The cover, kośaḥ, made of happiness, ānandaḥ. This kośaḥ, the subtlest of the pañca-kośas, pervades the other four. It is born of beginningless avidyā in the form of the kāraṇa-śarīram, the causal body of impure sattvam (mixed with tamas). This ānandamaya, which is a product of puṇya-karma, is a vṛttiḥ that has an upādhiḥ, the mind. Ānandaḥ, absolute happiness, reflects in the mind and hence pervades the ānandamaya vṛttiḥ. This means, as its name suggests, ānandamaya vṛttiḥ, being conditional and temporary, is not absolute happiness.The varying degrees of reflected
ānandaḥ pervading the
ānandamaya are known as
priya, modaḥ, pramodaḥ (which are in causal form in the
ānandamaya and experienceable in the waking and dream states). Hence, there is the possibility of the basic person, the enjoyer,
bhoktā (the
ahaṅkāraḥ mistakenly identified with the
ānandamaya) enjoying degrees of ignorance and happiness, which are at their fullest in
suṣupti-avasthā, deep sleep, and are restricted in
svapna-avasthā, dream, and in
jāgrad-avasthā, waking.
No experiential happiness arises from objects or circumstances. All experienced happiness (which is conditional and temporary) arises when the mind is somewhat resolved, somewhat free from agitation. When agitation subsides, the nature of the self, which is happiness, naturally becomes evident to the degree that it is unhindered by any remaining mental activity: the thinner the clouds, the brighter the sun. All happiness is the innate happiness of the self.
Mind (antaḥ, inner; karaṇam, instrument); consists of vṛttis, thoughts, of which there are four categories: manaḥ, buddhiḥ, cittam, ahaṅkāraḥ. The antaḥ-karaṇam is the means, the inner instrument, by which the ahaṅkāraḥ encounters and transacts with the world, the jagat. The mind is a product of previous action, karma "The mind exists, but for a moment... Use it whenever you need it. It is not a problem."*The mind is the only place where knowledge takes place and hence is the only place where liberation can take place. Manasa-eva-anudraṣṭavyam "[Brahman] is to be known through [by means of] the mind alone." Br. Up. 4.4.19. The mind is also the only place where ignorance is found and removed. There is no self-knowledge 'beyond' the mind.
The mind depends for its existence on the world, and vice-versa. The mind becomes a non-perceiver when (as in deep sleep) objects are no longer perceived. Then, in effect, the mind ceases to be the mind. If no object is perceived, there is no thought; no thought, no mind; no object, no world. The mind and the world are mutually dependent. Both depend on consciousness. The mind and the world arise (and resolve) together.
Immediate knowledge; an understanding derived from one's own personal observation of the world. Anubhavaḥ (anubhūtiḥ) is often translated as 'experience', whereas the better word is vision (seeing, understanding). Knowledge and experience are different levels; knowledge is grasping the essence of things, while experience is direct participation in perceiving things.
"Experience can lead to knowledge, but the impression of experience need not be knowledge. Experience has to be assimilated in terms of knowledge. Experience need not include or be knowledge. Experiences can be contradictory. Knowledge includes experience. Knowledge can contradict experience. Knowledge can also resolve the contradictions in experience. Knowledge cannot be contradicted."
* Some falsely believe that an
ātma-anubhavaḥ, an experience of the self at some point in time is necessary for
mokṣaḥ. However, this would make a limited object out of the limitless reality that is
ātmā, which is impossible:
draṣṭā hi dṛśyātmatayā na dṛṣṭaḥ - the seer is never to be seen in the form of the seen
(Vivekacūḍāmaṇi v183). Moreover, the self, the awareness that is the content of all experience, becoming an object of experience implies another hypothetical subject besides the self.
Truth or reality being ever-present, its hoped-for experience can never come – it is already in and through each and every experience as its very reality. Since truth or reality is ever-present, the knowledge that removes the misconceptions covering it is sufficient. Knowledge is the only correction needed because only knowledge, not practices or experiences, removes ignorance. See
svānubhavaḥ.
Grace, anugrahaḥ, is the presence of sat, pure being, which is īśvaraḥ. It is most readily recognised in pleasant, beneficial circumstances and in the earned capacity to form and enjoy them – all of which is puṇyam. That capacity is due to vivekaḥ, the recognition and purposeful distinguishing of true from false, valid from invalid. Hence, grace brings the capacity for and arising of vivekaḥ. That capacity is earned, not bestowed arbitrarily. It is extremely important to earn the grace of
īśvaraḥ. Earning the Lord's grace – earning (and later experiencing)
puṇyam – through prayer, worship,
mantra-japaḥ, living a life of
dharmaḥ, etc., can eliminate
pāpa-karma by neutralising it. Unless
pāpa-karmas are neutralised by
puṇya-karmas they will obscure appreciation and understanding of the knowledge given by the teacher and scriptures.
When
pratibandhas (inhibiting circumstances and misunderstandings resulting from
pāpa-karmas) are neutralised,
śravaṇam becomes unobstructed and hence understanding becomes unobstructed. Only when
pāpams and their restrictive, blocking effect are rendered ineffective (by being neutralised) can vague understanding become clear and the knowledge from
śravaṇam shine.
The grace of the teacher,
ācāryaḥ, which is the grace of the knowledge of the
śāstram, is transmitted not in touching the student's head or back, or in a glance of the teacher's eye, but in regular, systematic teaching of the
śāstram. It is the grace of the knowledge enshrined in the
śāstram that alone liberates, not the grace of the teacher, nor that of the self within. See
kṛpā (a synonym of
anugrahaḥ) also see
guru-kṛpā, ātmā-kṛpā and
śāstra-kṛpā.
Mutual (reciprocal) erroneous conclusion; error involving mutual superimposition of limiting attributes, upādhis. (Also known as itaretarādhyāsaḥ.)For example, a cold, heavy, solid, iron ball, when put in a fire, apparently becomes radiantly hot, whereas it is fire alone that is hot and radiant. Heat and brilliance – properties belonging to fire – are mistakenly seen to belong to (are mistakenly identified with) the iron ball. Seeing the ball as hot (when it is not) is
tādātmyam, a misidentification, an inseparability of natures, a taking something to be what it is not. This is preceded, in turn, by
adhyāsaḥ, erroneous perception and then by
adhyāropaḥ, superimposition.
When removed from the fire, the iron ball’s natural attributes seem slowly to reappear. But they were never lost or absent, only overlaid in our perception with those of the fire. Error-caused superimposition, adhyāropaḥ, made heat and radiance seem to belong to (become identified with) the iron ball rather than solely with fire, resulting in tādātmyam.
Adhyāsaḥ can create confusion both ways: as well as a cold, iron ball being mistaken here for what it is not – hot and radiant – fire too is mistaken here for what it is not: it appears solid, weighty and spherical. Such mutual misconception is called
anyonyādhyāsaḥ, the most obvious example of which is between the complex of body-mind-senses,
kārya-karaṇa-saṅghātaḥ, and
ātmā, where the qualities of each are mutually superimposed so that the body, mind and senses seem alive and
ātmā seems to have a form; there is
sāmānādhikaraṇyam, a common locus.
"A human being has the privilege of getting confused. Without getting confused he will not seek
moksaḥ. Recognition of the confusion is the starting point for the pursuit of
moksaḥ."
*Since the red-hot iron ball, when present, is present as (and is regarded as) a coherent, convincingly existent, independent reality, it is impossible to say from its present perspective when it came into being. Therefore, from its own perspective, it appears not only beginningless but has ever been as it is now, and must ever remain so. This means its beginning is ever shrouded in ignorance.
Similarly, the
jīvaḥ is never created – nowhere does the
śāstram say otherwise. "The
jīvaḥ is the changeless
ātmā of every being,"
* whose very changelessness is
ātmā.
Viewed from within the creation, the origination of the
jīvaḥ is shrouded in ignorance, an ignorance in which the
jīvaḥ seems to be a coherent, convincingly existent, independent reality that does not know or even conceive of itself to be otherwise. To imagine that the
jīvaḥ was created at some moment in time (like that fiery ball) is a mistake. Time is a factor within a creation; the beginningless
jīvaḥ did not originate within the creation. The creation is a product of the
jīva's
karma alone. Were you, the central figure in each of your dreams in bed at night, created when each dream began? No, all dreams occur fully formed – and all arise from the waker's mind, outside of the dream. And the central figure in the dream is recognisably you, the waker, even though you are essentially unrelated to the dream.