Atman

In Advaita philosophy, the atman is distinct from dharma, as it "has no other duty" and "shakes off both virtue and vice" (cite: edge_018650, cite: edge_018409). However, atman is also considered a qualified aspect of dharma, related to "the values consisting in long life, wealth, and holiness" and "the purposefulness of the scriptures" (cite: edge_019087, cite: edge_017890). Additionally, dharma is seen as a qualified aspect of atman, "for the sake of meditation" and "rites are enjoined for others" (cite: edge_020055, cite: edge_018553). The relationship between atman and dharma is complex, with atman being both distinct from and connected to dharma (cite: edge_018900). [Note: this summary may contain an unverified citation.]

In the school of Dvaita, the concept of atman is closely related to karma, with the atman being the cause of karma (cite: edge_007351). The atman is also described as being furnished with its own instruments, which are used to perform karma (cite: edge_007413). Additionally, the atman is said to be the cause of karma, with the body being produced by karma (cite: edge_007736). The atman is also connected to dharma, with the atman being qualified as an aspect of dharma, and dharma being a qualified aspect of the atman (cite: edge_007630, edge_007339). [Note: this summary may contain an unverified citation.]

In the Vishishtadvaita school of philosophy, the atman is considered a qualified aspect of dharma, as stated in the Bhagavad Gita (cite: edge_001136). The atman is also described as the supporter of the elements (cite: edge_001829) and is associated with freedom from evil and sin (cite: edge_006715). Additionally, the atman is said to be the cause of karma, with the souls using their own creative will-power to create their own worlds (cite: edge_006737) (cite: edge_006201). The atman is also characterized as possessing attributes such as freedom from all evil and sin (cite: edge_006712).

In the achintya_bhedabheda school of philosophy, the atman is seen as the cause of karma, as stated in the Bhagavad Gita, "the living entity is hurt by fatal weapons" (cite: edge_002768). The atman is also considered distinct from karma, with the Gita saying, "free from the repetition of birth and death" (cite: edge_004057). Additionally, the atman is viewed as a qualified aspect of prakriti, or nature, with the Gita noting that one is "compelled by your own nature" (cite: edge_004497). The atman's relationship with karma is complex, with the Gita also stating that the atman does not become entangled in karma, as "the activities performed due to his contact with material bodies do not entangle him" (cite: edge_004036).

In the school of dvaitadvaita, the concept of atman is considered to be identical to brahman (cite: edge_001077). This idea is repeated throughout various sources, emphasizing the oneness of atman and brahman (cite: edge_001074). The dvaitadvaita school suggests that one should realize the atman as one with what governs the beings, implying a deep connection between the individual self and the ultimate reality (cite: edge_001076). This understanding of atman is a key aspect of the dvaitadvaita philosophy (cite: edge_001075).

In Buddhist philosophy, the concept of atman is distinct from death, as a realized one no longer exists after death (cite: edge_009037). This idea is repeated in various sources, emphasizing that a realized one no longer exists after death (cite: edge_008884). Atman is also seen as distinct from knowledge, as one wouldn't truly know it (cite: edge_009204). Additionally, atman is considered a cause of karma, as those who are unrestrained and wicked are associated with it (cite: edge_010180).

In the Samkhya school of philosophy, the concept of atman is distinct from the soul (cite: edge_020695). According to the Samkhya perspective, there is a real difference among souls, as stated in the Svetasvatara Upanishad (cite: edge_020695). This distinction suggests that the atman and soul are not considered the same entity in Samkhya philosophy (cite: edge_020695). The Samkhya school upholds this difference, as noted in the Svetasvatara Upanishad (cite: edge_020695).