In plain words
Now, the second is the state of the jalākāśa. In the principle that issues from that seat of saṅkalpa, the principle mixed with saṅkalpa is called the jalākāśa. Here is a small example of this. When you ask someone, “My dear, when did you come?” he replies, ‘I came at night, Swami!’ But what came at night was his very body, not he himself. Out of the delusion that the body itself is he, ‘I came at night’: so in this reply we understand the plain fact that the body itself is he. The same man, after some time has passed, gets a stomach ache. Within a few minutes he may complain to Me, ‘Swami! My stomach is aching very badly.’ But here, the moment he says ‘my stomach’, he has become separate, and the stomach of the body has become separate. The reply about his coming, ‘I came at night’: one meaning there is that the body itself is he. Here, in what is said about the stomach ache, ‘my stomach ache’, he is separate and the stomach is separate: so the principle that has become separate from the body is understood in these two ways. Just these two. Thinking that the body itself is I is the ghaṭākāśa. The person who takes the body as separate and, himself standing as the witness, stays at the level that befits the saṅkalpa: that, there, is the jalākāśa. When we take these two into account, the ghaṭākāśa and the jalākāśa, the body and the saṅkalpa, we understand the principle of how these two are used. Next, the daharākāśa. The daharākāśa means this: when, in the enquiry ‘where does the principle called I come from?’, he enquires taking in his body, mind, senses, citta and Ahaṅkāra too, we understand that this saṅkalpa stands there as the witness, from the seat called the antaḥkaraṇa. This very thing they called the daharākāśa.