The mind, according to advaita Vedanta

The conception of the mind (also known as antaHkaraNam) varies in the
different systems of Indian philosophy, as stated below.
The nyAya-vaisheShika system considers the mind to be an eternal
substance, atomic in size. The prAbhAkara school of pUrva mImAmsA
holds the same view. The bhATTa school of pUrva mImAmsA maintains
that the mind is all-pervasive and is in eternal contact with the allpervasive Atman; that Atman and mind, in contact with each other,
function only within the sphere of the body with which they happen to be
associated; and the possibility of several cognitions arising at the same
time cannot be ruled out. The sAnkhyA and yoga systems consider the
mind to be of the size of the body.
According to advaita vedanta the mind is a subtle substance (dravya). It
is neither atomic nor infinite in size, but it is said to be of madhyama
pariNAma, medium size, which may be taken to mean that it pervades
the body of the particular jIva to which it belongs. The mind of each jIva
is different. It has a beginning, as is proved by such shruti statements
as, “It (Brahman) projected the mind” (br. up. 1.2.1). (VedAnta
paribhASha).
The mind, which is called ‘internal organ’ (antaHkaraNam), is produced
from the sattva part of all the five subtle elements together. It is known
by four different names according to the function. The four names aremanas, buddhi, chittam and ahamkAra. (Sometimes only two names,
manas and buddhi, are mentioned, as in Panchadashi.1.20, the other
two being included in them). The function of cogitation is known as the
manas or mind. When a determination is made, it is known as buddhi or
intellect. The function of storing experiences in memory is called chittam .
Egoism is ahamkAra. The word ‘mind’ is also used to denote the
antaHkaraNam as a whole when these distinctions are not intended.
Chandogya upanishad, 6. 5. 1 says: “The food that is eaten becomes
divided into three parts. The grossest part becomes excreta. The medium
constituent becomes flesh. The subtlest part becomes mind
(antaHkaraNam)”.
In his bhAshya on this mantra Shri Shankara says: “Getting transformed
into the mind-stuff, the subtlest part of the food nourishes the mind.
Since the mind is nourished by food, it is certainly made of matter. But it
is not considered to be eternal and partless as held by the vaisheShikas”. There is difference of opinion among advaitins on the question whether
the mind is an indriya, organ, or not. VAchaspati Mishra, the author of
bhAmatI, considers the mind to be an indriya. PrakAshAtma muni, the
author of vivaraNa, takes the view that the mind is not an indriya. The
author of VedAnta paribhAShA also takes the same view. This difference
is reflected in the different theories held by these two on the question of
how Self-knowledge arises from the mahAvAkyAs like ‘tat tvam asi’, as
explained below.
According to one theory, known as the prasankhyAna theory, attributed
to MaNDana Mishra, the knowledge which arises from the mahAvAkya is
relational and mediate, like any other knowledge arising from a sentence.
Such a knowledge cannot apprehend brahman which is non-relational
and immediate (aparoksha). Meditation (prasankhyAna) gives rise to
another knowledge which is non-relational and immediate. It is this
knowledge that destroys nescience. In this view the mind plays an
important role in the production of Self-knowledge.
The view of Sureshvara is the opposite of the above. Knowledge of
brahman arises directly from the mahAvAkyas. Whether the knowledge
given by a sentence is mediate or immediate depends on whether the
subject-matter of the sentence is mediate or immediate. Since Brahman
is immediate, the sentence which gives knowledge about it does produce
immediate knowledge. The difference between the two theories is that,
while, according to Sureshvara, the knowledge of the Self arises from the
mahAvAkya itself, according to BhAmati the knowledge of the Self arises
from the mahAvAkya only with the help of the mind.
Following the view of MaNDana, VAchaspati Mishra holds that the
mind is the instrument for the attainment of Self-knowledge. Following
the other view stated above, PrakAshAtman, the author of VivaraNa says
that the mahAvAkya itself is the instrument, though the knowledge no
doubt arises in the mind.
The mahAvAkya gives rise to Self-knowledge by making the mind
take the ‘form’ of brahman. This is known as akhaNDAkAra vRitti. The
question arises-- since brahman has no form, what is meant by saying
that the mind takes the form of brahman? This is explained by SvAmi
VidyAraNya in Jivanmuktiviveka, chapter 3 by taking an example. (In the
first place, the word ‘AkAra’ in these contexts should be taken as
meaning ‘nature’. Otherwise the terms ‘the form of pleasure, pain’, etc.,
will also be illogical). A pot made of clay is full of the all-pervading space
as soon as it is made. Filling it afterwards with water, rice or any other
substance is due to human effort. Though the water, etc, in the pot can
be removed, the space inside can never be removed. It continues to be there even if the mouth of the pot is hermetically sealed. In the same
manner, the mind, in the act of being born, comes into existence full of
the consciousness of the Self. It takes on, after its birth, due to the
influence of virtue and vice, the form of pots, cloths, colour, taste,
pleasure, pain, and other transformations, just like melted copper cast
into moulds. Of these, the transformations such as colour, taste and the
like, which are not-Self, can be removed from the mind, but the form of
the Self, which does not depend on any external cause, cannot be
removed at all. Thus, when all other ideas are removed from the mind,
the Self is realized without any impediment. It has been said-“One
should cause the mind which, by its very nature, is ever prone to assume
either of the two forms of the Self and the not-Self, to throw into the
background the perception of the not-Self, by taking on the form of the
Self alone”. And also—“The mind takes on the form of pleasure, pain and
the like, because of the influence of virtue and vice, whereas the form of
the mind, in its native aspect, is not conditioned by any extraneous
cause. To the mind devoid of all transformations is revealed the supreme
Bliss”. Thus, when the mind is emptied of all other thoughts Selfknowledge arises.
In mANdUkya kArika, III. 35 it is said:--
The mind loses itself in sleep, but does not lose itself when under
control. That very mind becomes the fearless brahman, possessed of the
light of consciousness all around.
In his bhAshya on mANDUkya kArika, III. 46 Sri Sankara says:--
When the mind becomes motionless, like a lamp in a windless place, it
does not appear in the form of any object imagined outside; when the
mind assumes such characteristics, then it becomes brahman; or in
other words, the mind then becomes identified with brahman.
In his bhAshya on gItA, 6.19, Shri Shankara says: A lamp does not
flicker when it is in a windless place. Such a lamp is compared to the
mind of a yogi whose mind is under control when he is engaged in
concentration on the Self.
From the above three quotations it is seen that the mind remains
dormant in deep sleep, but in concentration on the Self the mind
becomes identified with brahman.

The mind, being made of extremely subtle and transparent substance,
receives the reflection of the consciousness of the Self. Because of this, it
appears to be sentient, though it is really inert. All knowledge arises only
through an appropriate modification of the mind, corresponding to the
object of knowledge.
Panchadashi, 2.13 says that it is the mind that examines the merits and
defects of the objects perceived through the senses. The conclusion which the mind comes to will depend on the proportion of the three
guNas in it at the time.
Mind is the cause of bondage, as well as of liberation.

AmRitabindu upanishad, mantra 2, says that the mind is, verily, the
cause of bondage as well as of liberation; engrossed in objects of sense, it
leads to bondage; free from attachment to objects, the same mind leads
to liberation.
bRihadAraNyaka upanishad, 1.5.3 says: “Desire, resolution, doubt, faith,
lack of faith, steadiness, unsteadiness, modesty, knowledge, fear—all
these are only (forms of) the mind. The meaning of this statement is that
all these arise in the mind. The mind takes an appropriate vRitti when
any of these arises. These are known by the witness-consciousness as
soon as they arise, without the help of the external sense-organs. They
are therefore called ‘sAkShi pratyakSha’ or perceived by the witnessconsciousness directly.
The mind is the cause of happiness and unhappiness.
A person is happy when other living beings or inanimate objects are
favourable to him, and unhappy when they are unfavourable. A thing or
person is considered favourable when that thing or person responds in
the way desired. If a son obeys his father, the father is happy; if he does
not, the father is unhappy. A person is happy with his car or any other
object as long as it functions well; if it does not, he is unhappy and
wants to get rid of it. It is thus clear that happiness and unhappiness are
only states of the mind, but are wrongly thought to be caused by external
objects. Happiness is the result of the mind becoming calm. The mind
becomes calm temporarily when a particular desire is fulfilled, and then
happiness is experienced. But soon another desire crops up and agitates
the mind, causing unhappiness. Thus it is clear that lasting happiness
cannot be attained by the fulfillment of desires. The br. up, says
“etasyaiva Anandasya anyAni bhUtAni mAtrAm upajIvanti”—All
creatures enjoy only a particle of this bliss (the Bliss that is the very
nature of brahman). We wrongly think that happiness comes from
external objects. All the happiness that we enjoy is only a reflection of
brahmAnanda in the mind when the mind is calm.
Detachment is the key to lasting happiness.
True and lasting happiness can result only if the mind is permanently
kept calm. This can be achieved only if desires, which are the cause of
mental agitation, are completely eliminated. We are therefore led to the conclusion that total detachment towards all worldly pleasures (Vairagya)
is the only means for the attainment of true and lasting happiness,
which is brahmAnanda.
Vairagya is the most essential requisite for a person who wishes to
attain Self-knowledge, which alone will lead to eternal bliss. It is said in
vivekachUDAmaNi that one who attempts to attain Self-knowledge
without cultivating dispassion is like a person trying to cross a river on
the back of a crocodile, mistaking it for a floating log of wood. He is sure
to be eaten up by the crocodile midway.
The essential requisite for a spiritual aspirant is purity of mind. There
are six enemies of the spiritual aspirant and all these arise in the mind.
These are desire, anger, greed, infatuation, pride, and jealousy. Of these,
the first, desire, is the cause of all the other five. That is why so much
stress is laid on the rooting out of desire from the mind. The chandogya
upanishad explains how the mind can be made pure.
ch. up. 7.26.2 says: AhArashuddhau sattvashuddhiH—---
“From purity of food follows purity of the internal organ (mind). From the
purification of the internal organ unfailing memory results. When
memory is attained, all the knots of the heart are cut asunder”.
Shri Shankara explains this passage thus in his bhAshya: By food is
meant all that is enjoyed through the senses. What is meant is that all
enjoyments should be free of all defects such as attachment, repulsion or
delusion. When all enjoyments are pure, the internal organ becomes
pure. From the purification of the internal organ there arises continuous
memory of the Infinite Self. Then follows the destruction of all the bonds
born of nescience which had become hardened by the vAsanas
accumulated over innumerable lives. Therefore one should ensure that
everything that one enjoys is pure.