What is athma?

[SrividhyaJayaraman]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Kindly tell me the difference between athma and body.

Athma is ?
Body is Science

 

[C RAVI]

Kindly tell me the difference between athma and body.

Athma is ?
Body is Science

Athma is ? - "CONSCIENCE"
Body is - Science

 

[apsarathy]

You can feel the body; you can't feel Athma!
Body is destructible; Athma is not.
Athma is soul. (?)
Bhagavad Gita has some good explanations on Athma.

 

[sravna]

Kindly tell me the difference between athma and body.

Athma is ?
Body is Science

You say body is Science because you can perceive it. The analogy for atma would be it is spirituality because you cannot perceive it through your sensory organs but can only directly know it through mind. I think that happens when the mind merges with the atma.

 

[renuka]

The body is like a water bubble. It will disappear one day or the other. You are not the body that has birth, growth, decay and, ultimately, death. You are atma.


Then the question arises as to what is the atma, the divine spirit? The atma has no form. It is infinite, indescribable and immeasurable. It is attribute-less, pure, the final abode, eternal, unsullied, enlightened, free and the embodiment of sacredness. The atma is immanent in every individual, in every being, in the form of consciousness.

The importance of realising the Atma - A teaching from Sri Sathya Sai Baba

 

[sangom]

Kindly tell me the difference between athma and body.

Athma is ?
Body is Science

Madam Srividhya Jayaraman,

We have no reliable scientific proof for the existence of Athma. But many religions, including hinduism, have resorted to this idea of Athma. In a simplistic way, this religion-induced notion of Athma can be described as the continuation of human personality and identity after death when the physical body becomes lifeless (dead), becomes vegetative and rots if not burned.

This "Athma" theory or concept has its own plus and minus points, imo. Because religions generally propound that one's Athma will be punished adequately, after death, for all the sins which a person commits while alive, a certain amount of fear of doing evil (as prescribed by one's religion) and an inducement to do the good or virtuous deeds (again, as advocated and taught by one's religion), start working in people's minds and this helps social discipline to a small extent.

But over centuries or millennia, the "fear of god" has been completely replaced by bhakti or "love of a god who is love itself personified" has been steadily fed into the minds of most hindus and christians. According to my knowledge Islam is the only religion which still relies on the "fear of god" concept. This is a degeneration and has, consequently, caused degeneration in the human mentality. Hence we have so much of corruption, crimes, greed, etc., today because nobody feels afraid of doing these evil deeds when god is all-love and all-kindness for them.

The truth, therefore, is there is no such thing as Athma as put forward by religion/s.

The above statement of mine will invite many frenzied and emotional rebuttals. These will only show the extent to which religion has been able to influence or corrupt, people's minds and their thinking.

 

[SrividhyaJayaraman]

Finally atma is nothing but conscience because for body birth & death will happen. But for atma never...............
Atma select the body depends upon the karma of the previous birth......................

Rebirth is it true?.......................

 

[auh]

Fun intended:

Athma is actually asthma without an "s"

 

[prasad1]

Ātman (Sanskrit: आत्मन्) is a Sanskrit word that means 'inner-self' or 'soul'. In Hindu philosophy, especially in the Vedanta school of Hinduism, Ātman is the first principle, the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. In order to attain salvation (liberation), a human being must acquire self-knowledge (atma jnana), which is to realize that one's true self (Ātman) is identical with the transcendent self Brahman:


If atman is brahman in a pot (the body), then one need merely break the pot to fully realize the primordial unity of the individual soul with the plentitude of Being that was the Absolute.

?tman (Hinduism) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have to do the research.

 

[biswa]

So when all these explanations are given, is it the body talking, or is it the Atma?

If it is the body which is talking, then surely it is aware of the atma?

 

[prasad1]

Body is an organ like the drum. It does not talk until the "talker" in the body talks. Just like you need a drummer to plat the drum.

Drum is not aware of the drummer, but drummer is aware of the drum.

 

[sangom]

"Athma" is not like a drummer or a doll-inside-doll. It is like the power supply to a very vast network of robots, which start behaving as individual human beings so long as the power supply is working OK and so long as the individual computer in this net work is working at least with frequent "freezes" or hang-ups, etc. When the individual computer suffers so badly as not to function, death occurs and the power supply gets switched off automatically.

 

[SrividhyaJayaraman]

By doing meditation is it possible to find out our inner soul?............................is it true?

 

[sadasivam.sridharan]

We can get clarity on the subject of Atman if we read ' naan yaar ' by Sri. Ramana Maharishi.

 

[sangom]

By doing meditation is it possible to find out our inner soul?............................is it true?

Smt Srividhya Jayaraman,

I have not gone into the meditation line. But my cumulative knowledge and experience tell me that it is not possible to "find out" or "experience" the inner soul or ātmā. This is because it is the very sameātmā which is at the root of all such "finding out" or "experiencing", and it has been said in our scriptures that the "knower cannot be known", etc.

Yet, when the Yogadarśana of sage patañjali became combined with the sāṃkhyadarśana of sage Kapila, and subsequently also borrowed some of the tāntrik elements and became the latter day Yoga, meditation, etc., the Yoga gurus made it appear as if by the Yogic meditation and Yogic poses (āsanas) one can verily find out the ātmā and thus attainmokṣa or jīvanmukti or liberation, etc. And this continues to be the current fashion.

Adi Sankara has very clearly stated - in his bhāṣyas and other contexts - that neither sāṃkhya nor Yoga can lead one to brahmajñāna or "knowledge" of brahman which alone will give one the way to liberation (from saṃsāra or the cycle of births and deaths). I trust the Acharya's words because essentially He is suggesting only knowledge of brahman and not experiencing brahman and this appears more logical to me. Sankara suggests nididhyāsana or deep contemplation about one's own self or the brahman both of which are one and the same. This nididhyāsana is not our modern Yoga meditation.