• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Koshas (sheaths)

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I've been exploring the five koshas, which appear in the Taittiriya Upanishad.
Is this Wiki article a reasonable summary?

Kosha - Wikipedia

The Wiki articles compares the sheaths to the layers of an onion, though according to the notes in my Wordsworth Classics translation of the Upanishads: "The five sheaths represent a hierarchical order.. Thus the fifth sheath (the innermost) encompasses all that there is, including the first."
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Basically understanding in successively greater measure till finally reaching complete understanding (Anandamaya Kosha).
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Basically understanding in successively greater measure till finally reaching complete understanding (Anandamaya Kosha).

Isn't progressive understanding a function of the vijnanamaya Kosha?
I don't see how it would apply to the others.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Yes, Vijnanamaya Kosha is just one step below complete understanding. Knowledge full, only it needs to be applied, IMO.
Like files copied, installation remains (installed Mint linux 19.3 today). :)
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I was reading that the goal is to not identify with the first 4 koshas, since regarding them as "me" or "mine" leads to suffering.
Does that sound right, and if so, does this relate to neti-neti?
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Basically understanding in successively greater measure till finally reaching complete understanding (Anandamaya Kosha).
I just want to point out that they are more than an understanding but actually composed of real subtle materials in dimensions and at vibratory rates we can not detect with our three-dimensional physical senses and instruments.

I say this lest people try to turn the Koshas into something just allegorical. They are all real objective things too just as the Annamaya kosha (physical body sheath) is objectively real.
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I just want to point out that they are more than an understanding but actually composed of real subtle materials in dimensions and at vibratory rates we can not detect with our three-dimensional physical senses and instruments.

I say this lest people try to turn the Koshas into something just allegorical. They are all real objective things too just as the Annamaya kosha (physical body sheath) is objectively real.

So is the idea to recognise and experience the five koshas? And then what?
I'm trying to understand the purpose of this classification, how it is to be used, practically speaking.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Being a Hindu, I agree with you. You are right in your view, I am right in my view. Are we both not Advaitists, though with some difference! :)
And then what?
As the Zen monk said, "Sweep the floor and fetch the water".
Even after understanding, there will be a life to live. But one would have peace of mind, equanimity, and not doubts and conflicts. :D
 
Last edited:

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
So is the idea to recognise and experience the five koshas? And then what?
I'm trying to understand the purpose of this classification, how it is to be used, practically speaking.
They are just describing the five koshas. They are not talking about 'experiencing' the five koshas individually. Practically, we just need to concern ourselves with our normal spiritual practices (sadhana) and our development will proceed from that.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Are we both not Advaitists, though with some difference! :)
We've talked before and if you do not consider Brahman as infinite consciousness (not created by material interactions) then you are not Advaita in my book but much closer to a materialist-atheist.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
So is the idea to recognise and experience the five koshas? And then what?
I'm trying to understand the purpose of this classification, how it is to be used, practically speaking.

Awareness goes where awareness flows, and although we live in all 5 simultaneously, it's more a matter of which one dominates. As we progess in our sadhana, we start having awareness exist within the deeper bodies more.

As with much Hindu philosophy, the perspective from which you are looking at it will change how it looks. In other words we can perceive the 5 bodies from each of the 5 bodies.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I was reading that the goal is to not identify with the first 4 koshas, since regarding them as "me" or "mine" leads to suffering.
Does that sound right, and if so, does this relate to neti-neti?

I don't think that "not identify" with them would be the correct way to describe the goal. I would say it's more along the lines of not being attached to them.

I'm not sure what you mean by "relate to neti-neti." Can you elaborate?
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Are we both not Advaitists, though with some difference!
We've talked before and if you do not consider Brahman as infinite consciousness (not created by material interactions) then you are not Advaita in my book but much closer to a materialist-atheist.

Can I be "not Advaita(ist)," too?

I'm starting to feel left out here, guys. ;)

And who has George's book? May I see it?:D
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Can I be "not Advaita(ist)," too?

I'm starting to feel left out here, guys. ;)

And who has George's book? May I see it?:D
Yogapedia explains Advaita Vedanta
Advaita Vedanta is a subschool of Vedanta, which itself is one of six orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy. Advaita is one of the two oldest of the schools of Vedanta, having been formed around the eighth century. What distinguishes Advaita from other forms of Vedanta is the belief that the Self or Soul (Atman) is identical to Brahman. Knowledge of this oneness of Atman and Brahman is full awareness. Advaita Vedanta also believes that this realization of Brahman is attainable while still living on Earth.

All sources will say the same essential things.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Yogapedia explains Advaita Vedanta
Advaita Vedanta is a subschool of Vedanta, which itself is one of six orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy. Advaita is one of the two oldest of the schools of Vedanta, having been formed around the eighth century. What distinguishes Advaita from other forms of Vedanta is the belief that the Self or Soul (Atman) is identical to Brahman. Knowledge of this oneness of Atman and Brahman is full awareness. Advaita Vedanta also believes that this realization of Brahman is attainable while still living on Earth.

All sources will say the same essential things.

You missed my point entirely. :(
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
We've talked before and if you do not consider Brahman as infinite consciousness (not created by material interactions) then you are not Advaita in my book but much closer to a materialist-atheist.
I may not be an Advaitist in your book but you are still an Advaitist in my book, despite the differences. :D
Can I be "not Advaita(ist)," too? I'm starting to feel left out here, guys. ;)
And who has George's book? May I see it?:D
By your admission - you are an Advaitist, of whatever sort. Dont feel left out. Anyone denying it does not make any difference. :D
As with much Hindu philosophy, the perspective from which you are looking at it will change how it looks. In other words we can perceive the 5 bodies from each of the 5 bodies.
In the lower Koshas one may have an inkling that there are higher koshas, but one will not understand them. As one climbs the steps, things become clearer. From the ground floor, one will not know what is on the fourth floor. One will know what is on the fourth floor only when one has been there. :)
 
Last edited:

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
I may not be an Advaitist in your book but you are still an Advaitist in my book, despite the differences. :D
It's hard to have a conversation when terms can mean whatever you want them to mean. Definitions facilitate a meaningful description of something.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
.. What distinguishes Advaita from other forms of Vedanta is the belief that the Self or Soul (Atman) is identical to Brahman. ..
Is Yogapedia saying something other than what I say? I would not use an ambiguous word like 'soul' for 'self'. Soul has many connotations, of God, of heaven, hell, rebirth, etc.; that is where the problems start. It is much more simpler than that. 'Aham Brasmasmi' (I am Brahman), 'Ayamatma Brahma' (This Self is Brahman), 'So Aham' (I am the same), 'Tat twam asi' (That is what you are), 'Dwiteeyo Nasti' (There is no second), 'Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma' (All things here are Brahman). It is so clearly mentioned in our books. Where is the doubt? One has to realize this.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Hey guys. I tried to convey this with a bit of obscure humor above, but clearly, the point was missed.

This thread is about koshas, not what @George-ananda's and @Aupmanyav's opinion on what views qualify as Advaita Vedanta. If you two want to continue to debate this, please take it to a debate forum, as debating is not permitted in DIRs.

And please, let's stay on topic.
 
Top