A few years ago, while reflecting on the International Day of Happiness, and World Happiness Report, I wrote about a distinction that has stayed with me—that we often chase happiness in the gross (Sthool), but experience true bliss in the subtle (Sookshm). Over time, my own understanding has evolved, and I have found myself returning to a more rooted expression—Anand. It is a word we use broadly to express Indian version of happiness, yet it carries a depth that the English word “happiness” does not quite hold.
And perhaps even beyond Anand lies a deeper philosophical ideal—Satchitanand—the union of Sat (truth), Chit (consciousness), and Anand (bliss). Anand is not just a fleeting emotion; it is a state of inner fulfilment, of harmony with oneself and with the world.
As I read the World Happiness Report 2026, I cannot help but feel that what we are measuring globally is, at best, a partial reflection of this deeper human quest.
India has moved from 118th to 116th in the rankings. A marginal shift. But I find myself less interested in the movement of numbers and more in what they leave out. Over the years—through teaching, research, and lived experiences—I have come to believe that happiness, as captured in surveys, often remains at the level of Sthool. What we truly seek, however, lies closer to Anand, and in its highest expression, Satchitanand.
The global patterns in the report are familiar. Finland continues to hold the top position, followed by Iceland and Denmark. These societies have built strong systems—trust in institutions, social security, and a certain predictability of life. Costa Rica’s rise to fourth place adds a different flavor, suggesting that community life and cultural rootedness can also nurture wellbeing.
Yet, beneath these reassuring patterns lies a quiet unease. In North America and Western Europe, young people are reporting lower levels of happiness than they did fifteen years ago. This is not a story of deprivation. It is unfolding in societies that have achieved material abundance.
The report’s focus on social media offers an important clue. It tells us that not all engagement is equal. Passive scrolling, endless comparison, and algorithm-driven consumption tend to reduce life satisfaction. More meaningful engagement—learning, creating, communicating—appears to support wellbeing. But what is perhaps most telling is the sense of entrapment many users feel. They remain present not out of joy, but out of habit, or even pressure.
In many ways, this reflects a deeper shift in how we relate to ourselves and others. Social media amplifies the Sthool—what is visible, comparable, and measurable. It constantly draws attention outward. But Anand cannot be found there. They emerge when attention turns inward, when consciousness (Chit) becomes aware of itself, and when life aligns with a deeper sense of truth (Sat).
India’s position in the rankings, however, continues to remain low. At 116th, the country appears to lag behind not just developed nations but even several of its regional peers. The report points to weaknesses in social support (123rd) and healthy life expectancy (95th)—areas that undeniably require policy attention. There is no virtue in denying these challenges. Health infrastructure, inequality, and access to social security remain pressing concerns.
But to accept the ranking uncritically would be to misunderstand the complexity of Indian society. As I voiced it earlier, the World Happiness Report relies on survey data drawn from a relatively small sample. While statistically valid within certain limits, such an approach struggles to capture the civilizational depth of a country like India. Happiness here is not merely an individual evaluation; it is a shared, relational experience, shaped by family structures, cultural practices, and spiritual traditions.
In India, a festival is not just an event—it is an emotional ecosystem. A family is not just a unit—it is a support system that absorbs shocks and redistributes care. Spiritual practices are not abstract beliefs; they are lived experiences that cultivate inner balance. These dimensions do not easily translate into survey responses. They belong to the realm of the Sookshm—subtle, experiential, and deeply personal.
This brings us to a broader methodological concern. The six indicators used in the World Happiness Report—GDP, life evaluation, social support, freedom, generosity, and corruption perception—are undoubtedly important. But they reflect a particular epistemology, one that privileges what can be quantified. In doing so, they risk overlooking forms of wellbeing that are culturally embedded and qualitatively experienced.
In 2017, during a conversation with one of the report’s contributors, I had raised this concern—that Asian societies, including India, operate within a different framework of values, where relationships, community, and spiritual orientation play a central role. The response was pragmatic: in the absence of standardized data, measurement must rely on available tools. It is a reasonable position, but it also reveals the limitations of the exercise.
The report acknowledges that real-world connection matters far more. A sense of belonging—within families, communities, and institutions—has a much stronger impact on wellbeing than digital interaction. This is where my own experiences begin to shape my reading of these findings.
I had the privilege of living in Bhutan for nearly a decade. It was a period that transformed not just my professional understanding, but my personal sense of what it means to live well. Bhutan’s idea of Gross National Happiness is often discussed in policy circles, but its real meaning unfolds in everyday life.
During my association with a UNFPA project comparing urban and rural quality-of-life, I encountered not just data, but stories—of people whose sense of wellbeing was deeply rooted in relationships and shared existence. Having taught hundreds of students there, I witnessed how community living, cultural identity, and togetherness were not abstract ideals, but lived realities.
There was a certain stillness in the way people related to life. Joy was not always expressed loudly, but it was present—in the rhythm of daily living, in the way people showed up for each other. In those moments, one could sense a glimpse of Anand—and occasionally, something even deeper, a quiet alignment that resonates with the idea of Satchitanand. A life where being (Sat), awareness (Chit), and contentment (Anand) are not fragmented, but integrated.
Later, in Delhi when we conducted research involving 2695 students from different parts of India, we witnessed emergence of similar patterns. When asked about what makes them happy, their responses did not begin with material success. They spoke of their families, their relationships, the joy of festivals and gatherings, and the comfort of belonging.
What they described, in their own language, was not just happiness—it was Anand. A sense of fulfilment arising from connection, from being seen and supported, from being part of something larger than oneself.
This is why I often find myself reflecting more deeply on India’s position in global happiness rankings. Perhaps the most valuable takeaway from the global discourse on happiness is not the ranking, but the reminder that wellbeing is multidimensional. It cannot be reduced to income, nor confined to individual perception. It emerges at the intersection of material conditions, social relationships, cultural meaning, and inner experience.
At the same time, I wonder whether the frameworks we use are sufficient to capture the full spectrum of human wellbeing in societies like ours.
India is a civilisation where life has long been understood in relational and experiential terms. Happiness is not always articulated as an individual state; it is woven into the fabric of everyday living. It exists in relationships, in shared rituals, in the quiet assurance that one is not alone.
The methodology of the World Happiness Report provides a useful lens, but it is still a lens shaped by what can be measured. It captures the Sthool—income, perception, evaluation. What it struggles to capture is the Sookshm—the inner experience, the cultural depth, the alignment of being and awareness that gives rise to Anand.
This is not to reject measurement, but to recognise its limits.
The long-standing reliance on GDP as a measure of progress has already shown us that material growth alone does not lead to fulfilment. Across the world, rising prosperity has often been accompanied by rising anxiety, isolation, and fragmentation of social life. The promise of a better life, when defined only in economic terms, feels incomplete.
India, as it continues to grow, stands at an important moment. The question is not whether we should pursue development—we must. But can we do so while preserving the deeper dimensions of life that nurture Anand? Can we create systems that support not just economic wellbeing, but also relational and inner wellbeing?
The insights from the 2026 report on social media are particularly relevant for our young population. As digital engagement increases, there is a risk of drifting further into the Sthool—into comparison, distraction, and fragmentation. But there is also an opportunity. If used mindfully, technology can support learning, creativity, and meaningful connection.
The difference lies in awareness—in Chit.
As I reflect on these ideas—the global rankings, my years in Bhutan, my engagement with students across India—I find myself returning to a simple but profound realization. What we seek is not merely happiness as a fleeting emotion. What we seek is Anand, and perhaps, at a deeper level, Satchitanand—a state where life is aligned with truth, awareness, and inner fulfilment.
The world today is increasingly driven by measurement. We rank, compare, and analyze. But in doing so, we must be careful not to lose sight of what cannot be measured.
Anand cannot be ranked. Satchitanand cannot be surveyed.
They can only be experienced—in moments of connection, in a sense of belonging, in the quiet alignment of who we are with how we live.
Perhaps, on this International Day of Happiness, that is what we need to remember.
Not where we stand in a global list, but how we live, how we relate, and how we nurture that deeper state of being within us.
Because in the end, it is not just happiness that we are seeking—it is Anand.
===
Also Read:
c. whither India – Happiness, Human Well-being, and GDP
e. money, happiness, and motivation and Money, income & happiness
f. human well-being and governments
g. on international day of happiness 2018
