beads of different thoughts on common threads running
through them, in turn funneling all that belongs to the same line of thought. This also lets reader
to understand the very source of any kind of happiness, that is, always internal.

Keywords: Happiness, human, quest, philosophy.

Introduction: All the pursuits of this material world, all the means and ends, lead to but one end,
the end of achieving happiness in one’s life. The toil and turmoil, the haste and hurry, the wears
and worry all are pursued untiringly only to become happy. But while everyone is trying to work
day in and out in order to achieve that which one states to be his happiness – man knows little of
and about the nature of that happiness. One of the most abstract kind of questions that man can
ever be asked to answer is – What is Happiness for him? What does it mean for him to be happy?
What is his definition of happiness? Is it that the achievement of anything external suffice to his
senses the pleasure that would be eternal and that would lead to happiness? Or is it to be found
within him. What is his happiness about?

Only a handful of people ever pause to think about it. We all experience different kinds
and forms of happiness during our lifetime. Some are material, some immaterial; some conscious
and some subconscious; some felt instantaneously and some dwell in time. But even after
attaining utmost maturity when a man is asked to define what he means by happiness there is a
deep ponder moment leading to but the void. His own experiences and definitions, being so
volatile, leave him with no definite answer of that which he considers his happiness.

Going by the denotative science, the word Happiness has its roots in the English ‘Hap’
that means fortune or chance. But beyond this consensus on its etymology there is no one
agreement about the nature of happiness, neither in the common man nor amongst the
philosophers of the world. And as put in the book On Love & Happiness, “For centuries this has
been the subject of endless books, investigations, individual and collective experiments, one after
another; and, sad to relate, there has been complete failure to reach unanimity” (Chardin 51).
However, it is but established that whatsoever be this unestablished definition, there is a very
great importance of it in human life on the whole. Today we have nations setting up happiness
ministries to find out the levels of happiness of its public and also to ensure measures taken well
in time to encourage the growth of overall happiness. For example, Bhutan has introduced the
philosophy and concept of Gross National Happiness as a criteria for finding out the nation’s
progress.

So, in the light of the given and accepted importance of the topic, the paper studies,
analyzes, questions, and compares the various definitions of happiness given by philosophers all
over the world, which though very subjective to their time and age, are universal in nature and do
relate to human beings in general. And though Happiness is an outcome or result of experience
that is highly varied and dependent on litany of aspects that are even beyond the perception of an
individual still these definitions can serve as the guiding light for people on the endeavor of
happiness.

Manuscript: To embark on this journey of analyzing and comparing the different definitions of
happiness, we would start with the very own philosophy of happiness followed and accepted in
our country largely in the Hindu culture. The concept of happiness in Hinduism rests on self-
actualization: the state where the person lives in this material world but is actually detached from
it. His actions are well in consonance with the requirements of this world but his attention is on
finding that which his own basic nature is. And if a person is able to attain such a state then he is
assumed to be able to attain the happiness which is equivalent of perfect bliss. However, this
state of bliss is also understood to be dependent on the modes of attainment a person has adopted
to gain it – when it is through passion involving the rajas gunas or through his ignorance
encompassing his tamas gunas – the bliss cannot be perfect. A perfect bliss can be obtained only
when a person has attained it through his sattva gunas – that is through his knowledge, ability
and application of his own conscience.

Very close to this Hindu philosophy, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who was a French
philosopher stated happiness to be of three categories – one of the parasites surviving on others
without any dream of their own to pursue, the other one of those who find pleasure only in
sensory pursuits, and the third one of the people who become happy just as a result of the tasks
they undertake and accomplish. This is the happiness of the doers, who earn a well-deserved
reward in return of their untiring and unending labour. “And if we are to be happy, completely
happy we must…..in one way or another, directly or through some medium that gradually
reaches out further afield…..transfer the ultimate interest of our lives to the advancement and
success of the world we live in” (Chardin 77).

In addition to the above views, the mystics, poets, musicians and all creative, and artistic
people came with a twist in the vision and believed in a supreme cosmic energy flowing through
all of us and making us happy. For example, Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī, Saint Augustine, Saint
Thomas Aquinas, Benedict Spinoza and some more considered happiness to be one found in the
knowledge of and union with the divine. Spinoza put it, “Happiness is not the reward of virtue,
but is virtue itself; nor do we delight in happiness because we restrain our lusts; but, on the
contrary, because we delight in it, therefore are we able to restrain them” (Maltz).

Nonetheless, the opinions on being happy and state of happiness can be very fluctuating
owing to assumed parameters that are subconsciously planted into the society and every
individual over the journey of humankind. These factors and parameters are almost impossible to
be categorized and neither can we trace down to the actual roots of these notions. However,
happiness is the highest experience in terms of emotions felt by humans but if we see human
experience as a whole, happiness which we normally feel is merely a fragment of the whole and
it can be transcended by any human being, says every religion and philosophy on this planet.

The experience of the average humans is totally determined by the external factors, that
is, the nature and surroundings, they don’t make choices that determines their happiness rather
the circumstances decide it for them. Whereas the contemplating and aware humans have
volition, they do have the power to choose certain actions that will decide their state of mind and
reactions to that particular. But many a time humans certainly end up in situations that they never
chose, so in such a case, their reaction to the circumstances they are in decides further course of
their peace of mind, making it an utterly frustrating or an absolute learning experience.
Besides the domain of philosophy, another facet of happiness here on earth was put forth
by Dionysus. He sought pleasure in everything that was natural, as opposed to everything that
was made. He considered order and restrain as the opposite of happiness. He considered
happiness to be the free willed passion that sets humans on a journey of satiating every desire of
theirs howsoever insane that might seem like in the beginning. But human experience evidences
the futility of an enjoyment of this kind and many lives, including that of Samraat Asoka and
Gautam Buddha serve an example of the ultimate dismay a person faces after living a life of
unbridled rapture. The happiness that freedom from reins brings is experienced only when the
reins were initially put in place. Only the one who knows restriction would rejoice in freedom of
any sort. And living by the ways and methods suggested by philosophers like Epicurus,
Qoheleth, Stirner and Dionysus might actually lead humans to understand the hollowness of
those sensory pleasures that they derive, thus leading them to lead a life in a much different way.
As is quoted in Wisdom Revealed: The Message of Biblical Wisdom Literature--Then and Now,
“Qoheleth’s message is practical: pursue happiness as the goal of life. Find pleasure in the
moment; don’t be afraid to make mistakes; take fewer things seriously; travel lighter; accept pain
as part of your life; and don’t be afraid to die” (Kappelle 70).

In addition to the human experience, history has also proved that the actions that satisfy
the mind and the concepts related to it are of no sense to the actual reality because it is not the
materialistic entity that controls the human nervous system. It’s all about the lust humans create
for a particular thing and then when they get it somehow, the joy, the elation is so short lived and
within a few moments the mind finds a new point of focus that is of a higher parameter
altogether and this process then becomes a chain reaction. At every stage of it humans get a
glimpse of the emotion of happiness and no satisfaction. With happiness things work like a dose
of a tablets that relieve your headache for few hours and the effect disappears, the headache
returns again with more intensity. These temporary sensations also have the side-effects like the
tablets – the dose will keep on increasing but one will need to find a solution for the thing that he
assumed to be the solution, the medicine itself.
 Further, man makes a very big mistake, in quest of an emotion he runs away from the
other extremities to an extent that he even forgets the existence of any such states. In such a
situation the smallest bit of those things feels like a huge mountain. Man craves happiness
because man at any cost doesn’t want to experience sadness or pain, that's more of an escape
plan, he is not even ready to settle in middle of these extremes because chances of falling back
are very high.

In addition to this, if we try to perceive happiness as an experience there are many

versions of philosophies that totally contradict, some superimpose each other and remaining are
either subset or superset of another one. The quest for happiness continues to the point where it
becomes all about caring others, breaking free from the boundaries, accepting pains and
downside, losing the identity and ego, diving into something deep, becoming completely
passionate, involved and immersed in a life that you forget who you are, and goes continues until
the pinnacle of human evolution is achieved, some call it enlightenment or using your brain
beyond the normal capacity.
It's not only in the plain and simple emotion that happiness is seen on a positive note, but
we also have an inner conscience attached to it. Sometimes, things appear to be quite plain, void,
and dull with a sense of nothingness in it but if we actually view it as a sense of non-
inclusiveness then it starts making sense. Happiness that seems very happening, energetic and
active, has its very root in a sense of achievement as you gain something, you associate yourself
and eventually become “happy” with a sense of inclusiveness. However, a concept of ‘bliss’ that
can be defined as infinite times greater than happiness, is total immersion and weightless state of
pure witnessing. As Lao Tzu puts it, “If you are depressed you are living in the past. If you are
anxious you are living in the future. If you are at peace you are living in the present” (Nudelman
and Weller). Philosophers like Epictetus and Lao Tzu assert that happiness is that which lies in
the power unleashed through indifference. They treat the happiness derived from sensory
pleasures as just a distraction, a negation of unhappiness, pain and anxiety for a little while. But
the moment the senses are satiated the restlessness returns.
There was another philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche who also considered happiness as
power but his power is one that helps a person master his own instincts; the one that is gained
through the recognition of having full control. “For Nietzsche, the famous mustachioed nihilist,
happiness is a kind of control one has over their surroundings. The German philosopher wrote
frequently on the impacts that power (and a lack of power) can have on people's lived
experiences” (Nudelman and Weller).
In addition to this, the Buddhists consider happiness to be a state beyond senses, an ideal
beyond this world. It is found in complete surrender of the conscious. If we examine the different
writings on happiness the common theme that occurs throughout the various texts is about
surrender of passion and complete devotion that may be towards their work or the very existence
itself. The act of giving up can be regarded as very sacred but here also comes the greatest
dilemma the path of a house holder or a hermit i.e. one who takes part in the physical reality and
on other hand the hermit who abstains from everything: neither of them is happy in the absolute
sense, they both are in transit not on the final place. There are people who say that the physical
world is hell and spiritual world is heaven, therefore one who sticks to the physical world is
trapped but the very idea of happiness is perceivable for humans only as long as they have their
senses intact, in place, making one feel the way he does. So, the act of abstaining can also be
only realized only when it is felt through the senses, the knowledge thus gained can only be
transmitted through human senses and the such a knowledge can also be perceived only through
the senses. So, in a way the house holder stands above the hermit, because he doesn’t abstain
himself of anything, rather strives in the full realization of potentials that life offers to him.
This also indicates the lack of human understanding. But in today's world, the scenario is
even worse, we have a blend of the two, people who are trying to live on both the dimensions
which is impossible. The moment one starts creating patterns, rituals, do’s and don'ts, that’s the
boundary that he has created and after a short period of time he will barely recognize the truth for
himself. Moreover, on the hermit’s happiness and satisfaction Russell says that,
But the monk will not be happy until the routine of the monastery has made him
forget his own soul. The happiness which he attributes to religion he could have
obtained from becoming a crossing-sweeper, provided he were compelled to
remain one. External discipline is the only road to happiness for those
unfortunates whose self-absorption is too profound to be cured in any other way
(The Conquest of Happiness).
Not only Russell but Thomas Dekker, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Joseph Addison, Elbert
Hubbard, David Grayson, and Thomas Carlyle all agreed the fact that it is the ability to do some
productive work that makes and keeps a man happy beyond all the odds of life. Alfred Tennyson
in his twin poems differentiates between happiness gained by action and inaction, the latter
described as intoxicating.
However, besides the active and the passive pursuits, the Greek philosopher Socrates
considered happiness to be a virtue to be attained here on earth, which humans can achieve
through their efforts, and moral character. He considered happiness to be attainable in the
pursuits of soul and not the body. According to him happiness was to be found in a harmonious
mind of a quenched body, and a tranquil soul. He emphasized on attaining knowledge which he
regarded as the only tool to attain that harmony.
“Since all of us desire to be happy, and since we evidently become so on account of our
use—that is our good use—of other things, and since knowledge is what provides this goodness
of use and also good fortune, every man must, as seems plausible, prepare himself by every
means for this: to be as wise as possible. Right” (Socrates)?
Further his disciple Plato envisioned happiness as the peace in each individual’s mind
given the idealistic and just society he lives in. This view was also somewhat in line with one
that followed later, that of Karl Marx, who totally rejected the individualistic view of happiness
and considered it to be a state which can be achieved only in the socio-economic well-being on
the whole. If we look at the current scenario most of the land on this planet is human territory,
we dominate this planet but we can’t function in singularity. We are tied to everyone in this
society. This makes us a part of system that to an extent determines what we experience but we
do have our part in the process, this makes our life tied with invisible strings to the whole
mankind because people close to a person will determine most part of his happiness and this goes
on. Thus, happiness is very relative and interlinked to almost everything we may or may not see.
The side effect of the societal element of happiness however is that because happiness gives you
a status, a reason to be known and celebrated, sometimes humans start playing the make-believe
game leading to creating fake images to let everyone believe that he is in a state of happiness
which is but a trap. Moreover, the desires we actually have and what the modified and atoned
version becomes further leads to the lies that one tells to himself. Man aspires of most of things
not for himself but for adhering to his positive image according to the societal standards of
happiness. Thus, in actuality there comes a time when his own happiness actually remains a
dream and one realizes the mess he created in blind racing to achieve the endless because for him
the society’s opinion was the benchmark and final verdict.
 Another aspect to human happiness is also the fact, humans want to experience happiness
combined with peace, a happiness which is guilt free, which does not challenge their moral
premises, but it is self-evident that any and every kind of peace that has ever existed in the world
has existed parallel to some sort of sacrifice. So, now, one can either experience absolute peace
or absolute happiness, but not both of them in an absolute state together.

Conclusion: Based on the evaluation, analysis and critical judgment of the different definitions,
assertions and objections on the concept of happiness we can say that happiness an emotion
which is fleeting and volatile. It is purely subjective and both tangible and intangible. A concept
that is all about well-being, sense of pleasure and often considered as the fundamental goal of
one’s life. So as we delve into this topic the status of mind and one’s experience is pretty much
the deciding factor of the degree and intensity of happiness they experience. The factors that
govern it and also the extent to which a person will go for it shall be different in each case.
However, in the life of a normal person, his/her conception of happiness is deeply
conditioned with the teaching of his parents and the kind of childhood he has had. The happiness
of poor might rest in the delight offered through relish of good food and that of a rich person
might be found in buying a new car, a better make and version of it.
Howbeit, as Aristotle and Ayn Rand put it: Happiness is to be seen as the highest virtue
because all the virtues that humans imbibe in their lives is but to achieve this one end of being
happy themselves. Thus happiness is the ultimate motivation in a man’s life, the ultimate object
of achievement and thus the highest morality to be gained in itself. And this thus negates the very
view that pursuit of happiness is selfish.
However, if we make a moral issue out of happiness and conceive of it as
something to be earned as a sort of reward for being unselfish, we are very apt to
feel guilty about wanting happiness. Happiness comes from being and acting
unselfishly–as a natural accomplishment to being and acting, not as a “pay off” or
prize. If we are rewarded for being unselfish, the next logical step is to assume
that the more self-abnegating and miserable we make ourselves, the more happy
we will be. The premise leads to the absurd conclusion that the way to be happy is
to be unhappy (Maltz).
Happiness thus is not a concept that can be put in words but an experience which can
only be experienced. It is also for sure that happiness is not at all related to the external world,
because even for people who find their happiness in the materialistic pursuits are being guided
by something in their innermost self to consider that experience to be happiness, thus
internalizing the deciding source of it.
Moreover, like all experiences, the experiences of happiness that humans experience in
bits and pieces, also comes to an end and this is one common thread found in all the definitions.
One that has a beginning will have an end. The moment the search for happiness starts, the same
moment humans should realize that because the nature of happiness is so complex and
undefinable, therefore even though man experiences it, he never feels like having achieved it –
and this is wherein lies the secret of happiness. If it is achieved, then that’s the beginning, which
will definitely lead to some end. But because, no matter how successful, a man never can say for
sure that he has achieved that which is his happiness, there is no beginning to it and thus no end.
Only an eternal pursuit remains, which in turn directs all of mankind’s actions.
 References
Aristotle. "Rhetoric." classics.mit.edu. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. The Internet Classics
Archive, n.d. Web. 15 Jan. 2016.

Camus, Albert. Caligula & Three Other Plays. New York: Knopf, 1976. Print.

Chardin, Pierre Teilhard de. On Love & Happiness. Bibliolife, 2011.

Frank, Anne. The Diary of a Young Girl. New York: Pocket, 1990. Print.

Gotz, Ignacio L. Conceptions of Happiness. University Press of America, 2010.

Kappelle, Robert P. Vande. Wisdom Revealed: the Message of Biblical Wisdom
Literature, Then and Now. Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2014.
Krishnananda, Swami. "Introduction to the Upanishads." Swami-krishnananda.org. The
Divine Life Society, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2015.

Maltz, Maxwell, Psycho-Cybernetics Deluxe Edition: The Original Text of the Classic
Guide to a New Life. Prentice Hall Press, 1960.
Marx, Karl. "Theses On Feuerbach." Theses On Feuerbach by Karl Marx. Marx/Engels
Works Archive, 2002. Web. 25 Sep. 2017.

Mike Nudelman, Chris Weller, Business Insider. “9 Of History's Greatest Philosophers

Reveal the Secret to Happiness.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media,
12 Jan. 2017, www.independent.co.uk/life-style/philosophers-nietzsche-socrates-secret-
to-happiness-a7524371.html.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and H. L. Mencken. The Antichrist. New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1923. Gutenberg.org. The Project Gutenberg, 18 Sept. 2006. Web. 21 Sept. 2015.

“Socrates.” Pursuit of Happiness, Pursuit of Happiness, Inc., 2016, www.pursuit-of-

happiness.org/history-of-happiness/socrates/.

Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli, and Poola Tirupati Raju. The Concept of Man. A Study in
Comparative Philosophy. London: G. Allen and Unwin, 1960. Print.

Rand, Ayn, and Nathaniel Branden. The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism.
New York: New American Library, 1964. Print.
Russell, Bertrand. Conquest of Happiness. 1962.
Secretariat, GNHCB. "The Story of GNH." GNH Centre Bhutan. Secretariat GNHCB,
n.d. Web. 13 July 2015.

Sharma, Ram Nath. Great Philosophers of the World. Gurgaon: Spring, 2004. Print.

Thera, Piyadassi. "Setting in Motion the Wheel of Truth." Book of Protection - First
Discourse of the Buddha. Buddha Dharma Education Association & BuddhaNet, 2008.
Web. 16 Aug. 2015.

Watson, Lillian Eichler. Light from Many Lamps. Simon & Schuster, 1988.