Even so, if one were to say that because the vision of that (true nature) is absent one grieves, the text replies: No. “Only contact of the senses” — these are the objects; their touches and their connections are what are cold and hot, pleasant and painful. In the body, through connection with cold and heat and so on, the Atman experiences cold and heat; from that arise pleasure and pain. For the Atman there is no suffering of itself. How could there be? Because it is not subject to birth and decay. Even if the Atman itself were asleep or unconscious, it would still be the Atman. Therefore those sense-contacts exist only when the senses are awake; they are not something else — this is the distinction of concomitance and nonconcomitance, not arising from the self. Nor is there any other relation of the self to objects merely because of those contacts. Nor, even when one speaks of the nonperishing due to non-arrival of the scriptures, is there permanence in the flow-like sense — since there is no sleep-like dissolution and so on, the text says: impermanent. Thus it is the body and its changing (modes) that are the cause of sorrow. Therefore for the one freed from that (i.e., liberated), kinship, death etc. no longer bring sorrow. Hence abandon pride and patiently endure those cold and heat and the like.