Nirvana is not Perpetual Happiness

Nirvana is a key concept in Buddhism. It is important to clarify what it means.

Nirvana is not a blissful state if you understand “bliss” as “complete happiness” or perpetual pleasure. That would contradict the Three Marks of Existence, especially the Law of Impermanence. It is patently wrong to define Nirvana according to our ego needs.

Much confusion about what Nirvana means is due to the popular understanding of the term. One dictionary defines Nirvana as “a place of perfect peace and happiness, like heaven.” This is very misleading.

I posted my opinion that Nirvana does not mean complete or perpetual happiness in a Buddhist group over two years ago. Almost immediately, people responded and said that I was wrong. They justified their position by quoting the Third Noble Truth, which they understand to be the end of suffering and the beginning of the blissful state.

The problem lies in the careless use of words and the lack of rigor in understanding what the Buddha taught. This is why it is important to use the original Pali or Sanskrit words. Buddhist terms tend to lose their original meaning once they are translated into English. It is true that Nirvana is associated with bliss and happiness. But we need to make a distinction between two notions of happiness. One is “sukha.” The other one is “ananda.”