Trees have life- bhAshya

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Vaibhav,

What I have said is the established view accepted by all exponents of

advaita. The question why there cannot be a subtle body in stone does not

arise because this is the established view. I would therefore suggest that

you consult a scholar in whom you have confidence and find out the correct

answer. It will be too physically strenuous a job for me to put forward all

arguments in support of what I have said. Some other scholars in the group

may also give their views.

 

As regards the word 'sthANu', every word in Sanskrit has a number of

meanings. The meaning relevant to the context has to be taken. Sankara

interprets sthANu as 'vrikshAdisthAvarabhAvam' which means 'trees and

similar entities'. There is a general rule in Sanskrit that 'Adi' means

'others which are similar in nature'. So stones cannot be include in the

word 'Adi' along with trees.. There are such principles to be applied while

interpreting Sanskrit words.

 

Please excuse me for my inability to convince you. The reason is that of

late I have become physically very weak. Still some times I am tempted to

write something.

 

Regards,

 

S.N.Sastri.

 

 

 

 

So what prevents from a sukshma sharira to enter a stone or a metal? As far

as I understand there is nothing fundamentally different between a

human/animal body and a stone etc. if the sukshma sharira is absent from the

latter. **Is there a specific and direct quote in the Shruti saying the

sukshma sharira CANNOT enter the objects normally defined as 'not alive',

say a rock or a metal?**

 

Vaibhav

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Greetings my Advaitin family :

 

Yes! i am somewhat over my cyber fatigue and time disorientation (

after going through three time zones - U.S.A, Europe and now India) -

it is nice to be back in the company of one's Mother and

Motherland ! Sri Rama rightly said 'Janani janamabhoomicha

swargathapi gariyasi' - Mother and Motherland are dearer than

Heaven .

 

Shastriji has started a very interesting thread on 'Trees have

life ' - as a worshipper of 'Prakriti' ( mother nature ) i could not

agree more - Do trees have life? Sure , they do !

 

Was it Willaim Shakespeare who said " And this, our life, exempt

from public haunt, finds tongues in trees, books in the running

brooks, sermons in stones, and good in everything "

 

Also, on another note, The 'tree' has been used as a metaphor while

explaining a spiritual philosophy!

 

Sri Krishna Bhagwan uses the metaphor of 'tree' very effectively

while explaining the spiritual Truth to his disciple Arjuna !

 

in chapter 10 , verse 26 , Sri Krishna paramatma says

 

Vibhuti Yoga

 

asvatthah sarva-vrksanam

 

TRANSLATION

 

Of all trees I am the holy fig tree( Banyan tree)

 

And why did sri Krishna single out the 'Asvatta' tree - it is the

most beautiful and the highest tree and it is worshipped in India by

many for its wonderful properties.

 

Poojya Gurudeva Chinmayananda says " OF ALL THE TREES I AM THE

ASHWATTHA-TREE --- Both in its magnitude and life-span, the

Ashwattha tree (Pipal) can be considered as the " all-pervading " and

the " Immortal, " inasmuch as it lives generally for centuries. The

Hindu has learnt to worship it, and there is a sentiment of divinity

attached to it. It is also a fact that the Ashwattha brings up in

our mind fresh memories of the Upanishadic comparison of it with

samsara. Later, in the Geeta itself (XV-I) we have a mention of the

peepal tree as representing the pluralistic phenomenal world that

has shot up to spread itself like mushrooms of false sorrows over

what is dreamy nothingness. "

 

here is the verse 1 from Chapter 15 of the Srimad Bhagwad Gita

 

urdhva-mulam adhah-sakham

asvattham prahur avyayam

chandamsi yasya parnani

yas tam veda sa veda-vit

 

Literal translation

 

There is a banyan tree which has its roots upward and its branches

down and whose leaves are the Vedic hymns. One who knows this tree

is the knower of the Vedas.

 

then in verse 2 of chapter 15 , Sri Krishna says

 

adhas cordhvam prasrtas tasya sakha

guna-pravrddha visaya-pravalah

adhas ca mulany anusantatani

karmanubandhini manusya-loke

 

Literal translation

 

The branches of this tree extend downward and upward, nourished by

the three modes of material nature. The twigs are the objects of the

senses. This tree also has roots going down, and these are bound to

the fruitive actions of human society.

 

and finally in verse 3 and 4 of chapter 15 , sri Krishna says

 

na rupam asyeha tathopalabhyate

nanto na cadir na ca sampratistha

asvattham enam su-virudha-mulam

asanga-sastrena drdhena chittva VERSE 3

 

tatah padam tat parimargitavyam

yasmin gata na nivartanti bhuyah

tam eva cadyam purusam prapadye

yatah pravrttih prasrta purani VERSE 4

 

LITERAL TRANSLATION

 

The real form of this tree cannot be perceived in this world. No one

can understand where it ends, where it begins, or where its

foundation is. But with determination one must cut down this tree

with the weapon of detachment. So doing, one must seek that place

from which, having once gone, one never returns, and there surrender

to Sri Krishna from whom everything has began and in whom everything

is abiding since time immemorial.

 

Thank you shrimaan shastriji ! just by mentioning the word 'tree'

you made me think of Shri shri Krishna Bhagvaan - 'VASUDEVAM sARVAM

ITI' - 'Avan thhonilam ullan ; thurubilam ullan ' Yes! The lord is

the underlying 'consciousness ; in all objects - animate or

inamimate , moving or unmoving !

 

Jai Sri Krishna !

 

PS - Shastriji , it is your loving message that motivated me to post

this message from a cyber cafe in New Delhi ! thank you for keeping

me 'attached' to my cyber family!

[Guest guest]

advaitin , vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

 

>

> So what prevents from a sukshma sharira to enter a stone or a metal?

 

Namaste,

 

What prevents this is the density of 'tamo guna'! In the ritual

of 'prANa pratiShThA' for 'enlivening murti-s' of any inert material,

this principle is invoked.

 

Someone who has the intensity of 'tapas' to enliven the 'inert'

murti and has realized 'sarvaM khalvidaM brahma' can do so.

Resurrecting a 'dead' body would also fall in the same category of

phenomena.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

1. Sastriji,

 

Thanks for your explanation. But isnt the literal

meaning of the word sthANu simply 'one which does not

move'? It also occurs in Gita 2:24 and is also

translated as firm, immovable etc. And the reference

there is to the Self, definitely not to anything as

limited as plants etc., which also are not completely

immovable.

 

Anyway, I hardly have any authority to argue with you

especially in the knowledge of Sanskrit or Vedanta,

and hence would leave it at that.

 

2. Sunderji,

 

Namaste. If tamas is the only 'obstruction', then

there are subtle bodies with much lesser development

as compared to a animal or a plant. There are numerous

lower microbes (which by any definition of the term,

both scientifically and as per scriptures) are

'alive'. However, the difference between the microbes

and a piece of rock is hardly noticeable for the most

of their life except a function or two which puts them

in the 'alive' category.

 

I guess I do not see the reason why a subtle body

cannot enter a rock or a piece of metal. The inanimate

object, afterall, has the subtle elements present in

it. Someone quoted the examples of Ahilya confined to

a rock as well as Ramana Maharshi claiming the rocks

at Arunachala as alive.

 

I am not claiming that a human being will be born in

his/her next life as a rock, rather, just saying that

at a very low level of evolution, or with a

predominance of tamas (whichever way one wants to look

at it), the rocks are as alive as any other animals or

plants. The Consciousness which is completely

manifested in a jivan-mukta, and incompletely

manifested in an ordinary man, is also manifested, but

to a much much lesser extent in a rock (through the

subtle body).

 

Is this directly violating anything in the Shruti? If

it is, please do tell, as I am open-minded and would

like to learn more. Thanks.

 

3. Sadanandaji,

 

You said: " Stones and metals etc by themselves

apparently do not have all the requisite elements

conducive to exhaust the karma the jiivas have. "

 

What are the elements required for karma of jivas to

exhaust? Does Shruti say anything in this regard?

 

Also, once there is no life in a physical body (i.e. a

corpse), what is the difference between a stone and

it? They are made of similar gross elements as well as

same subtle elements, only in different compositions

and arrangements. So where is the fundamental

difference?

 

Also, the Si-based life-forms etc. are the creation of

science fiction writers. Even if such forms did exist,

I am sure you would agree it has only to do with the

gross/physical body and has no affect on the subtle

body or subtle elements. Not to mention carbon etc.

are present in the stones in our known universe as

well.

 

Thanks everyone for replying. My only intention in

posting this mail and the previous one was to

understand if my understanding is correct as per the

scriptures with the help of scholars in the community.

 

Hari Om!

~Vaibhav.

 

 

Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online at

http://in.messenger./webmessengerpromo.php

[Guest guest]

Just to add my two cents, I have been to the top of Arunachala and walked on the

rocks in my bare feet and they certainly felt alive to me, as a matter of fact

everything felt very alive up there!

 

John Miller

 

 

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

 

> 3. Sadanandaji,

 

> What are the elements required for karma of jivas

> to

> exhaust? Does Shruti say anything in this regard?

 

Shree Vaibhav - PraNams

 

The subtle body consists of mind, intellect, plus

panca praaNas, plus jnaana and karma indriyas etc each

need to be expressed depending on the vaasanaas that

need to be exhausted.

 

The praaNa, apaana, vyaana, udaana and samaana - the

physiological functions requires appropriate grosses

equipments to handle. The food that we eat will get

converted to gross (roughage), middle (flesh, blood,

organs etc needed) and subtle (mind and its

components) and the sthuula shariira need to be

capable of handling these reaction processes or

transformation process. Medical science is not perfect

yet to know exactly how the body functions or the

complexities involved. Implying that sthuula shariira

has all the capabilities that are dictated by causal

body to handle the requisite karma.

 

Now if you can convince that Lord that stones and

metal have these capabilities, by all means he will

enter in to those.

 

In the creation process discussions are done at

panciikaraNa or TrivRit karaNa showing how the subtle

to gross transformation takes place and when He enters

into the body.

 

 

> Also, once there is no life in a physical body (i.e.

> a

> corpse), what is the difference between a stone and

> it? They are made of similar gross elements as well

> as

> same subtle elements, only in different compositions

> and arrangements.

 

No - There is a fundamental difference between the

two.

Stone is just predominately some silicates and do not

have all the requirements for panca praaNas to

manifest.

 

Corpse has all that but that particular gross body is

no more conducive to express the vaasanaas that are

getting fructified. Once praaNa leaves, other germs

occupy using it as their abode.

 

>

> Also, the Si-based life-forms etc. are the creation

> of

> science fiction writers. Even if such forms did

> exist,

> I am sure you would agree it has only to do with the

> gross/physical body and has no affect on the subtle

> body or subtle elements.

 

How do you know, not that you are wrong? The point is

if it is possible to have subtle body to function, it

can and it will depend on the vaasanaas that need to

be exhausted.

We are finding that water is essential part of the

pancabhuutas in the panciikaraNa this is the one that

expresses as praaNa - see Chandogya. Up Ch. 6th. If

one gets dehydrated the praaNa leaves. Sthuula

shariira, more that 60% is water and most Si-based

compounds have high M.P and are not conducive to

conduct physiological functions - pancha praaNas.

Scientists are excited to discover water in the extra

terrestrial planets and hoping that there will be life

- meaning that it is an essential ingredient to

sustain life - praaNa.

 

In the body C is not in elemental form but complex

carbohydrates, proteins and in fact every part of the

gross matter in the body is hooked up to carbon chains

- that is why it is called organic chemistry.

 

Si - comes next in the same group but cannot form

complex compounds like C to sustain the life. carbides

and silicides run parallel but C takes a turn when it

comes to the organic compounds with extended ring

structures.

 

Well anyway - the point is for the life to express,

all gross mater is not conducive - Hence Upanishad

talk about two types - Bhuuta and bhoutika gross

matter - one that enjoys and the other than is

enjoyed. All metals and stones etc come under bhoutika

and all life forms come under bhuuta.

 

This much I know the rest one has to imagine.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Namaste All.

 

Here is another interesting fact which I pointed out on this forum

long back.

 

There is a verse in Shankara's Vivekachudamani which refers to the

*colourlessness* of the sky. I don't have the exact verse number.

 

This is strange in view of the the contention of modern science that

this is a recent discovery of the last century or so.

 

Well, there seem to be many such cases. One needs only listen to Dr.

Gopalakrishnan of the Indian Institute of Scientific Heritage.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

______________

 

advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> Dr. J.C. Bose (1858 –1937) is said to have discovered that trees

and plants

> have life and react to stimuli. .....

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sastri-ji and Vaibhav-ji.

 

Reference Vaibhav-ji post 38453.

 

The exchange of posts between you both is quite interesting. Again,

the issue is science going with shruti or science vs. shruti.

 

May I ask a question in this context? We have been talking about

this sUkSma sharIra for long now. Before we conclude whether or not

stone or an inanimate object has sUkSma sharIra, may I know if the

existence of a sUksSma sharIra has at all been empirically

established by science?

 

The second point that is worrying me is that we seem to be rather

very geocentric in our approach because the mundane seems to have set

upAdhis on our understanding and interpretation of the shAstrAs. We

don't seem to attempt any relaxation on our rigid thinking even in

this age when extra-terrestrial life seems a distinct possibility.

 

I am reminded of a novel I read long back - " The Black Cloud " by Sir

Fred Hoyle of the famous Steady State Theory of the Universe. Please

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Cloud. The cloud of the

book has intelligence.

 

Of course, it is fiction. Still, I can't be quite sure about the

thoughts the mountain I see from my window is thinking. A Malayalam

poet once addressed a mountain thus: " Oh, you, the one revelling in

nityAnanda samAdhi " . How much I wish I could say that that was not

pure imagery. Our mythology has mounts Meru and MainAka - the former

grew into the sky scaring the devAs and the latter blocked Lord

Hanumanji's course to Lanka like Mount VindhyA blocked the path of

Sage Agastya.

 

Haven't we personified the mountain abodes of our Gods? Look at the

sanctity we attach to mounts Pazhani in Tamil Nadu and Shabari

(Sabarimala) in Kerala. I think the Indian psycle has always

unknowingly recognized a distinctly pulsating presence in the

inanimate. That 'whatever it is' needs further probing. I am saying

this even at the peril of being labelled atrociously superstitious.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Sadanandaji,

 

Please let me clarify each of your points.

 

1. You said: " The subtle body consists of mind, intellect, plus

panca praaNas, plus jnaana and karma indriyas etc each

need to be expressed depending on the vaasanaas that

need to be exhausted. "

 

Is there any reason why any of these cannot be present in the stone?

For e.g. the 'mind-stuff', which itself becomes the ego, manas, buddhi and

chitta, is present throughout the universe. Patanjali Rishi says a Yogi's mind

becomes infinite when it reaches perfection etc. There are references which say

that the mind is infinite, and the 'inside'' and 'outside' of the mind are not

really existing but is a result of our ignorance.

 

Similarly, of the five Pranas, the one named Prana is the Supreme, and it

divides itself into the 5 parts. Prasna Upanishad says: To them prana, the

chiefmost said: " Do not fall into delusion. I alone, dividing myself into five

parts, support this body and uphold it. "

But this Prana is also present as much in a living body, as well as a corpse as

well as a stone. The Prana which is present inside the body is also continuous

with the outside.

 

The same logic applies to the the various organs. The organs in human being are

most developed, but they exist in various forms in all animals. All animals can

'get perceptions' and 'perform actions'. But there is no proof that a stone

cannot do the same. Even so-called inanimate objects " respond " and " react " .

Please go through the link given by Sunderji where Shri Jagadishchandra Bose

shows how metals can react to stimuli and can as well be 'killed'.

 

The whole point being, " all the so-called pre-requisites of a subtle body, or

its 19 parts can be present in a stone, as much as they can be present in a

human or animal or plant body " .

 

2. " Now if you can convince that Lord that stones and metal have these

capabilities, by all means he will enter in to those.

 

In the creation process discussions are done at panciikaraNa or TrivRit karaNa

showing how the subtle to gross transformation takes place and when He enters

into the body. "

 

Dear sir, are you trying test me here?

 

Even you agree that the 'Lord' neither goes nor comes. Nor do I need to convince

Him of anything.

 

As for panchiikaranam, again, by the very process of creation the subtle

elements are present throughout the Universe and there are numerous references

for this.

 

3. " Stone is just predominately some silicates and do not have all the

requirements for panca praaNas to manifest.

 

Corpse has all that but that particular gross body is no more conducive to

express the vaasanaas that are getting fructified. Once praaNa leaves, other

germs occupy using it as their abode. "

 

Sir, the entire discussion about silicon-based existence or carbon-based

existence is meaningless, because the same prANa flows throughout the universe,

no matter what the chemistry of it is. If a new element is synthesized in the

laboratory, and biology is based on it, the subtle elements which it is made of

will remain the same. For the subtle body, the gross chemistry is immaterial.

 

Secondly, the prANa is manifest even in silicates. All motion, all reactions any

change is a manifestation of prANa. Prasna Upanishad states: " All that exists

here is under the control of prana and also what exists in heaven. " In that

case, how CAN there be a substance which CANNOT manifest the prANa?

 

4. " Hence Upanishad talk about two types - Bhuuta and bhoutika gross matter -

one that enjoys and the other than is enjoyed. All metals and stones etc come

under bhoutika and all life forms come under bhuuta. "

 

Bhuuta is the basic subtle element (the 5 subtle elements), and bhautika are the

ones which are formed through the bhutas. That way, there are 5 subtle elements

and all the universe is the bhautika. Isnt the gross body also referred to as

the bhautika? The subtle body is formed by just the bhutas, and the gross body

is the bhautikas.

 

 

My question to you sir, is, " Is there a direct reference in shruti which says

that a sukshma sharira CANNOT enter a stone, metal etc.? " I am not asking this

to prove my point or disprove someone else's point, but because I really would

like to know if such a statement exists, and the reasoning behind it.

 

Thanks for your response.

Hari Om,

Vaibhav.

 

 

 

Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Nairji,

You have raised a point which is very near to me, namely if it is science with

sruti or science vs. sruti.

 

I for one firmly believe it has to be science going with sruti. The composers of

srutis wrote from a viewpoint where there is no space-time-causation, or from an

absolute viewpoint. Anything absolute is eternal by definition. Science, on the

other hand is a progressive subject, but one based on rigour and verifiability.

Our rishis have thrown forth the challenge that anyone is open to come and

verify the truth in their statements, at any point of time. Hence, the truths of

Sruti have to be in tune with science.

 

Swami Vivekananda gave a very insightful lecture " Reason and Religion " , where he

argues that if the quest of both reason and religion is truth, they have to

reach the same point. I guess only Vedanta philosophy can make the claim that

they are after Absolute and truth.

http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/vivekananda/volume_1/vol_1_frame.htm

 

So far, in my very limited knowledge of both, I do not see any contradiction in

science and sruti. In fact, most modern scientists including Schrodinger, Tesla

or Oppenheimer have been great admirer and students of Vedanta.

 

" Before we conclude whether or not

stone or an inanimate object has sUkSma sharIra, may I know if the

existence of a sUksSma sharIra has at all been empirically

established by science? "

 

I dont think science has in its grasp the concept of the panch mahabhootas. But

definitely, mind, prana, or various indriyas are studied and accepted in

science. Although the terminology or definition of specific terms will be

different, the concepts are surely there.

 

" The second point that is worrying me is that we seem to be rather

very geocentric in our approach because the mundane seems to have set

upAdhis on our understanding and interpretation of the shAstrAs. We

don't seem to attempt any relaxation on our rigid thinking even in

this age when extra-terrestrial life seems a distinct possibility. "

 

Sir, why should any of the concepts of either science or Vedanta change with

extra-terrestrial life? They both deal with the basic concepts which are

fundamental any nature. Truths in the sruti are fundamental statements and are

true without any assumptions etc. Hence I think they have to agree with any

questions raised by extra-terrestrial life. What might contradict is our

understanding of sruti, which can be flawed.

 

" Haven't we personified the mountain abodes of our Gods? Look at the

sanctity we attach to mounts Pazhani in Tamil Nadu and Shabari

(Sabarimala) in Kerala. I think the Indian psycle has always

unknowingly recognized a distinctly pulsating presence in the

inanimate. That 'whatever it is' needs further probing. I am saying

this even at the peril of being labelled atrociously superstitious. "

 

When we accept 'sarvam khalvidam brahmam " , we accept the divinity in all

objects. Hence what is wrong in worshiping a mountain, a river, an empty room or

one filled with idols of all shapes and sizes. That which is Infinite cannot be

grasped by all minds, and hence forms, shapes are given which are " preliminary

forms of worship " . I do not think such an approach is superstitious, it is

rather one which is beneficial to all human kind. If one sees divinity in all

objects around one, there is no abuse of them.

 

Thanks for raising various interesting points.

Hari Om,

~Vaibhav.

 

 

 

Why delete messages? Unlimited storage is just a click away.

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

 

namaskArAH everyone,

 

I am afraid, lately the discussions on advaitin forum are becoming

more and more like the episodes of a fiction novel !

I am not against science but I feel, any theory of science must

strictly conform to Sruti(It may sound orthodox) and the words of

Self-realized souls.

 

In vEdAnta panchadaSi of SrI VidyAraNya, we find the following verses:--

 

XV.20. Existence, consciousness and bliss – these are the threefold

nature of Brahman. In objects like clay, stone and so forth, only

existence is manifest, whereas the other two are not !

 

21. Both existence and consciousness are manifest in the Rajasika and

Tamasika Vrittis of the intellect and all the three are manifest in

the Sattvika Vrittis. Brahman associated with the world including the

Vrittis is thus described.

 

23. The two, absence of consciousness and misery, and non-existence –

these are the three forms of Maya. Non-existence is illustrated by

such expressions as `the horns of a man'; absence of consciousness is

seen in such objects as wood, stone etc.

 

26. In stone etc., he should reject both name and form and meditate on

existence; in Rajasika and Tamasika Vrittis he should reject the

misery (which is associated with them) and meditate on existence and

consciousness.

 

Yours,

SAMPATH.

 

========================================

> Dear Shri Vaibhav,

> What I have said is the established view accepted by all exponents of

> advaita. The question why there cannot be a subtle body in stone

does not

> arise because this is the established view. I would therefore

suggest that

> you consult a scholar in whom you have confidence and find out the

correct

> answer. It will be too physically strenuous a job for me to put

forward all

> arguments in support of what I have said. Some other scholars in

the group

> may also give their views.

>

> As regards the word 'sthANu', every word in Sanskrit has a number of

> meanings. The meaning relevant to the context has to be taken. Sankara

> interprets sthANu as 'vrikshAdisthAvarabhAvam' which means 'trees and

> similar entities'. There is a general rule in Sanskrit that 'Adi' means

> 'others which are similar in nature'. So stones cannot be include in the

> word 'Adi' along with trees.. There are such principles to be

applied while

> interpreting Sanskrit words.

>

> Please excuse me for my inability to convince you. The reason is that of

> late I have become physically very weak. Still some times I am

tempted to

> write something.

>

> Regards,

>

> S.N.Sastri.

>

>

>

>

> So what prevents from a sukshma sharira to enter a stone or a metal?

As far

> as I understand there is nothing fundamentally different between a

> human/animal body and a stone etc. if the sukshma sharira is absent

from the

> latter. **Is there a specific and direct quote in the Shruti saying the

> sukshma sharira CANNOT enter the objects normally defined as 'not

alive',

> say a rock or a metal?**

>

> Vaibhav

>

>

>