Vedanta

shrImadAnandatIrthArya mukhanissR^itaM

tasmAttasmAdakAmatvamiti cAshrutakalpanA .

akAmahata ityukte shrutahAnirapi sphuTA ..A.V 3.4.4

Some say - in the taittiriya shruti passage ‘saishA.andasya mImAmsA bhavati … te ye shataM mAnuShA AnandAH sa eko manuShyagandharvANAmAnandaH shrotriyasya cAkAmahatasya … te ye shataM prajApaterAnandAH sa eko brahmaNa AnandaH‘ 2.17-20 and the passage “shrotriyo.avR^ijino.akAmahata” the words akAmahata, avR^ijina etc do not refer to a liberated person. Instead it referes manushyagandharvAs and other superior souls who are still in saMsAra. One need not doubt how these words can point to a manuShyagandharva and others.

There is nothing wrong in called a manuShyagandharva etc., as shrotriya as anyone who studies shruti’s can be called as shrotriya. The usage - shrotriya~nchandodhIte - one who studies vedas is called a shrotriya - grants this kind of interpretation.

manuShyagandharvAs etc., can be called as avR^ijinas as they do not commit any sin due to being sarva~jna kalpa (almost all-knowing)

manuShyagandharvAs etc., can be called as akAmahatas as they have no desires because of detachment.

But in this manner if anyone can be called as shrotriya etc., then there was no need for the shruti to qualify anyone with these words in the first place. To this they reply. We are not saying that the shruti uses these words to qualify the person. Instead it is giving the reason why manuShyagandharvas are having 100 times more bliss than manuShyas. Similarly, devagandharvas have 100 times more bliss than manuShyagandharvas and so on, next person having greater shrotriyatva than the former. Putting it in the form of a logical statement -

manushyagandharvaadayaH manushyAdibhyo shataguna-anandavantah tebhyaH atishayena shrotriyAditvat

To this we say, it is not correct to say so. To get this meaning from the shruti passage, the words “tasmAt” and “atishayena” need to be inserted from outside. This amounts to an error called “ashrutakalpana”.

Also, interpreting akAmahata to mean akAma is also incorrect. This amounts to an error called shruta hAni as the word “hata” has been ignored in this process.

Therefore, due two these two fallacies, this interpretation is not valid.