Trees have life- bhAshya

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Narendra Sastry,

The points raised by you do not strictly come within the scope of the above

subject. However, since they are of general interest, I am answering them.

 

Your first point is---

 

" as far as I was told, that there is no valid paramAna for this story in

vAlmiki rAmAyana...but in actual story written by vAlmiki, sage gauthama

curses ahalya to be invisible to every ones eyes NOT to turn herself to

stone...and to do tapas (penace) in yagna kunda to get herself

purified...and will be visible soon after she sees rAma...can any one kindly

translates the exact meanings of vAlmiki rAmAyana shlokas...

 

My answer is---

 

What you have said is absolutely correct. The following was the curse:--

 

(Translations of N. Raghunathan).

 

" You shall live for thousands of years; feeding on air, starved for food,

lying on ashes and burning with remorse, you shall remain in this hermitage

unseen by any creature. When the invincible Rama, son of Dasaratha, comes to

this horrid forest, you will be purified. By offering him hospitality, you,

fallen woman, shall be freed from covetousness and delusion, and regain in

my presence your old self, and know happiness again " .

 

A question may be asked, why such a terrible punishment for a woman who was

a victim of deceit and who deserved sympathy? Valmiki says that she was not

an innocent victim, but a willing participant in the immoral act. This is

what Valmiki says:--

 

" Once, knowing that he (Gautama, husband of Ahalya), was away, Indra came

to Ahalya disguised as the sage, and said, " Men under the urge of passion do

not wait for the sanctioned seasons for love, my beauty. ------ " . Knowing

him to be Indra, come disguised as the sage, the evil woman agreed,

flattered by the attention of the King of the gods "

 

(I do not wish to add the further sentences which are very damaging to her.

This part of the story is not told publicly by those who give discourses on

Ramayana and so it is not widely known).

 

It is in the Adhyatma Ramayana that it is said that Ahalya was cursed to

become a stone and that is what is generally mistaken as being in Valmiki

Ramayana, mainly because those who give discourses mix up all these.

 

As regards your second point, namely,

 

and also another story which are falsely understood till today is

 

bharatha,lakshmana and shatrugna are the incarnations of conch shell, shesha

and sudarshana...but in vAlmiki rAmAyana it has not written like this...but

as lord vishnu has divided his soul to take birth as bharatha, lakshmana

and shatrugna...their power is half of power of rAma (vishnu)...

 

My answer is--

 

What Valmiki Ramayana says is:--

 

Rama was Vishnu Himself. Bharata was a fourth of Vishnu. About the other two

there is no specific mention, but they must be in the same proportion as

that in which Dasaratha gave the divine milk food to his 3 wives- namely,

half to Kausalya, one-fourth to Sumitra, one-eighth to Kaikeyi and again

one-eighth to Sumitra. So Sumitra got twins.

 

S.N.Sastri

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

 

> This, again, is my understanding and I do not find anything in it

which violates any fundamental claim laid down in the shrutis, nor

does it violate common logic. It certainly is in tune with what has

been shown by scientific experiments.

>

> If there is anything in the shruti, which is contrary to be above,

please let me know.

 

Dear Vaibhav-ji,

 

Here is a related excerpt:

 

antahsanjna bhavantyete sukhadukha samanvitaH

 

Consciousness exists even in things like tress and stones and they

'experience' happiness and misery also.

 

Manu Samhita 1:49.

 

It would be great if somebody can locate the complete verse and

confirm whether the translation is accurate or not.

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

[Guest guest]

-Dear Br. Vinayaka,

The following is Shloka 1. 49 of Manu smRiti:--

tamasA bahurUpeNa veshTitAH karmahetunA |

antaHsamj~nA bhavantyete sukhaduHkhasamanvitAH ||

The meaning is: These, which are covered by tamas of various forms

because of karma, have only internal consciousness and have joy and

sorrow.

This has to be read in the context of the preceding shlokas which

speak only of trees, plants and creepers and not stones. So the

word `these' has to be taken as referring only to trees and similar

things and not stones. In the commentary on this sloka Kulluka

Bhatta refers only to trees and plants. So stones are not intended

to be included here.

Moreover, there can be consciousness only if there is a jIvatmA or

subtle body. The chandogya upanishad describes in Chapter V how

jivas are reborn. On death the JivAtmA leaves the subtle body and

goes to other worlds. When according to its karma it is time for it

to be born again, it comes down through clouds, etc., and attaches

itself to some grain. When that grain is eaten by a male of any

species it is transmitted to a female of the same species through

their union and it is then born as a child in that species. All this

is described in detail in Chandogya up. V. 10. 1 to 7. It will be

clear from this that stones are not born with a subtle body. So the

translation which includes stones is clearly wrong. Vedanta does not

hold that stones have life. Of course stones, like every thing else,

are superimposed on brahman, but that by itself cannot make them

sentient. Sentience is acquired only when there is a subtle body and

brahman or pure consciousness is reflected in it.

S.N.Sastri

 

 

-- In advaitin , " Vinayaka " <vinayaka_ns wrote:

>

> >

> > > Here is a related excerpt:

>

> antahsanjna bhavantyete sukhadukha samanvitaH

>

> Consciousness exists even in things like tress and stones and they

> 'experience' happiness and misery also.

>

> Manu Samhita 1:49.

>

> It would be great if somebody can locate the complete verse and

> confirm whether the translation is accurate or not.

>

> Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

>

> Br. Vinayaka.

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

 

Dear Shastri-ji,

 

praNAms,

 

Thanks much for your kind clarification. It is very much clear now.

 

In fact, I could get a translation of the verse of manu smriti which

tallies with your view, which is as under:

 

49. These (plants) which are surrounded by multiform Darkness, the

result of their acts (in former existences), possess internal

consciousness and experience pleasure and pain.

 

Source: http://oaks.nvg.org/pv6bk4.html

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

 

 

 

>

> -Dear Br. Vinayaka,

> The following is Shloka 1. 49 of Manu smRiti:--

> tamasA bahurUpeNa veshTitAH karmahetunA |

> antaHsamj~nA bhavantyete sukhaduHkhasamanvitAH ||

> The meaning is: These, which are covered by tamas of various forms

> because of karma, have only internal consciousness and have joy and

> sorrow.

> This has to be read in the context of the preceding shlokas which

> speak only of trees, plants and creepers and not stones. So the

> word `these' has to be taken as referring only to trees and similar

> things and not stones. In the commentary on this sloka Kulluka

> Bhatta refers only to trees and plants. So stones are not intended

> to be included here.

> Moreover, there can be consciousness only if there is a jIvatmA or

> subtle body. The chandogya upanishad describes in Chapter V how

> jivas are reborn. On death the JivAtmA leaves the subtle body and

> goes to other worlds. When according to its karma it is time for it

> to be born again, it comes down through clouds, etc., and attaches

> itself to some grain. When that grain is eaten by a male of any

> species it is transmitted to a female of the same species through

> their union and it is then born as a child in that species. All this

> is described in detail in Chandogya up. V. 10. 1 to 7. It will be

> clear from this that stones are not born with a subtle body. So the

> translation which includes stones is clearly wrong. Vedanta does not

> hold that stones have life. Of course stones, like every thing else,

> are superimposed on brahman, but that by itself cannot make them

> sentient. Sentience is acquired only when there is a subtle body and

> brahman or pure consciousness is reflected in it.

> S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

Hello!

 

There is a problem with the grammar of these entries.

 

Trees don't HAVE life. The ARE life.

 

If they have life, then logically one could go to a

tree, find the " life " in it and say " Okay, here is the

life of the tree. " But we can't do that. All we can do

is point to a tree and say " That's a tree. It's

living. "

 

The same is true for everything else. Really, can we

be so arrogant as to say what is alive and what isn't?

Only by our own standard can we say what is alive and

what isn't. Is the universe dead except for what we

define as " living " ?

 

Interesting that the materials which go to make my

body will one day be dead or " not living " . So

currently these materials that make up my body are

thought to be " living " . In the " future " they will not

be thought to be so. So...is it to much of a reach to

think that everything now, not thought to be " living " ,

may one day in the " future " be " living " ?

 

I submit that our ideas of living/not living are very

fluid and that there is no clear distinction, except

by definition.

 

All the elements that make up my body are dead. Yet,

at this time, I'm not dead.

 

The same chemical elements make up matter that make up

my " dead " body...ha...well...easy to see where I'm

going with this...it is ALL definitional!!!

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

Having gone through your e-mai I was astonished to hear that

trees has no life.I donot know how you could arrive to this

conclusion.you want anyone to show the location of the life in a tree.

can u show the location of life in a humanbeing or in an animal or a

bird?Nowadays heart is takingplace in a humanbody safely.Brain is also

being operation safely.Then where is the Life in a Humanbeing?

Life in any livingbeing is not static at one place.It is the

activity performed by that livingbeing eRespiration,Excreation,and

Metabolism like preparation of food etc which can be detected

externally.A scientist by name " Jagadeesh chandra bose " proved that

trees also have feeling like sorrow,joy etc.this is possible only when

there is life.

Sd/sastry