Karan Malhotra

12/7/16
The Role of Atman in Śramanic Indian Traditions

Śramanic Indian traditions that initially arose pre-6th century BCE developed monastic and

mystic traditions running parallel to Vedic Brahmanism leading up to and following the

establishment of the Hindu pantheon in the 3rd century BCE; the concept of atman and its role

through one’s life and death has evolved alongside all of these Indian traditions, shaped by

various interpretations of the self and its nature. Modern translators of early Indian texts known

as the Upanishads which have influenced and shaped these traditions translate the Sanskrit term

atman as "self", rather than the historical translation of "soul"; this is done in order to mark a

clear distinction between the Western and Indian concepts of one's soul (Pechilis 8545). Indian

concepts of the "self" or atman maintain focus on one's persona, the temporal and autonomous

natures of atman, whether or not atman is universal or not, and whether or not atman exists.

There is a distinction between "ego" and "self" within some Indian traditions, a stark opposition

of conventional Western notions of the self. A constant across these Indian traditions is the belief

that one's ego is a hindrance to deeper realizations and higher knowledge, and that it must be

trumped in order to progress.

The earliest oral and written scriptures of the Indian tradition, the Vedas have led to the

birth of Vedic Brahmanism, which developed further into Hinduism and parallel Śramanic

beliefs. The Vedas, dating back as far as 1500 BCE and stretching forward into the Upanishads

well into the sixteenth century, are said to be the vibrations of the earth heard and translated by

ancient sages known as rishis; these noises hold sacred meaning, knowledge, and spiritual power

that is documented in the Indian holy language of Sanskrit. Hinduism holds all Vedic texts as

canonical, while parallel traditions have held some or none of the texts as canonical; regardless,

1
the ubiquitous influence of these texts across all of these traditions is absolutely undeniable. The

Vedas prior to the Upanishads maintain a ritualistic tone and viewpoint throughout their canon,

viewing death through ritualistic or natural means as a transformation between states, whilst the

Upanishads are purported to hold sacred knowledge that lead to deeper realizations of the

universe, reality, and existence. Upanishad translates to "hidden connection"; this name refers to

"unseen vital forces operative in the universe, their connection to things that can be seen,

including humankind, and humankind's ability to know them through a mystical as opposed to a

rational knowledge" (Pechilis 8546). The Upanishads dictate that through understanding of

atman, one can transcend the barriers of conventional consciousness and experience an ultimate,

unified reality. This ultimate reality and pure basis of all existence is referred to within the Vedic

tradition as brahman. Brahman is seen as an omnipresent force and being that resides and exists

as the entirety of all reality and the universe itself. Brahman is a universalized, homogenous

singularity that suffers from individualization which creates facets of reality. Atman is seen as

the "hidden connection" between humanity and brahman, as the facet of reality that is

incorporated by humanity and its existence. Atman, across all humans, holds together one's

persona and individual existence; because of this, atman and "self" seem like individualized

phenomena when they are in fact identical agents of human persona that hold together the

distinctions between humans and between a human and other facets of reality. Atman holds a

much more bodily connotation within the Vedic traditions, as opposed to the mind-based

connotation of brahman, relating to Western notions of mind-body duality. Atman and the

persona of a human are subject to environmental influence and the subsequent force of karma

that pervades all bodily experience. This influence is terminated once atman is merged into

brahman; "At death, "a person consisting of mind only" (that is, one who knows brahman)

2
merges with brahman, never to return; in contrast, those who perform actions, such as sacrifices,

pass into elements such as sky and wind before taking birth on earth again" (Pechilis 8546).

Once atman dissolves into brahman, the bodily experience and individual consciousness as well

as any notion of personality are also dissolved into the ultimate, pure, and homogenous

consciousness of brahman. Following the rise and fall of Vedic Brahmanism in the region, the

Indian sub-continent began to blossom philosophically, developing more complex notions of

both atman and karma from the fifth to the second century BCE; this time period allowed for the

cultivation of important schools of thought throughout Indian history, namely Hinduism and

Buddhism (Powers 449). Buddhism focuses on individual liberation independent of deities;

salvation is a wholly personal and singular experience within this Śramanic tradition. Hinduism

further expanded on Vedic insights through a portion of the epic text known as the

Mahabharata; this portion is known as the Bhagavad-Gita, and the revelations within it are

perceived with great variety by scholars and practitioners alike.

The Hindu tradition holds non-dualistic, dualistic, and theistic notions of atman and

brahman across its various schools of thought that differ significantly in interpretation. Many

Vedic hymns and verses refer to the advocacy of ritualistic practices as well as those that are

against such ritualistic practices, such as the ascetics of existing Śramanic traditions; these

traditions hold an "anti-vedic trend in their philosophical and religious ideals and goals" while

promoting asceticism as the necessary means of accessing ultimate reality (Shekhar 25).

Hinduism is seen by prominent scholars of the Indian tradition as a unification of these two

different philosophies. The Bhagavad-Gita, roughly translated as “Song of the Lord”, serves as

an important tale in the Hindu canon as well as a set of guidelines by which practitioners may

learn of atman and how to live according to the concept of dharma, or sacred duty. The Gita

3
revolves around the manifestation of brahman in the form of Krishna attempting to convince the

archer prince Arjuna to follow his sacred duty and take on his loved ones in war. Arjuna feels too

connected to his family and friends to commit an action he considers to be an absolute atrocity;

the Śramanic themes of detachment and individual liberation are incredibly prominent in this

text, however, as they serve to lead Arjuna towards blissful realization and an unwavering sense

of duty. Krishna teaches Arjuna about detachment from the fruit of action; it is not important in

the Gita’s perspective to worry about the result of an action, as only performance of that action

for the sake of completing one’s innate and sacred duty is what characterizes dharma. The more

ritual-based lifestyle and worship that is prominent within the early Vedas blends beautifully

with themes of ascetism and renunciation found in Śramanic traditions throughout the

development of Hinduism, as showcased in the Gita. Vishnu explains that he has designed the

nature of reality to follow specific laws and for humanity specifically to carry out “socioreligious

duties”; the force of karma that Vishnu employs to move the atman of each person through the

cycle of life and death known as samsara, judging him through his virtue and faith in both belief

and action, exists to lead the practitioner to moksha. Moksha is the Hindu term for one’s final

release from maya, the illusion of reality as atman perceives it from the standpoint of an

individual human (Powers 450). The incorporation of both ritualistic and ascetic, mystic

concepts is clear through Vishnu’s affirmation that reality as a whole is ultimately a homogenous

entity and that the illusory world of humanity is one of his own doing; in contrast to the

universality of this idea, moksha is described as an individual release or freedom from this

illusory world in order to reunite with the all-encompassing brahman at the highest level. The

practice of individualized release itself in the Gita can be achieved through one’s performance of

his socioreligious role as per his assigned dharma. This process is known as karma-yoga, a

4
salvific conduit to enlightenment and higher truth that involves living one’s life dichotomously;

the practitioner must achieve a personal, immaterial state of realization and detachment from

action while maintaining the social and spiritual fabric of his society, much like a cog in a

machine.

Scholars through time have offered their interpretations of atman and the role of the

individual in the relationship between atman and brahman and how this is displayed in

philosophy as well as in a practitioner’s life and subsequent death. The possibility of “living

liberation” is one that is also strongly in dispute by those studying any tradition involving atman

and enlightenment(Pechilis 8546). The Advaita Vedanta Nondualist School of Shankara follows

the theme of the Bhagavad-Gita in maintenance of the illusory nature of human reality. Heavily

influenced by and influential to Śramanic thought, Advaita Vedanta proposes that brahman and

atman are the only reality, one that is blind to humanity due to the ignorance and sensory,

unquestioning nature of human beings in relation to their perceivable reality. Due to this

unawareness of reality’s true nature, realization of this and liberation can only be achieved

through the pursuit and accumulation of knowledge according to the Shankara school of

Hinduism (Pechilis 8546). It is seen quite clearly then, that Shankara scholars posit the path to

liberation as possession of knowledge and mindfulness rather than ritual and devoted action; this

relationship between realization, liberation, and salvation is characteristic of the Śramanic

tradition and the mutual influence between these two realms is unequivocal. The ascetic and

monastic facets of Shankara, as well as its influence from and towards Śramanic traditions, are

seen through the lifestyles of prominent practitioners. Ānandamayī Mā, a famous female guru of

the 19th century CE, was known to refer to her physical body simply as “this body”, would not

even bother to eat or feed herself; this was instead done by devotees of the ascetic Hindu guru.

5
Alternative schools of Hinduism that remain popular in the modern day are much more ritualistic

and in the same tone of the Vedas in terms of how to practice, in contrast to the Shankara school

that shares aforementioned similarities with mystic, ascetic Śramanic thought. These latter

schools also hold a larger emphasis on theistic ideas that are scarcely, if ever, discussed in

Shankara and Śramanic views. Ramanuja, the central figure in the rise of the Visistadvaita or

Modified Nondualist School of Vedanta, viewed atman as a substance that is “literally bound to

the body and its psychological modalities; this is not illusory as in the Advaita system” (Pechilis

8546). Although atman is beyond human and transcends the flaws of humanity, it is still

entangled within the body, and can only be freed through the karma-yoga displayed in the

Bhagavad-Gita. Ramanuja’s view of liberation focuses more on the concepts of dharma and

karma-yoga put forth by the Bhagavad-Gita than Shankara does; Ramanuja saw devotional and

moral action towards God as the force that accumulates or depreciates karma and knowledge.

Once the threshold is met, the atman is said to achieve liberation that is realized upon one’s

death. Escape from samsara within this view does not result in complete unification with

brahman; instead, the self’s connection with God is cemented and brought to its highest limits

while still remaining a separate entity from God as Vishnu within his heaven of Vaikuntha

(Pechilis 8547). Madhva, a philosopher and influential thinker in the realm of Hindu philosophy

during the 13th century CE, built off of the modified non-dualism of Ramanuja’s perspective and

furthered the divide between atman and brahman put forth by him. Madhva’s Dvaita Vedanta

Dualist School sees Vishnu as the sole creator of all existence, a separate entity from reality that

is reflected upon its every facet. In this interpretation, humanity and atman exist as a reflection of

Vishnu and brahman; atman derives from Vishnu and has been deluded into the idea of

individualization by identifying itself with ego which is metaphysically produced by Vishnu

6
(Pechilis 8547). The misplaced association of atman as being interchangeable with ego is the

very force that conceives karma within both the individual and all of humanity. Dvaita Vedanta

controversially pushes forth the belief that Vishnu only means to liberate atman within certain

individuals, a theory that uniquely applies Hinduism’s view of predestination to everyday action.

Liberation is seen as a journey within this school of thought, one that involves multiple stages.

These stages include “detachment from the body, devotion to God, study and critical reflection

on the scriptures, and meditation on the attributes of God as presented in the scriptures; all of

these represent indirect knowledge of God” (Pechilis 8547). “Living liberation”, or

enlightenment while in the illusory realm, is achieved through a direct vision of Vishnu through

his whim and will, much like Arjuna’s view of Vishnu through Krishna and in contrast with the

earlier, more indirect stages and forms of ascending towards liberation. The final stage of this

theistic philosophy is, interestingly enough, the freedom of atman from the body at death and

eventual fusion with brahman as Vishnu as the homogenous, ultimate reality and consciousness.

The Gita’s established karma-yoga and canon had caused deep philosophical questions to

be raised by many scholars, practitioners, and skeptics alike between the fourth and fifth century

BCE; the processes of karma, moksha, samsara, and maya are all byproducts of brahman, but

brahman is the very essence of all existence, so what is the justification for putting one’s self

through such trial and suffering in comparison to bliss? This concept becomes more notable

when one takes into account that because brahman composes everything, it therefore holds

knowledge over everything and must be omniscient. Śramanic traditions incorporated the

superfluity of these notions into traditions that have managed to permeate the modern era, such

as Buddhism; this is done through the lack of a cosmogony within the Buddhist tradition, no

established deity or controlling being, and new interpretations on the nature of an ultimate reality

7
(Powers 450). The Buddha practiced mindfulness and emphasized living and dying as

experiencing the moment as it exists in the present, using a metaphor of a man wounded by a

poisonous arrow worrying about the name of the man who shot him, rather than removing the

arrow, as an example. The Buddha could not find any necessary reason to follow the ideology of

atman, so he posited the idea of anataman, or “no-self”; this is because the Buddha observed that

“There is no unchanging subtle essence to humanity, for everything arises and exists in a

codependent, mutable fashion to become material phenomena, including humankind” (Pechilis

8547). The Buddha, in his anti-vedic yet simultaneously Vedas-inspired Śramanic school of

thought, posited that karma existed despite anatman. He explains this by explaining that no

entity exists within one’s self; rather, one is composed of numerous karmic parts or ingredients;

the Buddha’s metaphor of the chariot and his insistence that one’s usage of the word simply

refers to the combination of many different parts is his example of anatman. Directly rejecting

the Vedic ideology of an underlying subtle essence to humanity, Buddhism eventually developed

into the two popular branches of Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism. The Mahayana school

reinforces the Buddha’s rejection of a ubiquitous essence through the concept of sunyata, a belief

in the underlying emptiness of all reality, which is simply composed of other parts; the human

form is composed of the five aggregates of skandha. These five aggregates are known as “form,

feelings, discrimination, consciousness, and compositional factors”; only consciousness moves

from body to body through the process of samsara, and all existence throughout this process is

considered to be suffering (Powers 452). The liberation within this Śramanic tradition is escape

from the cycle of suffering and attainment of nirvana, the “extinguishing of the flame”. The

detachment needed to let go of all concepts of materialism, the fundamental aspects of reality,

and identity is one attained only through unwavering determination and focus that involves

8
isolation and renunciation; ritual and action are unimportant in this stark rejection of Vedic

ideals. This rejection reflected in a life lived as an ascetic in a forest or a monk in a monastery, as

opposed to a priest making offerings or performing prayers to a deity.

Throughout the diverse and vastly expansive Indian Vedic Brahmanic tradition, as well as

through its discussed Śramanic counterpart of Buddhism, the concept of atman is explored

heavily and the ultimate reality is realized through either ritualized or ascetic practices

respectively. The Hindu religion that is studied in the modern day incorporates both the world-

renouncing and rite-based forms of understanding atman and its nature. The influence of atman

as a unique concept has shaped perspectives on the self and ultimate reality across various

traditions within reach of the Vedas’ geographical influence over millennia; Buddhist

practitioners have come to their own conclusions on atman or the lack of it, and through this lens

have perceived their own salvific ends via ascetic and Śramanic practices.

9
 Bibliography

Gosling, David L. "Embodiment and Rebirth in the Buddhist and Hindu

Traditions." Zygon® 48.4 (2013): 908-915.

Zander, Helmut. “Reincarnation” The Brill Dictionary of Religion, Edited by Kocku von

Stuckrad, Consulted online on 04 November 2016

<dx.doi.org.proxy.library.emory.edu/10.1163/1872-5287_bdr_COM_00388>

Wilke, Annette, “Mysticism”, in: The Brill Dictionary of Religion, Edited by Kocku von

Stuckrad. Consulted online on 04 November 2016

<http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.emory.edu/10.1163/1872-5287_bdr_COM_00301>

Sekhar, V. "The Human Person from Sramana Perspectives." (1996).

Goff, Philip, ed. Spinoza on monism. Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

“Indian Subcontinent: Time Chart”, in: The Brill Dictionary of Religion, Edited by Kocku von

Stuckrad. Consulted online on 04 November 2016

<http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.emory.edu/10.1163/1872-5287_bdr_COM_00212>

Carr, Brian. "Causation in Indian Philosophy." Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Donald M.

Borchert. 2nd ed. Vol. 2. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2006. 109-113. Gale Virtual

Reference Library. Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

Pechilis, Karen. "Soul: Indian Concepts." Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. Lindsay Jones. 2nd ed.

Vol. 12. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 8544-8550. Gale Virtual Reference Library.

Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

10
Powers, John. "Consciousness: Indian Thought." New Dictionary of the History of Ideas. Ed.

Maryanne Cline Horowitz. Vol. 2. Detroit: Charles Scribner's Sons, 2005. 449-452. Gale Virtual

Reference Library. Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

SARAO, K. T. S. "Anātman/Ātman (No-Self/Self)." Encyclopedia of Buddhism. Ed. Robert E.

Buswell, Jr. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 18-20. Gale Virtual Reference

Library. Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

Dupré, Louis. "Mysticism [First Edition]." Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. Lindsay Jones. 2nd ed.

Vol. 9. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 6341-6355. Gale Virtual Reference Library.

Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

Bareau, André. "Buddhism, Schools of: Early Doctrinal Schools of Buddhism." Encyclopedia of

Religion. Ed. Lindsay Jones. 2nd ed. Vol. 2. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 1192-

1203. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

Dundas, Paul. "Jainism." Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. Lindsay Jones. 2nd ed. Vol. 7. Detroit:

Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 4764-4772. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 4 Nov.

2016.

Heesterman, Jan C. "Vedism and Brahmanism." Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. Lindsay Jones.

2nd ed. Vol. 14. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 9552-9574. Gale Virtual Reference

Library. Web. 4 Nov. 2016.

11