Expanding Upon Ideas of Atman and Man

I want to expand upon the challenge that Zach put forward: Why might atman be “clearer” in human beings than in other forms of life? Zach notes that a consensus seems to emerge between the readings “that humanity is somehow distinctly different from all other life forms.” I am going to discuss my thoughts regarding the basis for that consensus.

At a fundamental level, Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty – in her The Rig Veda – seems to imply that man is a dextrous vehicle for tangible results and physical change. O’Flaherty, in expounding on early myths, writes that recitation – Hinduism’s fluid vehicle for vocal worship, sung by human beings – will bring palpable success to “him who knows the name and nature of recitation in this way.”

Even so, man’s awareness of himself and of his external surroundings are muddled in the Vedic tradition. We learn, from Jonardon Ganeri’s The Concealed Art of the Soul, that sages and gods are traditionally reluctant to bestow sacred or protected knowledge upon ordinary human beings. Ganeri tells the story of Naciketas, who has been granted three wishes by Death (Yama). When Naciketas’ final request involves the revelation of sacred knowledge, Death forcefully and continually pushes back, asking to be “release(d) from this” deplorable task. According to Ganeri, a “reluctant sage” once even implored Gargi – the great Vedic philosopher – not to “ask too many questions” for fear of his head “shatter(ing) apart.”

All this presents a relatively clear syllogism, and perhaps one answer to Zach’s question: if it is so profoundly difficult for human beings – sentient, conscious creatures who are gifted with the power of language – to grasp sacred Vedic concepts like atman, and other life forms are invariably less sentient, less conscious, and less (if at all) linguistically gifted, then atman will be “clearer” in (and to) human beings than in other forms of life.

Another brief thought: it seems to me that intellectual inquiry – even if answers are out of the question – is smiled upon in the Vedic tradition. O’Flaherty notes that when the ancient character Maitreyi asks her husband about immortality, he replies that the inquisitive nature of her question has made her “even more” dear to him. Other life forms, to modern scientific knowledge, are incapable of the same kind (if any) intellectual drive or inquiry. This may aid atman’s clarity in man.