Śrīḥ
Śrīmathē śatakōpāya namaḥ
Śrīmathē rāmānujāya namaḥ
Śrīmath varavaramunayē namaḥ
Śrī vānāchala mahāmunayē namaḥ
Background
The term „Bhagavān“ is used on many instances on our page. But what exactly does it mean? Here is a piece of a historical debate, where one of our Āchāryas provides insight into the meaning of this name of God.
The present article has been published in Journal of Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, July 1910 [1]. A scanned version of the historical article can be downloaded here.
It is a reaction to a somewhat provocative article by Grierson [2] published earlier in the same journal. Gierson writes:
The full account of what the word „Bhagavan“ means to a Bhagavata will be found in the Viṣṇu Purāna (VI, v. 69 ff). Most of the text is printed in the notes to Wilson’s translation, and it is curious that attention has not been directed to this important passage. The essential part, quoted by all Bhagavatas, is
aiśvarasya samagrasya darmasya yaśasaḥ śriyah |
jñāna-vairāgyasyōś cai ‚va ṣaṇṇāṁ „bhaya“ iti‘ ṅganā ||
Translation (from another source): (Bhaga indicates) „the six properties, dominion, might, glory, splendor, wisdom, and dispassion. The purport of the letter va is that elemental spirit in which all beings exist“
This is based on an absurd comparison of bhaya with bhaga, but it is valuable as expressing what a Bhagavata though the name implied. In the 71st verse it is said that the word “Bhagavat” is used in worship “(pūjya padārthōkti-paribhāṣāsamanvitaḥ)” used in a special significance with reference to the Supreme”, i.e. as a name of the Supreme. (…)
For these reasons I do not think that any adjective signifying mere a condition, such as “Blissful” or “Happy” indicates correctly the idea felt by Bhagavatas in applying the word “Bhagavan” to the Supreme. I think we must use some adjective implying worship, or adoration, due to be paid to Him, and here as at the present advised, I think “Adorable” is the most suitable word. If, however, a better one is suggested, I shall be ready to adopt it. These remarks are put forth to invite criticism. The point is not unimportant and if would be well if all scholars could agree on some translation.
Āchārya Govindāchārya Swāmi responds:
The contribution on this topic by Dr. G. A. Girierson in [2] is a good attempt made to approach the sense of the term Bhagavān (or Bhagavat), and then to find the nearest English word for it.
The term Bhagavān is an ancient one, which may be found in the Upaniṣads, and traceable further back to the Vedic deity Bhaga. And according to a grammatical rule, „vat“ can take the place of „mat „, so that Bhagamām becomes Bhagavān.
The intention of the Viṣṇu Purāna, VI, v. 69 ff, is to explain the ancient Mantra, the Dvādaśakṣarī, containing both the terms Bhagavān and Vāsudēva, the latter being traceable to the Viṣṇu / Gāyatrī of the Nārāyaṇam in the Taittrirīya Upaniṣad. In this explanation, the Viṣṇu Purāna takes up Bhagavān first and then Vāsudēva. Bhagavān, according to the definition contained in the verse 79
Jñāna-śakti-blaiśvarya vīrya-tējāṁsy aśēṣataḥ |
Bhagavte-chabda-vācyāni vinā hēyair guṇādibhiḥ ||
is „He who is full of auspicious qualities and devoid of inauspicious ones„. That this conception of God is not a later one, enunciated by the Bhagavata school, but is the oldest Vaidic conception, may be learnt from what is called the Ubhaya-liṅgā-dhikaraṅa in the Brahma-Sūtras, extending over III, ii, 11, beginning Na sthānatō’pi to III, ii, 25. The word cannot therefore mean merely „blissful“, qualified subjectively, or merely „holy“, for either of these terms give but a part connotation of the word. „Blessed“ would be better, if it may be understood as an abbreviation for „blessed-qualified“.
The word „Adorable“ only draws out the root-sense, but completely ignores the contents of the definition as given in the Viṣṇu Purāna, verse 79 (above). Parenthetically, the words „used in worship“ on p. 161 ought to be „used for others than Bhagavān for mere courtesy „. I would therefore suggest the following terms with which to translate Bhagavān: „Blessed,“ „Excellent,“ „Best,“ „Perfect,“ „Glorious,“ and perhaps „Lord“. I would leave to my English friends to weigh the different connotations these several terms carry in their lexicon, and choose the best.
Referring to the term Vāsudēva, it is often confounded with the son of Vasudēva (Kṛṣṇa), but read the several connotations of it in the Sahasra-nāma-bhāṣya. Similarly, Kṛṣṇāya Dēvakī-putrāya, of Chāndōgya-Upaniṣad, III, xvii, 6, is by some confounded with Kṛṣṇa, the son Vāsudēva. Śrī Madhvācārya, in his commentary on this Upaniṣad, explains this clearly [3]. There is also a Kṛṣṇa again in the Nārāyaṇam of the Taittirīya-Upaniṣad. This is, again, not to be confounded with Kṛṣṇa, the son of Vasudēva.
A. Govindācārya Svāmi
Veda-Grham, Mysore (S. India)
February 7, 1910
References
[1] The Translation of the Term „Bhagavan“
A. Govindācārya Svāmi
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland
Jul., 1910, pp. 861-863, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25189741
[2] The Translation of the Term „Bhagavat“
George A. Grierson
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland
Jan., 1910, pp. 159-162, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25189643
[3] See a summary of the points with respect to whether Kṛṣṇa is mentioned in the Upaniṣad at Quora
Kōyil Deutschland 