Kaṭha Upaniṣad 110

110

na jāyate notpadyate mriyate vā na mriyate cotpattimato vastuno 'nityasyānekā vikriyās tāsām ādyante janmavināśalakṣaṇe vikriya ihātmani pratiṣidhyete prathamaṃ sarvavikriyāpratiṣedhārthaṃ na jāyate mriyate veti / vipaścinmedhāvī, avipariluptacaitanyasvabhāvāt / kiñ ca nāyam ātmā kutaścit kāraṇāntarād babhūva na prabhūtaḥ / asmāc cātmano na babhūva kaścid arthāntarabhūtaḥ / ato 'yam ātmājo nityaḥ śāśvato 'pakṣayavivarjitaḥ / yo hy aśāśvataḥ so 'pakṣīyate, ayaṃ tu śāśvato 'ta eva purāṇaḥ purāpi nava eveti / yo hy avayavopacayadvāreṇābhinirvartyate sa idānīṃ navo yathāṅkarādis tadviparītas tv ātmā purāṇo vṛddhivivarjita ity arthaḥ / yata evam ato na hanyate na hiṃsyate hanyamāne śastrādibhiḥ śarīre / tatstho 'py ākāśavad eva ///1,2.18 //

Shankara’s Commentary:
Com.—The particle ‘Om’ has been pointed out as a prop of and as a substitute for the atman, asked about in the text beginning with ‘Anyaira dharmat,’ etc., and devoid of all attributes, for the benefit of the ignorant and the middling class of men who wish to attain the Brahman, manifested and unmanifested. Now, this text is indroduced for the purpose of directly ascertaining the real nature of the atman, to attain whom the word ‘Om’ was mentioned as a prop; he is not born, i.e., produced; nor does he die; various modifications are incidental to a thing which is produced and not eternal. Of those, the first and the last modifications namely birth and death are at the outset denied of the atman, with the object of denying all modifications by the expressions ‘he is not born nor does he die.’ Vipaschit, intelligent; for, he is by nature of indestructible intelligence. Again, this atman came not from anything, i.e., from any other cause; nor did any other real thing proceed from this atman; therefore, this atman is unborn, eternal, everlasting, undecaying (for, whoso is not everlasting decays; but he is everlasting); therefore, ancient, i.e., new, even formerly; (for, that which undergoes a development of its parts, is then said to be new); for instance a pot, etc.; but the atman who is of a contrary nature is ancient, i.e., incapable of development; this being so, he is not slain or affected, even though the body is slain by swords, etc. Though in it, he is in it like the akas.