Soul Body And Person In Ancient India

Author(s): Karin Preisendanz
Publisher: Karin Preisendanz

Page 26

References
soul."22) In the religio-philosophical tradition of the Jainas lua ("that which is alive") becomes the main technical term for the "soul" roughly in this latter sense from the time of their canonical scriptures, whose core goes back to the fourth century BCE.
Arbman 1926 Ernst Arbman, "Untersuchungen zur primitiven Seelenvorstellung mit besonde
rer Rücksicht auf Indien. Einleitendes," Le monde oriental 20 (1926), 85– 226.
Arbman 1927a Ernst Arbman, "Untersuchungen zur primitiven Seelenvorstellung mit besonde
rer Rücksicht auf Indien. II. Altindischer Seelenglaube, sein Ursprung und seine Entwicklung," Le monde oriental 21 (1927), 1-185.
Arbman 1927b Erst Arbman, "Tod und Unsterblichkeit im vedischen Glauben," Archiv für Re
ligionswissenschaft 25,1/2 (1927), 339-387.
The reflections on dtman, purusa and jīva are now almost inseparably connected with the question about life after death and numerous ideas about the mode and causality of repeated birth for living beings, foremost for human creatures. However, even a sketch of this fascinating and highly complex topic in its ancient developmental phase is definitely outside the scope of the present contribution. I would merely like to mention that in the development of teachings about repeated rebirth which soon included ethical considerations and connotations - as opposed to the assumption of an automatic process similar to a law of Nature - the notion of the conscious and active, individual and eternal aman, PMTW.SA or jioa becomes connected with the aspect of moral retribution, also in the classical philosophical traditions, regardless of their diverging metaphysical presuppositions. In the classical period of Indian philosophy this aspect, more precisely, the assumption that only a conscious, individual and permanent (i.e., eternal) atman that is responsible for its own actions can guarantee that good and bad actions bring about right/just consequences, is utilized argumentatively in proving the existence of such an atman. Especially in the Brahminical philosophical traditions of Vaiseșika (philosophy of nature), Nyaya ("logic") and Mimāmsā (the comprehensive ritual science that in classical times developed its own philosophy in the context of Vedic hermeneutics) this and other aspects of the atman touched upon above were thus argumentatively resorted to in the clas sical and early medieval periods, and additional arguments of different types de veloped, especially in the context of the heated philosophical controversy about the existence of an atman conducted with Buddhist opponents.224 Their diametrically opposed positions in this question are addressed by Birgit Kellner in her contribution to the present volume.
Arbman 1928 Ernst Arbman, "Tod und Unsterblichkeit im vedischen Glauben (Fortsetzung
und Schluss zu Bd. XXV S. 387)," Archiv für Religionswissenschaft 26,1/2 (1928), 187-240.
Bodewitz 1982 H.W. Bodewitz, "The Waters in Vedic Cosmic Classifications," Indologica
Taurinensia 10 (1982), 45-54.
Bodewitz 1986 Henk Bodewitz, "Prāna, Apāna and other Prāņa-s in Vedic Literature," Adyar
Library Bulletin 50 (1986), 326-348.
Bodewitz 1991 H.W. Bodewitz, Light, Soul and Visions in the Veda. Poona 1991.
Bodewitz 1992 H.W. Bodewitz, "King Prāna," in: Ritual, State and History in South Asia: Essays
in Honour of J.C. Heesterman, cd. B. van den Hoek, D.H.A. Kolff and M.S. Oort, Leiden/Köln 1992, 50–64.
Bodewitz 1994 Henk W. Bodewitz, "Life after Death in the Rgvedasamhitā," Wiener Zeitschrift
für die Kunde Sudasiens 38 (1994), 22-41.
223 Cf. ChUp 6.11.2 and 3. A very early preference to, or rather predecessor of this unitary no
tion of a "soulcalled us may be found in RV 1.164.30c (cf. the translation in Geldner 1951-1957: vol. 1, 233; cf. also Bodewitz 1991: 46 and Dange 1995-1996: 26) where it is said that the lua (m.) of the/a dead person wanders at will / independently ko m asya Carati sadhabhih), a phrase which may be compared to the one in RV 10.16.5b. The referent of lua is clearly something rather concrete here which makes a translation of the word
as "life" (cf., e.g., O'Flaherty 1981:79) problematic. 224 Cf. especially Oetke 1984.