Parallel to the development of the concept of Brahman as Universal Essence was that of the Soul or Atman also as being the Universal essence. The Atman was in like manner shown as being both ubiquitous and immanent. This thought derived its inspiration from the Rig-Vedic concept of the Cosmic Person from whose eye emerged the Sun, the Moon from his mind, fire from his mouth, the wind from his breath, the sky from his head, the earth from his feet etc. Thus the Cosmic Person was seen as projecting into the forces of nature and the world.
A further extension of this thought in the Upanishads was to create a correspondence not only to the world in general but to the individual as well. Thus fire now entered the mouth of a person and became speech, wind entered the nose and became breath, the Sun became sight in the eyes, the moon became his mind and so on. While on the one hand creation was shown as emerging from the Universal Essence, on the other the created forces were shown as producing the faculties of man. Thus the microcosm and the macrocosm were connected.
From the Cosmic Person analogy also arose the thought that the Universal Essence was a Great Soul of which the individual soul was an aspect (Ansha). Thus in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad it is stated:
”Atman is the person in the earth and the person in the body… in fire and in speech; in wind and in breath; in the Sun and in the eye… in truth and truthfulness; in humanity and in the human; in the Self and in the self.”
The idea of the immanence of Brahman had a cosmic magnificence while that of the extension of the Universal Soul at the core of beings as individual souls, was even more extraordinary with profound spiritual implications. It was philosophically and ethically elevating and deeply significant for the future course of Indian thought and spirituality. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad clearly defines the emerging insight:
”That same thing, namely, this self, is the trace of this All; for by it one knows this All. Just as ( if it were)a footprint”
Again in the Svetashvatara Upanishad the same theme is reiterated:
” with the nature of this self, as with a lamp, a practitioner of Yoga beholds here the nature of Brahman”
The cosmic Brahman as an idea and the subtle Atman concept then began to be connected as we see in the Chandokya Upanishad : ”Who is our Atman? What is Brahman? Finally the two concepts merged and Brahman and Atman became synonymous. Thus the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad cleary states:
‘Verily, that great unborn soul, undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless is Brahman.’
And again in the Svetasvatara Upanishad it is affirmed:
‘The Soul which pervades all things…this is Brahman.’
This grand union of two complimentary concepts implied that the unitary cosmic realism of the first was now one with the innermost spiritual essence of the self and the not-self, the great spirit of a supersoul. Furthermore the linkage between the individual self and the Great Self was the ultimate step to an authentic Monism as in the resounding declaration of the Chandokya Upanishad”
‘Tat tvam asi’ – ‘That thou art’
I have always found the concepts of Atman and Brahman very beautiful. The way I see it is that it is the ego that wants to treat them as distinct. But I also think that my Atman and your Atman have their own uniqueness, I may have more fire for example, you more earth or water.
LikeLike
According to Hindu theory the Atma being the Universal Essence present in us has to be the same in all beings like electricity is the same energy force everywhere – the shroud of the gross body and the subtle body which cover it can be different, like so many ships but the divine sailor is the same – at least that is the Hindu view – the same sailor tries to enlighten each ship ( ego + gross body + subtle body ) but each ship reacts differently – after the period of the Upanishads Brahman and Atman are synonymous in Hinduism .
LikeLike
Thank you, that really explains it, I was a bit confused. I have to find out now about the gross and subtle bodies.
LikeLike
Monika if you look at the pages listed above on my home page you will find one on the subtle body the ego and much more with a page-post dedicated to each – that is how i began my journey into this blog
Indrajit
LikeLike
thanks for going through 3 of the posts on the soul – ego, embodiment, and subtle body – when you have the time Monika, to get a fuller understanding of Hindu thought on the subject it is imperative that you also glance at the next 3 posts – if interest still persists – they are quite short and precise – then i would like your comments – mind you the concept of the soul in western theology is entirely different as it is not divine though it is spiritual and can be tainted and be answerable on the day of judgement – but as you will see the Hindu concept absolves the soul which does not act when the ego acts from the consequences of action as the post on reincarnation of the soul will fully explain. after going through this evolution of thought then alone will you be able to fully appreciate the early developments of Upanishidic thought which freely speculated for half a millenium before in the Gita the conclusions were arrived at reagrding the nature of the soul – it is onlybecause you have philosophical insight and intersr from a different culture that i am presuming to propose further exploration and in the hope of useful and focussed feed back.
Indrajit
LikeLike
Dear Indrajit ji, Namaste!
It is the Paramatma(Supreme Soul) that pervades all the creation and can be compared like an electricity that illuminates all the souls. It is Ishwar’s energy that we see around us and inside us. Soul and Supreme soul are not the one. In fact, vedic (not just Rigveda, in fact all the 4 vedas), concept clearly states that Prakriti, Atma and Paramatma are eternal. Every soul carries its own amount of sanskaras from their past karma.
First manthra of 40th chapter of yajurved mentions about these three eternal bodies. Dwa Suparna Sayujaa Sakhaayau of Rigved also states about these three things. Soul lacks ananada and seeks to gain aananda from Parameshwar. Soul is sat and chit, where paramatma is sat-chit-aananda swarup.
Soul travels many cycles of birth improvising itself by conducting noble actions and removing ignorance and finally attains mukti from re-birth. Soul doesn’t join Ishwar but remains in a state of mukti. This is brahma gnaan.
LikeLike
RamNarayanji,
furthermore
your comment that souls acquire ‘Sanskaras based on their Karma – goes against what the Gita states categorically let me quote:
”He truly sees who sees that all actions are done by Prakriti alone and the Atma is actionless” CH.13.29
”That being so , he who in imperfect understanding looks upon the Self(Atma) as the agent (of action) – he does not see at all. CH 18.16
”Having no beginning and possessing no Gunas, the Supreme Self (Paramatma), imperishiable, though dwelling in the body, neither acts nor is tainted. CH 13.31
Sir therefore there is no question of the Atma acquiring Sanskaras or acting and acquiring Karmik consequences – it is the subtle body and the gross body with their ego that acquire them.
As stated above the Paramatma it is that resides in the body as the Atma and there is no difference thus between the two.
Hope that clarifies this issue.
Namste
LikeLike
Dear RamNarayanji,
The fundamental view of Advait, the Gita and the Upanishads is that the soul (Atma) is indeed an extension of Paramatma/Brahman, the supreme essence and is therefore referred to in the Gita as the Antaryami – the soul is not a separate entity apart from the parabrahman ( universal essence ). The following quotes make this amply clear:
”That same thing, namely, this self, is the trace of this All; for by it one knows this All. Just as ( if it were)a footprint” Brihadaranyaka Upanishad
Again in the Svetashvatara Upanishad the same theme is reiterated:
” with the nature of this self, as with a lamp, a practitioner of Yoga beholds here the nature of Brahman”
‘Verily, that great unborn soul, undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless is Brahman. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad
And again in the Svetasvatara Upanishad it is affirmed:
‘The Soul which pervades all things…this is Brahman.’
‘Tat tvam asi’ – ‘That thou art’ Chandokya Upanishad
I am the self..seated in the heart of all beings Gita Ch.10.20
An eternal portion of Myself having become the eternal soul in the living world, draws to itself Nature’s five senses. Gita Ch.15.7
The soul does incarnate but is not the agent of action nor does it acquire karmic effects, it is only the subtle body which does so and suffers the consequences – the souol is only There are many many quotes
a ‘prisoner’ till the subtle body, its prison gets cleansed and then the subtle body falls away like a shroud releasing the prisoner which then merges back into its source Brahman.
It is for this reason that Hinduism has been called Transcendental Monism in philosophy – the separate soul that you talk of is a Christian concept and is called Dualism.
Namaste
LikeLike
[…] The Upanishads : Brahman and Atman (indrajitrathore.wordpress.com) […]
LikeLike
[…] The Upanishads : Brahman and Atman (indrajitrathore.wordpress.com) […]
LikeLike
[…] The Upanishads : Brahman and Atman […]
LikeLike
[…] The Upanishads : Brahman and Atman […]
LikeLike
I am ready!
The Upanishads : Brahman and Atman | Search for The Soul – Indrajit Rathore
LikeLike
do you have a question Sir?
LikeLike
What is the relationship between Upanishads and Brahman..where they coincide?
LikeLike
Upanishads are the scriptures in which Brahman is mentioned.
LikeLike
Great post especially the inference to Upanishads. There is a dicourse that Brahma gave in Changodya Upanishad chapter 6 about atman or self.
http://www.simplyhindu.com/what-is-atman-self/
LikeLike