shrImadAnandatIrthArya mukhanissR^itaM
kAmasya yatrAptAH kAmAstatra mAmamR^itaM kR^idhi |
iti yallaxaNaM mukteH shrutirAha balIyasI |
kAmahatiH kuto.anyatra prAptakAmasya sA bhavet || A.V 3.4.4
It was said that the adjectives “akAmahatatva” etc are not possible in a saMsArin. But some may doubt - There are higher souls like chaturmukha brahma and others who are still in the saMsAra but totally detached. Why can’t they be called “akAmahatas”? - thus.
To this we reply. In a sense, chaturmukha brahma and others are not inflicted by kAmas even in the state of saMsAra. But , in the strictest sense of the word, they are also not akAmahatas. Why? Because, the shruti “kAmasya yatrAptAH kAmAstatra mAmamR^itaM kR^idhi - liberate me there where all desires are fullfilled” specifies that mukti is a place where a person has AptakAmatva(all his desires fullfilled ). Hence according to shruti, “AptakAmatva” is the laxaNa(a defining mark) or unique definition of the liberated. That means it exits only in muktAs and not in any one else. Therefore how can “akAmahatatva” be present in those other than muktAs?
But some may argue. Let “AptakAmatva” be the laxaNa of a mukta (liberated). But how can this be an answer to why akAmahatatva is not possible in saMsArins? It could have been an answer if AptakAmatva and akAmahatatva are one and the same. Is AptakAmatva same as akAmahatatva?
To this we reply. An AptakAma (person whose desires are all fullfilled) is not affected by any desires. He becomes akAmahata. Therefore, AptakAmatva is the cause of akAmahatatva. Therefore AptakAmatva is not the same as akAmahatatva. They have a cause and effect relationship.
As AptakAmatva, being the laxaNa of muktAs, is impossible in samsArins, akAmahatattva, its effect is also not possible. How can an effect exist without its cause?
shrI madhvAchArya in his bR^ihadArabya bhAShya clarifies this point further
yaH kAmitaM na prApnoti sa kAmahata uchyate .
One whose desires are not fullfilled is called kAmahata
kAmyAprApteshcha pApAcca pApAt kAmahataH smR^itaH
ubhayasyApyabhAvena mukto.akAmahato mataH ..bR^ihad bhAShyam 6.3.34
A kAmahata is one whose
1. desires are not fulfilled
2. who is a sinner
As the liberated are neither of the above they are called as akAmahatAs.
akAmahatatvaM ca mukhyaM muktasyaiva .
akAmahatatva in the strictest sense is only possible in muktAs.
brahmaNo.api hyamuktasya nAkAmahatatA parA .
yatastasyApi kAmasya xaNavyavahatirbhavet .. bR^ihadArabya bhAShya 3.5
Even the unliberated brahma is not called akAmahata in the strictest sense. As even in his case, there is a little delay in realizing his desires(kAmyAprApti for a second) . What to say about other ordinary souls?
Hence, we should accept that the adjectives “akAmahatatva” etc are not possible in saMsArins.
