What Is Atman In Indian Philosophy?

Introduction

Indian philosophy, with its rich and diverse traditions, has long sought to address the profound questions of existence, reality, and the self. At its core lies the concept of Atman, the inner self or essence of being.

This timeless idea has shaped the basics of Orthodox (Astika) and Heterodox (Nastika) schools of Indian thought, offering varied and intricate perspectives on the nature of the self.

Atman in Astika Schools of Indian Philosophy

In the six orthodox (astika) schools of Indian philosophy, which include Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Mimamsa, and Vedanta, Atman is often upheld as an eternal and basic reality. They view Atman as the key to understanding existence and achieving liberation (Moksha).

Vedanta equates Atman with Brahman (The Ultimate Reality).

Samkhya and Yoga treat it as distinct from Prakriti (matter), emphasizing its role as pure consciousness.

Nyaya and Vaisheshika focus on Atman as an individual entity that is the locus of cognition and experience.

Mimamsa integrates Atman into its framework of ritual and dharma.

Atman in Nastika Schools of Indian Philosophy

In contrast, the heterodox (Nastika) schools, such as Buddhism, Jainism, Charvaka, Ajivika, and Ajnana, present different views on the self.

Jainism recognizes Atman as a distinct, eternal soul capable of liberation through purification.

Buddhism, however, rejects the notion of a permanent self and advocates the concept of Anatta (non-self), which challenges the very existence of Atman as a fixed essence.

The Charvaka school, rooted in materialism (Logathayavada), dismisses Atman entirely, focusing instead on the tangible and physical aspects of life.

The Ajivika school, with its deterministic worldview, acknowledges the self. However, it views it as bound by a cosmic order. Also, as per this school liberation is predestined and not reliant on individual effort.

The Ajnana school, known for its skepticism, refrains from definitive claims about the self and emphasizes the limitations of knowledge and inquiry.

This interplay between the Astika and Nastika perspectives reveals a dynamic philosophical dialogue, where differing interpretations of Atman have enriched the discourse on selfhood and liberation.

By exploring these diverse viewpoints, this article seeks to uncover the nature of Atman and its enduring relevance in understanding the self.

The Journey through Different Schools of Indian Thought

In the chapters ahead, we will journey through the subtle interpretations of Atman across these schools of thought.

We will explore how this concept has shaped Indian philosophy over millennia from its metaphysical essence in Vedanta to its outright denial in Buddhism.

Through this exploration, we may find that the search for Atman, whether accepted, refined, or rejected, reflects a universal human desire to uncover the truth of our existence.

Indian Philosophy: An Overview

Definition and Scope

Indian philosophy consists of intellectual traditions that explore the ultimate truths of existence, reality, and human purpose.

It encompasses a wide range of schools and systems, broadly classified into Orthodox (Astika) and Heterodox (Nastika) schools.

The Orthodox schools adhere to the authority of the Vedas, while the Heterodox schools reject or reinterpret Vedic authority.

Each of these traditions contributes to the vast landscape of Indian thought and offers unique perspectives on metaphysics, ethics, and the human condition.

They explore the questions about the nature of the universe, the self, the origin of suffering, and the path to liberation.

Their approach is both analytical and experiential, combining rigorous logic with deep spiritual inquiry.

Focus on Metaphysical Questions, Ethics, and Liberation

At the heart of Indian philosophy lies a profound engagement with metaphysical questions.

What is the ultimate nature of reality?

Is there a universal principle that underlies existence?

These inquiries lead to discussions on concepts like Brahman (the ultimate reality), Atman (the self), and Prakriti (nature or matter).

Ethics, too, plays a key role in Indian philosophy. Pursuing dharma (the path of righteousness or moral duty) is integral to many schools, shaping individual and societal conduct.

Ethical teachings often relate directly to the goal of Moksha or freedom from the cycle of birth and death (Samsara). Moksha is viewed as the ultimate aim of human existence. Depending on the school of thought, It can be achieved through self-realization, detachment, or knowledge.

The Central Question: Who Are We, and What Is Our Ultimate Nature?

Perhaps the most basic question in Indian philosophy is, “Who am I?” The inquiry into the true nature of the self (Atman) forms the cornerstone of many philosophical systems.

Is the self eternal and unchanging, or is it transient and conditioned?

Is it distinct from the universe, or identical to the ultimate reality?

These questions are addressed in diverse ways across the schools of thought.

Vedanta posits that the self (Atman) is identical to the ultimate reality (Brahman).

But Buddhism challenges this notion with its doctrine of Anatta (non-self).

However, Jainism asserts the existence of an individual, eternal soul.

In contrast, Charvaka denies any metaphysical self altogether, focusing instead on material existence.

This central question, transcending cultures and eras, not only defines Indian philosophy but also resonates with humanity’s universal quest for meaning and identity.

Indian philosophy invites us to look inward by exploring the nature of the self, offering profound insights into our ultimate purpose and the essence of existence.

Let us now explore how each Darshana perceives Atman in detail.

Atman In Sankhya Darśana

In Sāṅkhya philosophy, the concept of Ātman is closely related to Puruṣa, which is the fundamental conscious principle. Unlike Vedānta, where Ātman is often equated with Brahman (the absolute reality), Sāṅkhya presents a dualistic framework in which Puruṣa (pure consciousness) and Prakṛti (primordial matter) are two independent and eternal realities.

Puruṣa as Ātman

1. Puruṣa: The True Self
   • In Sāṅkhya, Puruṣa is the real self of an individual, which aligns with the concept of Ātman in other Indian philosophical traditions.
   • It is pure consciousness, unchanging, inactive, and beyond time and space.
   • Unlike Prakṛti, Puruṣa does not undergo transformation or modification.
2. Multiplicity of Puruṣas
   • Unlike Advaita Vedānta, which holds that there is only one universal Ātman, Sāṅkhya asserts that Puruṣas are many (Aneka-Puruṣa-Vāda).
   • Each being has its own distinct Puruṣa that is separate from others but identical.
3. Puruṣa-Prakṛti Interaction and Liberation
   • The bondage of Puruṣa arises due to its association with Prakṛti, which creates the illusion of ego, mind, and the material world.
   • Kaivalya (Liberation) occurs when Puruṣa realizes its distinctness from Prakṛti and stops identifying with the body, senses, and mind.

Key Differences from Vedānta’s Ātman

In Sāṅkhya, Ātman is best understood as Puruṣa, the eternal, conscious self that is distinct from matter (Prakṛti).

Liberation is achieved by recognizing this distinction, leading to the cessation of suffering and ultimate freedom (Kaivalya).

Atman In Yoga Philosophy

Yoga philosophy, as presented in Patañjali’s Yoga Sūtras, is closely related to Sāṅkhya but incorporates Ishvara (God) and a systematic discipline of meditation and self-purification to attain liberation.

The concept of Ātman in Yoga aligns with Puruṣa in Sāṅkhya, but the path to realization emphasizes practical techniques (sādhana) rather than purely philosophical inquiry.

1. Ātman as Puruṣa (Pure Consciousness)

• In Yoga philosophy, the individual self (Ātman) is identified with Puruṣa, which is pure consciousness, unchanging, eternal, and distinct from Prakṛti (matter).
• Like in Sāṅkhya, Puruṣa is a witness (dṛṣṭā) and not the doer (kartā), meaning it merely observes the activities of the mind and body but does not act.

2. The Role of the Mind (Citta) in Bondage and Liberation

• The mind (Citta) and its modifications (vṛttis) obscure the true nature of Ātman.
• The famous Yoga Sūtra 1.2 states:
  “Yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ” → Yoga is the cessation of the modifications of the mind.
• When the mind is active with thoughts, desires, and emotions, Puruṣa mistakenly identifies with them, creating suffering and attachment.
• Liberation (Kaivalya) is attained when the mind becomes still, allowing Puruṣa to experience its true nature.

3. The Path to Self-Realization (Ātman-Jñāna) in Yoga

To separate Puruṣa (Ātman) from Prakṛti (body-mind), Yoga prescribes an eightfold path (Aṣṭāṅga Yoga):

1. Yama – Ethical restraints (non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing, celibacy, non-possessiveness).
2. Niyama – Self-discipline (purity, contentment, self-study, devotion to God).
3. Āsana – Physical postures to prepare the body for meditation.
4. Prāṇāyāma – Control of breath to regulate life energy (prāṇa).
5. Pratyāhāra – Withdrawal of the senses from external distractions.
6. Dhāraṇā – Concentration of the mind on a single object.
7. Dhyāna – Deep meditation.
8. Samādhi – The ultimate absorption where the self (Ātman) realizes its true nature as pure consciousness.

4. Ishvara in Yoga: The Special Puruṣa

• Unlike Sāṅkhya, Yoga introduces Ishvara (a supreme being or special Puruṣa).
• Ishvara is a Puruṣa untouched by karma and suffering, and devotion to Ishvara (Īśvara-praṇidhāna) is a method for achieving liberation. In other words, Ishvara is a means to attain Kaivalya.
• Patañjali suggests chanting OM (Praṇava) as a means to connect with Ishvara.

5. Liberation (Kaivalya) – The Ultimate Goal

• The Puruṣa attains Kaivalya (absolute freedom) when it realizes its separation from Prakṛti.
• In Samādhi, the Yogi experiences Puruṣa as pure, eternal, and untainted by worldly suffering.
• This is a state of complete detachment (vairāgya) and self-realization, where the Yogi no longer identifies with the body or mind.

Key Differences: Ātman in Yoga vs. Other Philosophies

In Yoga philosophy, Ātman is Puruṣa, and liberation (Kaivalya) is attained through mental purification and meditative absorption (Samādhi). Unlike Vedānta, which emphasizes philosophical inquiry, Yoga provides a practical and systematic approach (Aṣṭāṅga Yoga) to realizing one’s true nature.

Ātman in Nyāya Darśana

Nyāya Darśana, the school of logic and epistemology, presents a unique perspective on Ātman that differs from the idealistic monism of Vedānta and the dualism of Sāṅkhya. In Nyāya, Ātman is not just pure consciousness but a real, substantial entity that possesses qualities and is the substratum of cognition, desire, and actions.

1. Ātman as a Permanent and Independent Entity

• In Nyāya, Ātman is a real, eternal, and independent substance (dravya).
• Unlike Sāṅkhya’s Puruṣa, which is mere consciousness, Nyāya holds that Ātman is both conscious and the seat of mental functions.
• Ātman is distinct from the body, mind (manas), and senses, yet it experiences pleasure, pain, and karma through these faculties.

2. Characteristics of Ātman in Nyāya

According to Nyāya, Atman possesses several attributes (guṇas):

1. Jñāna (Cognition) – Knowledge arises in Ātman through the connection of the senses and mind with external objects.
2. Icchā (Desire) – Desire arises within Ātman when the cognition of an object occurs.
3. Dveṣa (Aversion) – Aversion is the opposite of desire and exists in Ātman.
4. Sukha (Pleasure) & Duḥkha (Pain) – Ātman experiences happiness and suffering as effects of karma.
5. Karma (Action) – The actions performed by a person influence the cycle of rebirth.
6. Dharma & Adharma (Merit and Demerit) – Moral and immoral actions shape the future births of Ātman.

Thus, unlike in Advaita Vedānta, where Ātman is changeless, Nyāya accepts that the self undergoes different experiences while remaining a permanent entity.

3. Proof of the Existence of Ātman (Ātma-Siddhi in Nyāya)

Nyāya philosophers logically argue for the existence of Atman through various Pramāṇas (means of knowledge):

a) Inference (Anumāna)

• Nyāya proves the existence of Ātman through inference:
  • Cognition (jñāna) and memory (smṛti) exist.
  • These cannot belong to the physical body, senses, or mind.
  • Therefore, they must belong to a distinct, eternal entity – Ātman.

b) Recognition (Pratyabhijñā)

• We recognize ourselves as the same person over time, despite bodily and mental changes.
• This continuity suggests an unchanging Ātman as the substratum of identity.

c) Moral Law (Karma)

• The effects of past actions persist across births.
• Since the body perishes after death, a permanent Atman must carry forward Karma to future births.

4. The Relation Between Ātman and Mind (Manas)

• Nyāya holds that manas (mind) is separate from Ātman.
• The mind is atomic (anu) and perishable, while Ātman is all-pervading (Vibhu) and eternal.
• Manas connects Ātman with sense perception, but cognition belongs to Ātman itself.

5. Liberation (Mokṣa) in Nyāya

• Liberation (Apavarga) is the permanent cessation of pain (duḥkha) and rebirth.
• It is not a state of pure bliss (ānanda) like in Vedānta but a state of absence of suffering.
• Liberation is attained through right knowledge (tattva-jñāna), ethical actions, and philosophical reasoning.

6. Nyāya vs. Other Schools on Ātman

In Nyāya Darśana, Ātman is a real, independent, and eternal entity that possesses cognition, desires, and experiences. Unlike Advaita Vedānta, which views Ātman as identical to Brahman, Nyāya holds that Ātman is distinct and bound by karma until liberated through right knowledge and reasoning.

Ātman in Vaiśeṣika Darśana

Vaiśeṣika, the Indian school of atomism and metaphysics, presents a realist and pluralistic view of the universe, where Ātman is a distinct and substantial entity. It is considered a dravya (substance) that possesses qualities but is different from the physical body and mind.

1. Ātman as a Substance (Dravya)

• In Vaiśeṣika, Ātman is classified as one of the nine fundamental substances (dravya) of reality:
  1. Earth (Pṛthivī)
  2. Water (Ap)
  3. Fire (Tejas)
  4. Air (Vāyu)
  5. Ether (Ākāśa)
  6. Time (Kāla)
  7. Space (Diś)
  8. Mind (Manas)
  9. Ātman (Self)
• Ātman is eternal, all-pervading (Vibhu), and non-material, yet it has qualities like cognition, desire, happiness, and suffering.

2. Attributes of Ātman in Vaiśeṣika

Vaiśeṣika defines Ātman as a real entity that possesses several qualities (guṇas), including:

1. Jñāna (Cognition/Knowledge) – Arises from sense perception and inference.
2. Icchā (Desire) – The inclination toward objects of pleasure.
3. Dveṣa (Aversion) – The tendency to avoid painful experiences.
4. Sukha & Duḥkha (Pleasure & Pain) – Direct experiences arising due to karma.
5. Karma (Action) – Ātman is the performer of actions, which influence its future rebirths.
6. Dharma & Adharma (Merit and Demerit) – Ātman accumulates moral and immoral actions, which determine its cycle of rebirth.

Unlike Advaita Vedānta, where Ātman is pure consciousness and changeless, Vaiśeṣika holds that Ātman undergoes changes by acquiring different qualities.

3. Proof of the Existence of Ātman (Ātma-Siddhi in Vaiśeṣika)

Vaiśeṣika philosophers prove the existence of Ātman using logical arguments:

a) Inference (Anumāna)

• Knowledge, memory, pleasure, and pain cannot belong to the body or mind alone because:
  1. The body is inert and cannot produce consciousness.
  2. The mind (manas) is atomic (anu) and momentary, meaning it cannot store memories.
  3. Therefore, these qualities must belong to an eternal substratum—Ātman.

b) Recognition (Pratyabhijñā)

• We recognize ourselves as the same person over time, despite changes in body and thoughts.
• This continuity suggests a permanent, unchanging self (Ātman) that persists through transformations.

c) Moral Law (Karma)

• The effects of past actions persist even after death.
• If Ātman did not exist, karma could not function, since there would be no entity to carry past deeds into future births.

4. The Relation Between Ātman and Mind (Manas)

• In Vaiśeṣika, the mind (manas) is separate from Ātman and serves as an intermediary between Ātman and the senses.
• Mind is atomic (anu), momentary, and responsible for cognition, but it cannot store experiences—that is the function of Ātman.
• Without Ātman, the mind would not be able to connect with sensory experiences.

5. Liberation (Mokṣa) in Vaiśeṣika

• Liberation (Apavarga) is the complete cessation of pain and the cycle of rebirth.
• Unlike Vedānta, Vaiśeṣika does not describe Mokṣa as the realization of Brahman but as a state where Ātman exists without pain, pleasure, or worldly experiences.
• Liberation is achieved through the right knowledge, detachment, and ethical living.

6. Vaiśeṣika vs. Other Schools on Ātman

In Vaiśeṣika Darśana, Ātman is an eternal, all-pervading substance that possesses cognition, desire, karma, and emotions. Unlike Vedānta, which views Ātman as pure consciousness, Vaiśeṣika sees it as a distinct entity with qualities. Liberation (Apavarga) is attained when Ātman is freed from all suffering and rebirth, leading to a state of peaceful existence without worldly experiences.

Ātman in Mīmāṁsā Darśana

Mīmāṁsā, particularly Pūrva Mīmāṁsā (ritualistic interpretation) and Uttara Mīmāṁsā (Vedānta), provides unique perspectives on Ātman. While Vedānta deals with the metaphysical aspect of Ātman, Pūrva Mīmāṁsā focuses on the self with karma and dharma, rather than abstract philosophical speculation.

1. Ātman as a Real and Eternal Entity

• In Pūrva Mīmāṁsā, Ātman is real, eternal, and distinct from the body and senses.
• It is the agent (kartā) of actions and the experiencer (bhoktā) of their results.
• Unlike Vedānta, which seeks knowledge of Brahman, Mīmāṁsā emphasizes Ātman’s role in karma and the continuation of dharma.

2. Key Features of Ātman in Mīmāṁsā

1. Performer of Karma – Ātman is responsible for performing Vedic rituals, which determine its future.
2. The One Who Experiences Fruits of Actions – Through karma, Ātman enjoys the results of meritorious and sinful deeds.
3. Eternal but Not Non-Dual – Unlike Advaita Vedānta, Mīmāṁsā does not equate Ātman with Brahman.
4. Distinct from the Body and Mind – The self is not the body or the mind but an independent entity that accumulates karma.

Mīmāṁsā does not deeply investigate pure consciousness (jñāna-svarūpa) or absolute reality like Vedānta but focuses on Ātman as an ethical and ritualistic being.

3. Proof for the Existence of Ātman (Ātma-Siddhi in Mīmāṁsā)

Mīmāṁsā philosophers establish the reality of Ātman through:

a) Memory and Personal Identity

• We remember past experiences, which implies a continuous entity beyond bodily changes.
• Since the body changes but memory persists, there must be an unchanging self (Ātman).

b) Vedic Injunctions (Śruti Pramāṇa)

• The Vedas prescribe rituals for the performer (kartā) and the recipient of karma’s effects.
• This presupposes the existence of Ātman, which endures across lifetimes to experience results.

c) Law of Karma

• Since the results of actions may manifest in future lives, there must be an eternal Ātman that carries karma beyond death.

Thus, Ātman is accepted as an undeniable reality, not merely an abstraction.

Ātman in Vedānta Darśana

Vedānta, the philosophical culmination of the Vedas, presents Ātman as the fundamental reality of existence. Unlike Mīmāṁsā, which focuses on karma and dharma, Vedānta prioritizes knowledge (jñāna) and self-realization as the means to liberation (mokṣa).

Vedānta schools interpret Ātman differently, but they all agree that:

1. Ātman is eternal, unchanging, and distinct from the body and mind.
2. Realizing Ātman leads to mokṣa, the highest goal of life.

1. Core Concept of Ātman in Vedānta

Vedānta identifies Ātman with pure consciousness (Chaitanya) that is beyond birth, death, and modification. The Upaniṣads repeatedly emphasize:

• “Ayam Ātmā Brahma“ (This self is Brahman) – Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad
• “Tat Tvam Asi“ (You are That) – Chāndogya Upaniṣad
• “Ahaṁ Brahmāsmi“ (I am Brahman) – Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad

However, different Vedānta schools interpret these statements differently.

2. Three Major Views on Ātman in Vedānta

3. Advaita Vedānta: Ātman as Non-Dual Brahman

Advaita (Non-dualism), founded by Śaṅkarācārya, teaches that:

• Ātman = Brahman = pure consciousness (Chaitanya).
• The world (Jagat) is Māyā (illusion), created by ignorance (avidyā).
• The ego (Ahaṁkāra) falsely identifies with the body and mind, causing bondage.
• Liberation (Mokṣa) occurs when one realizes that they were always Brahman.

Example: The classic rope-snake illusion – A person mistakes a rope for a snake in darkness. Similarly, due to ignorance, we think we are the body, but in truth, we are Ātman.

Key Upaniṣadic Proofs:

• “Brahma Satyam, Jagat Mithyā, Jīvo Brahmaiva Nāparaḥ” (Brahman alone is real, the world is an illusion, and the individual self is none other than Brahman).

4. Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta: Ātman as a Part of Brahman

Rāmānuja’s Viśiṣṭādvaita (Qualified Non-dualism) states that:

• Ātman is real and eternal but dependent on Brahman (Viṣṇu).
• Brahman is both the efficient and material cause of creation.
• The universe and Ātman are attributes (viśeṣa) of Brahman like the body is to the soul.
• Devotion (bhakti) to Viṣṇu leads to self-realization and liberation.

Example: Just as waves are part of the ocean but not separate, Ātman is part of Brahman but not identical to it.

5. Dvaita Vedānta: Ātman as Distinct from Brahman

Madhvācārya’s Dvaita (Dualism) teaches that:

• Ātman and Brahman are eternally different.
• Brahman (Viṣṇu) is the Supreme Reality, and Ātman is His servant.
• The world is real, not an illusion (unlike Advaita).
• Mokṣa is achieved through unwavering devotion (bhakti) to Viṣṇu.

Example: Like the difference between the sun and its rays, Ātman is always distinct from Brahman but depends on Him for existence.

6. Ātman in Śuddhādvaita Vedānta

Śuddhādvaita (Pure Non-Dualism), founded by Vallabhācārya, is a unique Vedānta school that teaches pure monism while affirming the reality of the world.

Key Features of Ātman in Śuddhādvaita:

1. Ātman is identical to Brahman but retains individuality – Unlike Śaṅkara’s Advaita, which considers the world an illusion (Māyā), Śuddhādvaita states that Brahman alone exists, and everything—including the individual Ātman and the world—is a manifestation of Brahman.
2. Brahman is Personal and Loving – Brahman, identified with Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is saguṇa (with attributes), full of bliss (ānanda).
3. The World is Real and Divine – Unlike Advaita, which sees the world as an illusion, Śuddhādvaita sees the world as Brahman’s divine play (Līlā), emanating from Kṛṣṇa.
4. Liberation through Grace (Pushti Bhakti) – The Ātman attains mokṣa by surrendering to Kṛṣṇa’s grace (pushti), not by knowledge (jñāna) or rituals (karma).

In Śuddhādvaita, Ātman is eternally real, part of Brahman, and can attain liberation through pure devotion (bhakti) to Kṛṣṇa. The world is not an illusion (Māyā) but a divine expression of Kṛṣṇa’s blissful nature.

Atman in Cārvāka School of Thought

Cārvāka, also known as Lokāyata, is the materialist and atheist school of Indian philosophy. It rejects the existence of Ātman as a separate, eternal entity, contrasting sharply with all other Indian darśanas.

1. Core Beliefs of Cārvāka on Ātman

1. Ātman is not separate from the body – Consciousness arises from the physical body and perishes with it.
2. No soul, rebirth, or liberation – Since there is no Ātman, ideas like reincarnation, karma, and mokṣa are false.
3. Only perception (pratyakṣa) is valid – Since the Ātman cannot be perceived, it does not exist.
4. Mind is a product of matter – Just as the combination of ingredients produces the intoxicating effect of alcohol, consciousness arises from the body but has no separate existence.

2. Cārvāka’s Rejection of Ātman

• Refutation of Upaniṣadic Ideas: The Upaniṣads describe Ātman as eternal, but Cārvāka argues this is mere speculation without direct evidence.
• Criticism of Other Schools: They mock concepts like karma and mokṣa, calling them priestly fabrications to exploit people.

3. Death and the End of Existence

For Cārvāka, death is the end of consciousness, as there is no soul to survive beyond the body. This leads to their famous philosophy:

• “Yāvat jīvet sukhaṁ jīvet, ṛṇaṁ kṛtvā ghṛtaṁ pibet”
  (Live happily as long as you are alive; even if you must take a loan, enjoy life to the fullest.)

In Cārvāka philosophy, Ātman is merely the living body, and consciousness is a temporary byproduct of matter. Unlike other schools that see Ātman as eternal, Cārvāka denies any spiritual existence beyond the physical realm and advocates a life of sensory pleasure and rational skepticism.

Atman in Ājīvika School of Philosophy

The Ājīvika school, founded by Makkhali Gosāla, was a major śramaṇa tradition alongside Buddhism and Jainism during ancient India. It had a unique perspective on Ātman, which differed from other Indian philosophical traditions.

1. Core Beliefs of Ājīvikas on Ātman

1. Ātman is eternal and unchanging – Like Jainism and Sāṅkhya, Ājīvikas believed in the existence of an individual soul (Ātman) that is distinct from the body.
2. Niyati (Fatalism): Everything is predetermined – The Ājīvikas taught that all events, including the fate of the Ātman, are controlled by Niyati (cosmic destiny or determinism).
3. No Free Will – Unlike Jainism and Buddhism, which emphasize karma and effort, Ājīvikas believed that the Ātman follows a fixed path through rebirths, without individual effort affecting its course.
4. Liberation (Mokṣa) is Inevitable – Every Ātman, regardless of his actions, will eventually attain liberation, as predetermined by fate.

2. Comparison with Other Schools on Ātman

The Ājīvika school accepted the existence of Ātman but rejected the idea that actions (karma) determine its future. Instead, everything, including the soul’s journey, is governed by fate (Niyati). This made them radical fatalists, believing that liberation was not a result of effort but an inevitable event in the cosmic order.

Ātman in Buddhism: The Doctrine of Anattā (Non-Self)

Buddhism rejects the concept of Ātman and instead teaches Anattā (Anātman), meaning “no permanent self”. This is one of the fundamental differences between Buddhism and other Indian philosophies.

1. The Buddhist Rejection of Ātman

1. No Eternal Soul – Unlike Hinduism, Jainism, or Sāṅkhya, Buddhism states that there is no unchanging, eternal Ātman.
2. Anattā (Non-Self) – The self is just a collection of impermanent phenomena, constantly changing.
3. Dependent Origination (Paṭicca Samuppāda) – The idea that everything, including the notion of self, arises due to causes and conditions and is not independent.

Key Buddhist Teachings on Non-Self

• The Five Aggregates (Pañcakkhandha) – What we call “self” is just a combination of:
  1. Rūpa (Form) – The physical body
  2. Vedanā (Sensation) – Feelings of pleasure, pain, or neutrality
  3. Saññā (Perception) – Recognition of things
  4. Saṅkhāra (Mental Formations) – Thoughts, intentions, emotions
  5. Viññāṇa (Consciousness) – Awareness

Since these are always changing, there is no fixed, eternal self (Ātman).

2. The Buddha’s Criticism of Ātman

• “Sabbe Dhammā Anattā” – “All phenomena are non-self.” (Dhammapada 279)
• The Chariot Analogy – Just as a “chariot” is only a name for its parts, the “self” is just a name for the five aggregates.

3. Nirvāṇa and the Illusion of Self

• Suffering (dukkha) arises from attachment to the idea of “I” and “mine”.
• By realizing Anattā, one becomes free from craving (taṇhā) and attains Nirvāṇa.

4. Comparison with Other Indian Schools

Buddhism completely rejects Ātman and teaches Anattā, the absence of a permanent self. Realizing this is key to liberation (Nirvāṇa), as it ends attachment, ego, and suffering.

Atman in Jainism

In Jainism, Ātman (soul) is real, eternal, and individual. Unlike Buddhism, which denies a permanent self (Anattā), Jainism strongly affirms that each living being has a distinct Ātman that is eternal but bound by karma.

1. Key Features of Ātman in Jainism

1. Eternal and Independent – The Ātman (jīva) exists forever and is distinct from the body.
2. Bound by Karma – The soul accumulates karma through actions, which affects its future rebirths.
3. Infinite Knowledge and Bliss (in a pure state) – The true nature of the soul is omniscience (Kevala-jñāna) and bliss, but karma obscures this.
4. Liberation through Self-Purification – The soul attains mokṣa (liberation) by removing karma through austerities and right conduct.

2. Classification of Atman (Jīva) in Jainism

Jainism divides souls into two categories:

• Saṁsārī Jīva (Bound Souls): Souls trapped in the cycle of birth and death due to karma.
• Mukta Jīva (Liberated Souls): Pure souls free from karma, existing in a state of infinite bliss at the top of the universe (Siddha-śilā).

All living beings (from microbes to humans) have a soul, which is why Jainism follows strict non-violence (Ahiṁsā).

3. Path to Liberation (Mokṣa) in Jainism

The soul is purified through the Three Jewels (Ratnatraya):

1. Samyak Darśana (Right Faith) – Belief in Jain teachings
2. Samyak Jñāna (Right Knowledge) – Understanding reality without ignorance
3. Samyak Cāritra (Right Conduct) – Practicing non-violence, truth, and asceticism

Liberation (mokṣa) happens when all karma is removed, and the Ātman attains its pure form, free from the cycle of rebirth.

4. Comparison with Other Schools

Jainism strongly believes in Ātman as an eternal, individual soul that is bound by karma but can achieve liberation through self-purification. Unlike Vedānta, Jainism does not see all souls as one but as separate, unique entities striving for mokṣa.

Atman in Śaiva Siddhānta

Śaiva Siddhānta is a theistic and dualistic school of Śaivism that emphasizes the distinct existence of Ātman (soul) and Śiva (Supreme Reality). It is considered one of the oldest and most systematic Śaiva traditions, primarily developed in South India.

1. Nature of Atman in Śaiva Siddhānta

1. Ātman is eternal but distinct from Śiva – Unlike Advaita Vedānta, which equates Ātman with Brahman, Śaiva Siddhānta maintains that the soul is real and eternal but not identical to Śiva.
2. Bound by Anava Mala (Ego-Impurity) – Every Ātman is naturally pure but covered by three impurities (Mala) that prevent the realization of Śiva:
   • Anava Mala (Ego, Ignorance of Śiva’s Grace)
   • Karma Mala (Past actions and their consequences)
   • Māyā Mala (Illusions of material existence)
3. Soul’s Journey Toward Liberation – Through devotion, knowledge, and Śiva’s grace, the Ātman can remove these impurities and attain liberation (mokṣa).

2. The Relationship Between Atman and Śiva

• Pati (Lord) → Śiva (Supreme Reality, the Liberator)
• Paśu (Soul) → Ātman (Bound, but capable of liberation)
• Pāśa (Bondage) → The Three Malas (Impurities)

Liberation (mokṣa) happens when Śiva’s grace removes the three Malas and the Ātman realizes its divine nature without merging into Śiva (unlike Advaita, which sees mokṣa as the dissolution into Brahman).

3. Path to Liberation (Mokṣa)

Śaiva Siddhānta prescribes four progressive paths for the Ātman’s evolution:

1. Charya (Service and Ritual Worship)
2. Kriya (Devotion and Temple Worship)
3. Yoga (Meditation and Self-Discipline)
4. Jñāna (Self-Realization through Śiva’s Grace)

Final Liberation (Mokṣa): The Ātman, after purification, attains śivatva (divine status) and experiences eternal bliss in Śiva’s presence without losing individuality.

4. Comparison with Other Schools

In Śaiva Siddhānta, the Ātman is real, eternal, and distinct from Śiva but ultimately dependent on Him for liberation. Unlike Advaita Vedānta, mokṣa does not mean merging into Śiva but rather existing in eternal bliss under His grace. The soul’s impurities (malas) must be removed through devotion, worship, and Śiva’s divine intervention to attain liberation.

Atman in Kashmir Śaivism

Kashmir Śaivism is a non-dualistic (Advaita) school of Śaivism that teaches Ātman (individual self) is identical to Śiva (Universal Consciousness). It differs from Śaiva Siddhānta, which sees the Ātman as distinct from Śiva.

1. Atman as Śiva: The Doctrine of Non-Duality (Advaita)

• Ātman is not separate from Śiva – Unlike Vedānta, which sees Brahman as passive consciousness, Kashmir Śaivism views Śiva as a dynamic, ever-vibrant Consciousness.
• Self-Recognition (Pratyabhijñā) – The Ātman is already Śiva, but due to ignorance (Avidyā), it forgets its true nature. Liberation is simply recognizing one’s Śiva-nature.
• No Real Bondage – Unlike Śaiva Siddhānta, which speaks of real impurities (malas), Kashmir Śaivism teaches that bondage is just a false perception. The soul is always free but perceives limitation.

2. The Five-Fold Consciousness of Śiva (Pañcakrityas)

Śiva (the true Ātman) constantly performs five divine actions:

1. Sṛṣṭi (Creation) – Manifesting the universe
2. Sthiti (Sustenance) – Maintaining the universe
3. Saṁhāra (Dissolution) – Withdrawing the universe
4. Tirodhāna (Concealment) – Hiding His true nature
5. Anugraha (Grace) – Revealing His true nature

The Tirodhāna (Concealment) is what causes the Ātman to forget it is Śiva, and Anugraha (Grace) restores self-recognition.

3. Liberation (Mokṣa) in Kashmir Śaivism

• Liberation is not escaping saṁsāra (rebirth) but recognizing one’s true identity as Śiva while still living.
• This is called Jīvanmukti (Liberation-in-Life).
• Unlike Vedānta, where mokṣa comes through intellectual realization, Kashmir Śaivism emphasizes direct experience (Śaktipāta – the descent of divine grace).

4. Key Differences from Other Schools

In Kashmir Śaivism, Ātman is already Śiva, but due to ignorance, it perceives itself as limited. Liberation is not about escaping the world but realizing one’s divinity while still living. The path is through self-recognition (Pratyabhijñā), meditation, and divine grace (Śaktipāta).

Atman in Pāśupata Śaivism

Pāśupata Śaivism is one of the oldest Śaiva traditions, founded by Lakulīśa (2nd century CE). It follows a theistic dualism, meaning that Ātman (individual soul) is real but distinct from Śiva (Supreme Being).

1. Nature of Ātman in Pāśupata Śaivism

1. Ātman is eternal but bound – The soul is independent but trapped in the cycle of birth and rebirth due to karma.
2. Śiva is Supreme (Pati) and Ātman is Bound (Paśu) –
   • Pati (Lord) → Śiva (All-powerful, Supreme Reality)
   • Paśu (Soul) → Ātman (Bound by ignorance and karma)
   • Pāśa (Bondage) → Karmic impurities that keep the soul in saṁsāra
3. Liberation (Mokṣa) happens by Śiva’s grace – The soul attains liberation by surrendering to Śiva and practicing asceticism.

2. Bondage and Liberation of Atman

• Bondage (Saṁsāra) – The Ātman is stuck in the material world due to ignorance and karma.
• Path to Mokṣa – The soul must practice extreme asceticism (tapas), meditation, and devotion to Śiva to purify itself.
• Final Liberation – The Ātman, after purification, exists in eternal bliss under Śiva’s grace but does not merge into Śiva (unlike Advaita Vedānta).

3. The Role of Asceticism

• Severe renunciation (Vairāgya) – Followers take vows of celibacy and live in isolation.
• Physical and mental discipline – Pāśupatas believe in extreme forms of yogic and ascetic practices to purify the soul.
• Devotion (Bhakti) to Śiva – The soul attains liberation only through complete surrender to Śiva.

4. Comparison with Other Schools

In Pāśupata Śaivism, Ātman is distinct from Śiva but can attain eternal bliss by surrendering to Him. The path to mokṣa involves severe asceticism, renunciation, and devotion. Unlike Advaita Vedānta, the soul does not merge with Śiva but remains in a blissful liberated state under His grace

Ātman in Kāpālika & Kālāmukha Śaivism

Kālāmukha Śaivism was a tantric and ascetic sect of Śaivism, closely related to the Kāpālikas. It thrived between the 8th–13th centuries CE, primarily in South India. Unlike mainstream Śaiva traditions, Kālāmukhas followed esoteric rituals, extreme asceticism, and tantric practices.

1. Nature of Ātman in Kālāmukha Śaivism

1. Ātman is real but bound – The individual self (Ātman) is distinct from Śiva and caught in saṁsāra (cycle of rebirth).
2. Bondage through karma and ignorance – Like Śaiva Siddhānta, the soul is bound by past actions and ignorance, which must be purified.
3. Union with Śiva through ascetic practices – The goal is not merging into Śiva (as in Advaita Vedānta) but achieving liberation through extreme penance, rituals, and tantra.

2. Path to Liberation (Mokṣa)

• Tapas (Austerity) – Kālāmukhas practiced severe asceticism, including fasting, self-mortification, and isolation in cremation grounds.
• Mantra & Tantra – Secret tantric rituals and mantras were used to overcome worldly attachments.
• Śakti Worship – Unlike Śaiva Siddhānta, which focused solely on Śiva, Kālāmukhas also invoked Śakti (Divine Feminine Energy).
• Guru’s Role – The guru was essential for imparting esoteric knowledge and guiding the soul toward liberation.

3. Key Differences from Other Śaiva Schools

In Kālāmukha Śaivism, Ātman is distinct from Śiva but bound by karma and ignorance. Liberation is achieved through extreme asceticism, tantric practices, and Śiva’s grace. Unlike Vedānta, which teaches merging with Brahman, the Kālāmukhas sought a state of divine realization while maintaining individuality.

Conclusion: Ātman Across Different Schools of Indian Philosophy

The concept of Ātman (the Self) varies significantly across Indian philosophical traditions. Some schools see it as an independent, eternal entity, while others argue that it is illusory or ultimately identical with the Supreme Reality. Below is a summary of the major perspectives:

1. Schools That Affirm Ātman as Real and Eternal

(a) Dualistic & Theistic Schools (Ātman is separate from the Supreme Reality)

• Nyāya & Vaiśeṣika – Ātman is an individual, eternal substance that undergoes experiences and is subject to karma.
• Mīmāṁsā – Ātman is perpetually distinct and active, experiencing results of karma.
• Sāṁkhya – Ātman is called Puruṣa, which is eternal, pure consciousness, distinct from Prakṛti (material nature). Liberation occurs when Puruṣa realizes its separateness from Prakṛti.
• Yoga (Patañjali’s Yoga Sūtras) – Similar to Sāṁkhya, Yoga holds that Ātman (Puruṣa) is distinct from Prakṛti, but liberation (Kaivalya) is achieved through meditative discipline (Yoga), leading to a direct experience of pure consciousness.
• Śaiva Siddhānta & Pāśupata Śaivism – Ātman is real but separate from Śiva, attaining liberation through devotion and discipline.
• Dvaita Vedānta – The soul is eternally distinct from Brahman (Viṣṇu) and achieves liberation in His service.

(b) Non-Dualistic Theistic Schools (Ātman is distinct but eventually merges with the Supreme Reality)

• Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta – Ātman is a part of Brahman but retains some individuality after liberation.
• Kālāmukha & Kāpālika Śaivism – Ātman is bound by karma and liberated through tantric rituals and extreme asceticism.

2. Schools That See Ātman as Identical with Ultimate Reality

• Advaita Vedānta – Ātman is pure consciousness, identical to Brahman. Liberation is realizing this unity.
• Kashmir Śaivism – Ātman is already Śiva, and bondage is just an illusion. Liberation comes through self-recognition (Pratyabhijñā).

3. Schools That Reject Ātman as a Permanent Reality

• Buddhism – No permanent Ātman exists; all experiences arise from impermanent aggregates (Skandhas).
• Cārvāka (Materialism) – Ātman is just the body and mind; consciousness ends with death.

Final Reflection

From the strict materialism of Cārvāka to the pure non-dualism of Advaita Vedānta, Indian philosophy provides a vast spectrum of views on Ātman. The key distinctions revolve around:

1. Does Ātman exist?
2. Is it distinct or identical to the Supreme Reality?
3. How does it attain liberation?

While Vedānta, Śaivism, Sāṁkhya, and Yoga see Ātman as divine and eternal, Nyāya and Mīmāṁsā treat it as a rational entity, and Buddhism rejects it altogether. Despite their differences, all these schools aim at overcoming suffering and attaining liberation, making the concept of Ātman a central pillar of Indian thought.

Om! Tat! Sat!