Clothes (and Kosha) Don’t Make the Woman
- Tara Lemerise
- Aug 10
- 5 min read
How ‘bout them O’s?
Not too long ago I was in the grocery story and a kindly old gentleman started talking to me about baseball. While I've been to a fair share of Baltimore Orioles games in my youth and two Washington Nationals games this season, I can't name a single baseball player.
At first I was confused. Did this great grandfather-type mistake me for someone else? Because I certainly don't know Jackson Holliday or know anything batting averages.
And then I realized I was wearing an Orioles t-shirt.
I apologized for masquerading as a true fan, we had a good chuckle, and we both moved on down the aisle.
My shirt was a part of the way the outside world was perceiving and receiving who I am but it wasn't telling a very accurate story to my fellow grocery shopper.
What are the Kosha?
The kośa (कोश) - pronounced kosha - are exactly like this.
The most common description of the kośa (कोश) comes from the Taittiriya Upanishad, most likely from the 6th Century BCE. The text suggests that the our core True Self known as ātman (आत्मन्) is covered by not just one t-shirt but by five different layers called the pañca kośa (पञ्च कोश) - pronounced pancha kosha. Pañca kośa (पञ्च कोश) is commonly translated into English as five sheaths.
The Taittiriya Upanishad says:
“[annamaya kośa - अन्नमय्य कोश] Human beings consist of a material body built from the food they eat... [prāṇamaya kośa - प्राणमय कोश] Inside this is another body made of life energy. It fills the physical body and takes its shape... [manomaya kośa - मनोमय कोश] Within the vital force is yet another body, this one made of thought-energy. It fills the two denser bodies and has the same shape... [vijñānamaya kośa - विज्ञानमय कोश] Deeper still lies another body comprised of intellect. It permeates the three denser bodies and assumes the same form... [anandamaya kośa - आनंदमय कोश] Hidden inside is yet a subtler body, composed of pure joy. It pervades the other bodies and shares the same shape..."
This framework is often represented by a graphic like this:
Each layer makes up how you are perceived by and how you perceive of the outside world. All of these layers obscure your True Self. Most of the time, exactly like my Orioles shirt, the layers can only tell a small, often inaccurate, piece of the story of you.
A Different Framework of the Kosha
Most ideas evolve over time and the kośa (कोश) are no exception.
The Tantrik practitioners believed there was a different and more useful way to engage with concept of the kośa (कोश). They did not believe we needed to discard the kośa (कोश), like I did with my Orioles shirt at the end of that day, in order to know our True Self.
Instead, they reimagined the kośa (कोश) as a set of unique opportunities for genuine inquiry into and experiences of embodied Consciousness. The work then became about using each layer as a portal to enlightenment.
The revised graphic representation looks like this:
The Tantrik School's model of the kośa (कोश) names and arranges the layers differently as follows:
.
vastu (वास्तु) - literally ‘the house or dwelling’, meaning here the external environment and any items/stuff outside of the body
deha (देह) - physical body
citta (चित्त) - a single word that is best understood as a combination of heart, mind, and spirit; the mind as a whole that contains thoughts, emotions, and intentions; literally ‘the stuff of Consciousness’
prāṇa (प्राण) - life-force, also the same word for breath
śūnya (शून्य) - literally 'zero'; nothing, void, emptiness
cit (चित्) - Consciousness
This re-order represents the layers from subtle to coarse and from least to most necessary. In other words, life-force is more subtle and more essential than the mind.
What's the Difference?
As you can see when they are side-by-side, there are several differences in these two representations:
The earlier model separates the mind into two layers: thinking/feeling (manomaya kośa) and a discerning/perceiving layer (vijñānamaya kośa). The Tantrik model puts these together into citta (चित्त) as the 'heart-mind'.
Additionally, the śūnya (शून्य), or void layer, is completely absent from the first framework. One argument is that Vedānta practices simply do not incorporate or emphasize meditation as much as the Tantrik practices do and thus had no need to represent the profound stillness accessible through meditative practices.
Consciousness is Dynamic
The most crucial difference is that the first framework doesn’t offer a layer or a any representation specifically for Consciousness.
This is because Vedānta philosophy understands human consciousness and the True Self as static and unchanging.
The Tantra model here specifically positions cit (चित्) - Consciousness - as central and dynamic, able to extend inward and outward, as indicated by the arrows on the diagram.
The Tantrik practitioners conceded that some who follow the Vedānta (वेदान्त) model will touch the True Self as the Core of Reality, especially those who connect with the idea of One Universal Consciousness.
However, the Tantrik School feels so strongly about the dynamic quality of Consciousness that they centered Consciousness and advocated for using its power to work through the other layers. This is the key to accessing our True Self and thus, the key to enlightenment.
Huh? (I know, right?)
Lucky for us, in his commentary on the Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam, more commonly known as The Recognition Sutras, Rājānaka Kṣemarāja identifies the “goal” of liberation of each philosophical school or approach in terms of the Tantrik view of the kośa (कोश):
Materialists master no level beyond the physical body. They believe Consciousness is merely an accident, a kind of bonus to the more important phenomenon of existence of the physical body. In other words, our identity is only the body and nothing more.
Logicians master the mind, because identity is a collection of mental activities. (Some Buddhist practitioners work from this angle too.)
The haṭha-yogīs (who practiced as described in texts like the Hatha Yoga Pradipika) master the body, as do the Materialists, but they also aim to master and harness life-force. They are much less concerned with the inner workings of the mind, as the mind can be overcome through the actions of the body.
Many Buddhists practice in order to immerse themselves in the void. They understand freedom as being able to remain undisturbed in the vast expanses of peace.
Which team do you cheer for?
Some of yoga philosophy argues in favor of the familiar adage "no one is free unless we are all free" and may therefore have a vested interest in convincing people to practice in a certain way in order to attain enlightenment.
However, more of yoga philosophy takes the view that whatever works for you is what you should do. And accordingly, I don't think we need to be persuaded by one framework over another.
Kṣemarāja's explanation does help me to understand why someone might work in one way with yoga principles and someone might work another way depending on their values and their priorities.
I enjoy considering each of these frameworks as ways to understand my own and other people's relationships to themselves and to the world around them. I especially like exploring how these ideas can make their way onto a yoga mat or into a yoga classroom.
If you get excited about things like this too, join our community for a class sometime soon. You can find me teaching live-streaming yoga classes, book clubs, in-person at yoga studios in Maryland and DC, and leading longer weekend and week-long retreats.
If you are a yoga teacher and you want to learn more stuff like this, check out Sattarka School of Yoga's Level 2 Yoga Teacher Training.
Comments