Did we enter the body at conception or we were already in the sperm before?

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

To say that cells are just bags of chemicals is no different from saying the human body is just a bag of chemicals--it is atheism.

.

don't put words in my mouth.

the body is a machine that is produced by the material energy under the control of Paramatma.

Srila Prabhupada said blood cells get energy from the soul in the heart.

this speculation that there is a soul in every cell contradicts what Krishna says in the gita that the body is made of material energy.

the energy of the cells comes from the soul in the heart of the human, not from a jiva in each cell.

Murali_Mohan_das · July 18, 2007

If the jiva is animating the body which *is*, as you observe, made up of material energy, why can't a jiva be animating each idividual cell which is also made up of material energy?

I've made it clear that I'm speculating. You are pretending to have some shastric footing for your contention that the cell definitively does *not* contain a jiva-soul.

I have seen nothing in shastra that conclusively says the cell is purely a mechanical beast.

.
don't put words in my mouth.

the body is a machine that is produced by the material energy under the control of Paramatma.

Srila Prabhupada said blood cells get energy from the soul in the heart.

this speculation that there is a soul in every cell contradicts what Krishna says in the gita that the body is made of material energy.

the energy of the cells comes from the soul in the heart of the human, not from a jiva in each cell.

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

If the jiva is animating the body which *is*, as you observe, made up of material energy, why can't a jiva be animating each idividual cell which is also made up of material energy?

I've made it clear that I'm speculating. You are pretending to have some shastric footing for your contention that the cell definitively does *not* contain a jiva-soul.

I have seen nothing in shastra that conclusively says the cell is purely a mechanical beast.

Krishna says the body is a machine made of material energy.

How much more simple can I make it.

it there were jivas in every cell then the body would be made of spiritual energy.

Lord Brahma's body is made of jivas, ours is NOT!

when you become Lord Brahma then you will have a jiva in every cell of your body.

our bodies are made of STOOL not spirit souls. :wacko:

Ananta Sesa · July 18, 2007

Do we have Hridayananda Maharaja or somebody of his caliber here who could settle this out?

theist · July 18, 2007

Single celled organisms (amoeba, etc.) don't have reproductive organs either. They split. You're saying amoeba don't have souls?

Totally illogical (Captain). By your reasoning, if each human body (or plant body) had it's own soul it would not need to be energized by the sun. Does that make any sense?

To say that cells are just bags of chemicals is no different from saying the human body is just a bag of chemicals--it is atheism.

Yep. Nothing but gross materialistic propaganda. Exactly what the materialists teach school children.

We have to learn to perceive the lifeforce at work in matter and in this why we can detect the soul's presence. Just like I can't see the wind but when I look outside and see the trees limbs moving under it's influence I know it is present by that symptom.

theist · July 18, 2007

Do we have Hridayananda Maharaja or somebody of his caliber here who could settle this out?

Guru #90210? No he is not here. I think you can find him at his Beverly Hills estate..er... I mean bhajan kutir.

krsna · July 18, 2007

Do we have Hridayananda Maharaja or somebody of his caliber here who could settle this out?

Acaryadeva9.219.jpg

Calibrated heaviness meant to purge the ele[hantantitis of the mind's gyrations.

Murali_Mohan_das · July 18, 2007

Lord Brahma's body is made of jivas, ours is NOT!

Don't you get it? In the universes that our our bodies, we *are* Lord Brahma!!!!

Albeit, we may be the Brahmas with *half* a head (and not four or sixteen, or...).

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

Don't you get it? In the universes that our our bodies, we *are* Lord Brahma!!!!

Albeit, we may be the Brahmas with *half* a head (and not four or sixteen, or...).

sorry to break the bad news pal, but your body is a bag of stool, not a body of jivas.

Murali_Mohan_das · July 18, 2007

sorry to break the bad news pal, but your body is a bag of stool, not a body of jivas.

You can think what you like.

Our bodies are certainly bags of stool. At the same time, that stool is being animated by countless jivas.

I could write an e-mail to Gurudev today and have an answer by tomorrow. Rather, I think I will wait until I can sit at his feet at the Soquel Seva Ashrama and ask him in person (which, Krishna-willing, will be in a few months).

Until then, I'm perfectly satisfied with my own speculation on the matter.

July 18, 2007

Lord Brahma's body is made of jivas, ours is NOT!

no, Brahma's body is very subtle, purely energetical (mind, intelligence, and ego) and is completely his own.

dont confuse Lord Brahma with the Universal Form

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

no, Brahma's body is very subtle, purely energetical (mind, intelligence, and ego) and is completely his own.

dont confuse Lord Brahma with the Universal Form

as best I can remember the body of Lord Brahma contains the sum total of all the jivas in the universe.

I'll have to look for a quote.

We are all one small part of the total body of Lord Brahma.

Within Lord Brahma is contained all jivas of this brahmanda.

That is part of his omniscience in the universe.

We are all within the great body of Lord Brahma.

I'll have to look for a reference.

Maybe I am just getting senile?

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

no, Brahma's body is very subtle, purely energetical (mind, intelligence, and ego) and is completely his own.

dont confuse Lord Brahma with the Universal Form

Here is one verse that somewhat illustrates the point I was making.

Śrī Brahma-saḿhitā 5.22

evaḿ sarvātma-sambandhaḿ

nābhyāḿ padmaḿ harer abhūt

tatra brahmābhavad bhūyaś

catur-vedi catur-mukhaḥ

SYNONYMS

evam — thus; sarva-ātma — with all souls; sambandham — related; nābhyām — from the navel; padmam — a lotus; hareḥ — of Viṣṇu; abhūt — sprung up; tatra — there; brahmā — Brahmā; abhavat — was born; bhūyaḥ — again; catuḥ-vedī — versed in the four Vedas; catuḥ-mukhaḥ — four-faced.

TRANSLATION

The divine lotus which springs from the navel-pit of Viṣṇu is in every way related by the spiritual tie with all souls and is the origin of four-faced Brahmā versed in the four Vedas.

PURPORT

The same divine lotus originating from the divine person entered into the hidden recess, is the superior plane of aggregation of all individual souls. The four-faced Brahmā, the image of self-enjoyment, derives his origin from the prototype Brahmā or Hiraṇyagarbha, the mundane seminal principle, who regards the aggregate of all mundane entities as his own proper body. The delegated godship of Brahmā as well as his being the dislocated portion of Kṛṣṇa, are also established.

It says here that Lord Brahma considers the aggregate of all mundane entities as his own body proper.

What this fully means I can't claim to understand.

theist · July 18, 2007

What this fully means I can't claim to understand.

Perhaps a good reason not to pontificate on it.

<dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd"><sup>2</sup>pon·tif·i·cate </dd></dl> 1 a: to officiate as a pontiff b: to celebrate pontifical mass

2: to speak or express opinions in a pompous or dogmatic way

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

Perhaps a good reason not to pontificate on it.

since when is posting a quote from shastra pontification?

I was simply posting what Srila Saraswati Thakur has pontificated on it.

The meaning is self-evident.

That is why they translate into English, so we can understand.

muralidhar_das · July 18, 2007

A human ego thinks of himself in terms of the body he feels and controls with his mind and senses.

Brahma emerged from Brahma (Brahman) and he sees everything as Brahma

Guruvani · July 18, 2007

Perhaps a good reason not to pontificate on it.

<dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd"><sup>2</sup>pon·tif·i·cate </dd></dl> 1 a: to officiate as a pontiff b: to celebrate pontifical mass

2: to speak or express opinions in a pompous or dogmatic way

so, when you disagree with somebody you have to call them pompous?

Maybe you need to look in the mirror if you want to see pompous?

July 19, 2007

"The four-faced Brahmā, the image of self-enjoyment, derives his origin from the prototype Brahmā or Hiraṇyagarbha, the mundane seminal principle, who regards the aggregate of all mundane entities as his own proper body."

----------------------------

Brahma was born out of Hiranyagarbha, the Golden Egg (or Womb) the Vedic hymns glorify as the pre-Universe conglomerate of jivas and matter. In our philosophy Hiranyagarbha is the proto-Universe which emanated from the pores of Lord Vishnu's skin. Brahma is specifically born out the lotus flower growing on a long stem from Lord Garbhodakasayi Vishnu's navel. The flower and stem contain all ingredients of the material creation, including dormant living entities.

Guruvani · July 19, 2007

Apart from what somebody might find in the Wikipedia, here is the Gaudiya conception of Hiranyagarbha.

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 20.292

hiraṇyagarbha-antaryāmī — garbhodakaśāyī

'sahasra-śīrṣādi' kari' vede yāńre gāi

SYNONYMS

hiraṇyagarbha — named Hiraṇyagarbha; antaryāmī — the Supersoul; garbha-udaka-śāyī — Lord Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu; sahasra-śīrṣā-ādi kari' — by the Vedic hymns beginning with sahasra-śīrṣā (Ṛg Veda-saḿhitā 10.90.1); vede yāńre gāi — unto whom the Vedas pray.

TRANSLATION

"Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, known within the universe as Hiraṇyagarbha and the antaryāmī, or Supersoul, is glorified in the Vedic hymns, beginning with the hymn that starts with the word 'sahasra-śīrṣā.'

Hiranyagarbha is the name for Garbhodakasayi Vishnu - the Paramatma.

Guruvani · July 19, 2007

Brahma was born out of Hiranyagarbha, the Golden Egg (or Womb) the Vedic hymns glorify as the pre-Universe conglomerate of jivas and matter. In our philosophy Hiranyagarbha is the proto-Universe which emanated from the pores of Lord Vishnu's skin. Brahma is specifically born out the lotus flower growing on a long stem from Lord Garbhodakasayi Vishnu's navel. The flower and stem contain all ingredients of the material creation, including dormant living entities.

Obviously, what you got from the Wikipedia is not correct on the topic of Hiranyagarbha.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiranyagarbha

July 19, 2007

In the Rig Veda hymn 10.121,the source of "all powers and existences, divine as well as earthly" is identified as a golden embryo (hiranyagarba).

This hymn (HYMN 10.121. To Ka) says:

1. IN the beginning rose Hiranyagarbha, born Only Lord of all created beings.

He fixed and holdeth up this earth and heaven. What God shall we adore with our oblation?

2 Giver of vital breath, of power and vigour, he whose commandments all the Gods acknowledge -.

The Lord of death, whose shade is life immortal. What God shall we adore with our oblation?

3 Who by his grandeur hath become Sole Ruler of all the moving world that breathes and slumbers;

He who is Loord of men and Lord of cattle. What God shall we adore with our oblation?

4 His, through his might, are these snow-covered mountains, and men call sea and Rasā his possession:

His arms are these, his are these heavenly regions. What God shall we adore with our oblation? (Ralph T.H. Griffith)

-----------

Even if we accept that Hiranyagarbha is the Supersoul, it is not Lord Brahma

Guruvani · July 19, 2007

Even if we accept that Hiranyagarbha is the Supersoul, it is not Lord Brahma

Srila Saraswati Thakur wrote that Hiranyagarbha (Garbhodakasaya Vishnu) is the proto-type of Lord Brahma.

That means that Lord Brahma is very similar in certain ways.

Lord Brahma being the creator god of this universe considers all the conditioned jivas as part of his body proper.

Any god worth his salt would consider thus.

Sometimes when there is no jiva qualified for the post of Lord Brahma then Garbhodakasayi Vishnu becomes Lord Brahma.

That Lord Brahma is the prototype for all other Brahmas.

All Brahmas emulate that Hiranyagarbha Brahma.

July 19, 2007

To answer your question concerning having someone of the calibre of Hrdayananda speak, we have that here. We have theist, gHari, guruvani, lowborn, and two muralis. There is six people there that are equal or even much greater authority than my obsessive godbrother who never shows any tolerance to the folks he speaks to.

Haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

PS If you dont mind my asking, by what authority is he deemed authoritative?

Jahnava Nitai Das · July 19, 2007

All cells contain souls according to the following conversation with Srila Prabhupada. I just listened to the audio to see whether Prabhupada is saying "yes" to confirm the statement or whether he is saying "yes, go on with your question." It wasn't a super forceful yes (like he was absolutely stating it), but it was forceful enough to make it appear that Srila Prabhupada was agreeing with the statement.

It isn't as authoritative as if Prabhupada had said the words himself, as he may not have heard the question or statement clearly (due to the sound of the ocean in the background), or he may not have understood the specific context that Bhakti Swarup Damodar Maharaj was trying to present.

Still after reading the transcription and hearing the tape I would tend to think Prabhupada did agree with the statement. Also Bhakti Swarup Damodar's statement itself deserves serious consideration since he was (I believe) a molecular biologist. The fact that he considers cells to possess life would be enough for a nontechnical person like myself to accept his word that cells are living. I havent studied molecular biology, and I don't know all the intricacies of cell formation and cell functioning, but if someone who did study this presented to me that they are living, I would generally accept it, especially coming from a learned vaishnava.

Svarupa Damodara: What is the condition of the soul, innumerable souls, within the body? Like the cells. All are living cells. These all contain individual souls.

Prabhupada: Yes.

Svarupa Damodara: So what these individual souls are doing to support the bigger soul?

Prabhupada: No, they are living individually. Just like there are many germs in your stool. Because the stool is there, they are living. That is their perfect condition of living. That's all. But that germs has nothing to do with this individual soul, Mr. John. Just like I am living, you are living, but we are all independent different souls. They are living in their own condition, you are living in your own condition. But when you go to office to work, you find so many others are also working. But that does not mean they are dependent on your working or you are dependent on their work. But the condition is like that.

This conversation (which occured in Los Angeles, Dec. 13th, 1973) was also made into a "Prabhupada Speaks Out" in Back to Godhead Magazine (a 1999 edition). I compared the two and it was pretty surprising how much it had been edited. I wasn't aware that the conversations were so edited in Back To Godhead magazine. Here is the same conversation from Prabhupada Speaks Out:

Disciple: So, Srila Prabhupada, we can distinguish that the soul who goes away from the material body has nothing to do with the worms and germs that go on living in the body after death. But before the soul goes away from the material body, does he have something to do with the innumerable souls who live within the body’s cells? I think that in the past you’ve said each cell contains a distinct and individual soul.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, I said that.

Disciple: So, during the time before the “main soul” goes away from the body, could we say that these other souls living in the cell structures are supporting that one particular soul?

Srila Prabhupada: No. They are living their own individual lives, irrespective of that particular soul. For instance, there are many germs living in some person’s, say Mr. John’s, stool. Why are those germs living there? Simply because stool is their ideal place for living; that’s all. But those germs have nothing to do with that particular soul, Mr. John.