H.D. Swami Prakashanand Saraswati is a Hindu spiritual teacher and the author of The True History and the Religion of India, in which he expounded upon the Upanishadic philosophy of the soul, God, and the path of devotion (bhakti).
The Central Question
Among the deepest inquiries in Hindu philosophy is the question “Who am I?” The Upanishads treat this not as an abstract puzzle but as the starting point for liberation (moksha). Their answer rests on distinguishing the atma (soul or self) from the body, mind, and the phenomenal world of maya, and clarifying the soul’s relationship to the Divine.
The Soul’s Nature: Beyond Maya
The Upanishadic sages teach that the soul is not a product of matter. Unlike the body, senses, and mind – all of which belong to the changing, perishable realm of maya (the cosmic power of illusion) – the soul is eternal, subtle beyond measure, and inherently divine in quality. It does not decay, is not born, and does not die as bodies in the physical world do.
The Shvetashvatara Upanishad distinguishes the two unborn, eternal principles at play here:
ज्ञाज्ञौ द्वावजावीशनीशौ । (Shvet. 1/9)
It means that within a physical body, two unborn (eternal) entities exist together – one who knows and one who does not, one who is the Lord and one who is not the Lord. This points to the eternal soul and the eternal power of God (or, in another reading, soul and Prakriti/maya) as distinct realities.
And maya itself is described in the same Upanishad as the creative, ever-multiplying power that gives rise to the diversity of the world:
अजामेकां लोहितशुक्लकृष्णां वह्वीः प्रजाः सृजमानां सरूपाः ।। (Shvet. 4/5)
The one unborn power (maya), appearing in shades of red, white, and black, brings forth many creatures resembling herself.
Yet the texts note a paradox: while the soul is essentially a minute fraction of the power of pure and divine God, souls within the world of maya are covered over by ignorance of their own creation. This mayic veil of worldly attachments makes them forget their true nature, causing them to remain entangled in the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth. Correct understanding begins with recognizing that a being’s nature is that of a soul and the true, eternal relationship is with God. The bondage souls create by worldly attachments clouds their true nature.
Tat Tvam Asi — “That Thou Art”
One of the most quoted lines from this tradition comes from the Chandogya Upanishad (6.8.7): tat tvam asi, “That thou art.” This mahavakya (great saying) is central to how different schools of Vedanta understand the self:
- Non-dualist (Advaita) readers take it as pure identity: the individual soul (atma) and the ultimate reality (Brahman) are literally one, with any sense of separateness being an effect of ignorance (avidya).
- Dualist and devotional (Dvaita/Vishishtadvaita) readers read it instead as essential likeness and eternal belonging rather than absolute identity: the soul shares the Divine’s fundamental substance, as a drop shares the nature of the ocean, while remaining a distinct, eternally individual entity in loving relationship with God.
These are not minor differences; they represent centuries of debate among figures like Shankaracharya, Ramanuja, and Madhvacharya, each grounded in the same Upanishadic texts.
The Soul’s Relationship With the Divine
A recurring theme in devotional (bhakti) interpretation is that the soul’s bond with God already exists eternally and simply needs to be recognized and lived out. The Mundaka Upanishad describes the disposition needed for this recognition:
उपासते पुरुषं ये ह्यकामाः । (Mund. 3/2/1)
Those who are free from selfish desire worship and serve the Supreme Being (Purusha).
And when the soul finally beholds its Lord, the same Upanishad describes the result:
जुष्टं यदा पश्यति । (Mund. 3/1/2)
When the soul beholds the beloved Lord (and His glory), it is freed from sorrow.
The practical implication of “correct understanding” is not mere intellectual assent but a shift in how a person relates to existence:
- Recognizing that one’s truest identity is the eternal soul, not the body or ego.
- Understanding that entanglement in worldly desire is a form of forgetfulness (of one’s true nature), not a genuine or permanent state.
- Reorienting love and devotion toward the Divine as the natural object of the soul’s affection, since the soul is described as having an eternal, personal relationship with God.
Why This Matters in Practice
This teaching isn’t mere theology; it’s meant to reshape how a person lives. If the self is temporary and material, anxiety, attachment, and the pursuit of external validation seem rational. But if the self is an eternal soul intrinsically connected to the Divine, priorities shift toward inner cultivation, detachment from what is transient, and devotion.
A Note on Interpretation
Hindu philosophy is not monolithic on this subject. The Upanishads are dense and open to multiple readings, which is why distinct schools of Vedanta developed to interpret them. Some emphasize that self and God are ultimately identical, others emphasize an eternal, loving distinction between soul and God. Both trace their authority to the same body of scripture.