This query was raised by someone else but I was not able to find any explanation for it, even though my faith says so. The attempt is to find out some logical, intellectual explanation. The question is as under :

We say that God is omnipresent, present everywhere. ( It is , of course, my faith too ) In case of vegetables, animals, humans, the fact can be seen..there is growth, there is decay, sometimes death- after the spirit ( chaitanya ) has left. How can this fact be explained as regards to inanimate objects ?

The exact query raised was, when we cut down a tree and make some articles out of the wood, whether those articles contain God..how can it be proved ? Here, the wood was equated to body after the spirit has left.

Can somebody explain please ? Would welcome views of all. Padmajaji, Swaminiji…...please..

Regards

Uma

Dear Umaji,
Hari OM. Pranams.

I sincerely hope Swamini Amma answers your question. I am just going to scribble my thoughts here.

In my understanding, God is not in anything. Everything is in God. When we dream at night, we see "mountains, rocks, rainbows" which are inert and "people, trees, animals" which are sentient. However both inert and sentient entities in dream are nothing but our mind appearing as those. Similarly both sentient and inert appearances in world is Lord only. He gets called consciousness in sentient and existence in inert. However consciousness and existence are not really different. Let's see how.

Your question is "when we cut down a tree and make some articles out of the wood, whether those articles contain God..how can it be proved ?"

Let's examine tree, to see where exactly "life" in tree is hiding. Firstly, what is really tree? Tree = roots + trunk + bark +branches + leaves + buds + flowers + fruits etc. If we examine each of these parts "individually" by plucking say a root, part of trunk, part of bark, a branch, few leaves, buds, flowers and fruits can we find "life of tree" in them? Even if we brought down the whole tree in parts we won't be able to find life. We can examine each part under microscope e.g. go to living cell then nucleus then chromosomes then DNA then adenine, cytosine, guanine, thymine..what is there? just chemicals. Where is "life" hiding? Is short Tree is assemblage of "inert" things. Same is true for humans also. In chandogya upanishad it is explained how gross body, pranas and even mind is made up of food. That is why if we don't eat for days we can't think and if we don't drink water we die because Pranas get feeble like fire gets feeble if wood is not fed to it. Also, Growth is not really a criteria to define life because by definition it is one of the 6 modification of inert "gross body" ( Asti, jayate, vardhate, viparinamate, apakshiyate, vinashyati). Just like tree trunk grows, we see rocks also grow by deposits of layers of earth piling up on top of each other years after years. Movement is also not criteria because wind moves, car moves. Energy is also not criteria because matter is converted to energy (like electricity, atomic energy). This proves that anything that we see, hear, touch, smell, taste is "inert".

However, if everything in the world is inert then who is creating this inert world? Inert cannot create inert because it is "inert". Obviously "sentient" must be creating "inert". With what material will sentient create inert other than itself? So all inert is created by sentient from itself. So, what "appears as inert" is not really inert. There can be no such thing as inert. Hence whole world is sentient.

(Also there can't be any "plurality" because what is really "plurality"? consciousness expressing through different inert upadhis (limiting adjuncts). Since all inert is just "appearance" there can't be "many consciousnesses". It is ONE "appearing as many".)

Hari Om Uma, Thanks for raising this Uma.

Hari Om Padmaja,

There is one more explanation which you will give far better. Recall the 3 gunas and how even the stone has consciousness but owing to predominance of tamoguna, the stone is seemingly insentient.
On the contraray, the tamoguna in plants is ;less...hence they respond...

Can you explain this also?

Hari Om

Hari Om

May I add a little bit of what i read about God.

First definition of God: Jagat Karta - God is the creator of universe. Nothing is purposeless in creation. Everything in creation is purposeful and well designed and there is an intelligent creator behind it, who is omnicient and omnipotent. Eka Rupa Isvara.

Second definition of God: Jagat Karanam - God is the cause of the Creation. He is not only the creator but he is the raw material for the creation, from which he created the entire universe like a spider creating the web from its own intelligence and rawmaterial from its body. Since God is the raw material, God alone becomes the universe. The universe is nothing but God alone. He is Aneka Rupa Isvara or Viswa Rupa Isvara.

Third definition of God: Jagat Adhisthanam - God appears as the world with different forms.He is not affected by any form in which he appears. He is the very substartum of all the forms and transends them all. Since God transends all the forms of creation, no particular form belongs to God. Therefore, God as adhisthana Isvara is Arupa Isvara, Formless God.

In the above definitions, the latter one does not replace the former. Arupa Isvara , includes Eka rupa and Aneka rupa Isvara.

Pranams

Hari Om Uma,

I have asked a swamini this question and await her reply.

Meanwhile, wanted to say this: God is both intelligent cause and material cause, and as material cause exists in the parts and the whole, in the cause and the effect...

Or as we know in our shloka: ॐ, पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदम पूर्णत पूर्णं उदच्यते पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्नामेवावशिश्यते

God is in the whole and in the parts... but understanding this is key.

I guess what you may have been confused with is in seeing Consciousness as an attribute and God above that...God is Consciousness. God is. Consciousness is...

Let' s wait for an authentic response. Will post as soon as she sends...

Om.

Ok this is from Swamini Narayanananda of Divine Life Society:

When it's said that God is omnipresent, present everywhere, people interpret that as if God is in everything, like water is in a pot. Actually God is not in everything, God is everything. For God, there is no inside or outside. God is not only the spirit, consciousness, but God is also what appears as matter. So God is the tree, the wood, the table, the stone, metal, and all objects in the world because God is the world. The entire universe is an appearance in the mind of God, just as a dream is an appearance in the mind of the dreamer. If you dream of a tree, and that tree is cut into pieces of wood, are not those pieces of dream wood the same consciousness as the dream tree? Are they not both equally you?

People often feel that God is the soul and not the body. The soul, or spirit, is that consciousness that evolves through various incarnations. If a tree is cut then the soul leaves it and there's no soul in the wood, just as when the body dies the soul leaves it and there's no soul in the corpse. But God is both the soul and what it occupies.

This is an important point because seekers think that liberation is something to be attained, that God is to be reached. Actually God is the only reality, so there's no question of reaching God when everything is already That. What is needed is that the seeker should realize this. It's merely a question of understanding. This also applies to the concept of heaven. People think that God is up in heaven, but for God there is no up or down because God is infinite and everything.

There are a number of logical proofs for this, but the only real proof is the experience, because God is both logic and beyond logic. I hope this answers the question.


Hari Om

Dhanyavaad Padmajaji. The point from Chandogya upanishad is really nice. Thanks Muruganji.

And Meera, special thanks for taking it up and please do convey thanks to Swaminiji too. I totally agree with her, actually as per my faith, God is everywhere, just wanted some intellectual explanation.

Can you request Swaminiji to cite a few logical proofs, as well ? Because although, experience is the real proof, not all of us are qualified to have it in this life.

Sinecere thanks once again to all of you

Uma

Hari Om Uma,

I am not sure I can ask for more, but will try. But I also feel trying to understand the concept pf God with our 5 senses and this frail BMI is not possible. It was not even meant to be so. If it was possible, would we be scrambling all over the place like this?!! That is why we are urged to go beyond...and then make the leap of faith!

I do not believe my intellect has the greatness to understand, let alone convey the proof of God to me... !

All the same, let me ask Swaminiji gently..

And thanks for raising this qs, it was good brain aerobics!

Hari Om

Hari Om Uma,

I am not sure I can ask for more, but will try. But I also feel trying to understand the concept pf God with our 5 senses and this frail BMI is not possible. It was not even meant to be so. If it was possible, would we be scrambling all over the place like this?!! That is why we are urged to go beyond...and then make the leap of faith!

I do not believe my intellect has the greatness to understand, let alone convey the proof of God to me... !

All the same, let me ask Swaminiji gently..

And thanks for raising this qs, it was good brain aerobics!

Hari Om

Hari Om Meeraji and Umaji,
Namaskar.

Thank you for giving me opportunity to reflect on this subject though I don't know the answer. I think, God is so "self evident" that is why giving proof is not easy. He can't be known through five sense organs.

Pujya Guruji Swami Tejomayanandaji once told us a joke "A nurse was carrying a dead patient on the gurney to morgue. He became conscious on the way and seeing the morgue shouted "Why are you taking me here?" Nurse said "Because, you are dead !" Man shouted "But, I am alive." Nurse said "I have doctor's certificate to prove that you are dead." Pujya Guruji told this joke to make a point that "No proof is needed to know that 'we exist', we just know it !" Another example He gave was "If you are in a dark room and somebody asks you from outside 'What things are there in that dark room?' you won't be able to tell without a flash light. If you have a flash light then you will be able to see and tell what is there in that dark room. However when you are in a dark room and somebody asks you 'are you there?' you will immediately shout "Yes !" you won't need any flash light to know you are there." So, God is like that.

Ishavashya Upanishad says "Om Ishavasyam-idagam sarvam yat-kincha jagatyam jagat" (All this, whatsoever moves in this universe, including this universe, itself moving, is indwelt or pervaded or enveloped or clothed by the Lord.) For somebody who believes in scripture this proof is enough.

Bhakta Prahlad told his father Hiranyakashapu that 'God is everywhere and in everything'. His angry father confronted him to demonstrate the existence of Ishwar everywhere. Bhakta Prahlad had little choice but to point to the nearest pillar. And what came out of the shattered pillar was an eye-opener not only for Hiranyakasipu but to the entire mankind. For a devotee this proof given by Lord Himself is enough.

Another simple proof for a logical mind is - We can't destroy anything in this world. We can only change its current form. That is because we can't destroy existence. It is everywhere, in everything, enveloping everything. It is everything. No matter how advanced science is, it can't create anything without using what is available in this world. To postulate any theory and logic, we can't use any other instrument but our 'intellect' which is given to us by Lord. We didn't create it, we are born with it.

Sant Jnaneshvar Maharaj writes in Dnyaneshwari (Gita commentary in marathi Adhyay10 shloka 2 and 3) -
The Vedas became confounded trying to know my essence; the mind and vital breath lost their nerve in trying to reach me. The sun and moon were eclipsed before my splendor, even before the night had set in. As the foetus in the womb cannot gauge its mother's age, so all these gods cannot know me. Just as aquatic creatures cannot fathom the sea, or the flies cannot cross over the sky, so the wisdom of the sages cannot penetrate into my being. Many ages have rolled on in the man's attempts to delve into my mysteries as to who I am, how great, of what origin and my whereabout. Because, O Arjuna both the gods and the great sages, much less all the common beings find it difficult to know me, as I am their origin. If water running downhill can rise up to the mountain or the tree starts growing downwards to reach its roots, then alone the world of beings originating from me can comprehend me. If the leaf emerging from the core of the fig tree could cover up the tree and if the waves could contain within them the whole ocean and if entire globe could be contained in one single atom, only then living beings, great sages and gods originating from me will be able to know me. Even though it is difficult to know me, if a person gives up the path of pravritti and turning away from sensuous enjoyment abandons notion that 'I am body' and, sets himself on the crown of the five great elements then he sees my birthless-deathless (Beginningless) nature in the clear light of self-knowledge, he knows that I am the great lord of all beings, beyond causation.

Thank you very much Padmaja. Will definitely refer to Dyaneshwaree too now. And example of Bhakt Pralhad is apt.
Thank all of you, you all took quite an effort for me

Regards

Uma

Hari Om Uma...

Your question helped me think. If not, the mind gets complacent and rusty. This was good sadhana for the fat mind! It is feeling healthy now!
Thanks for allowing me to step in and say what I felt. If what I said was incorrect, may Bhagawan direct you to the right answer and may I be forgiven.

be happy!
hari om

Hari Om. Pranam to all.

Meeraji, I know you are busy and may not be able to read this immediately.

There is no question of right and wrong answer. I feel I am still in the beginner’s stage of learning and the first step is trying to learn through my limited intelligence, still miles and miles to go …...hence this effort.

Today I read something, in the 7 th adhyay..page 15, 6 th shloka

Poojya Gurudeva has said

“ The matter by itself , in its inertness, will not be able express the similitude of Consciousness unless the spirit were there to dynamise it.”

I felt this is the explanation. Though He has created everything, sentient, inert or rather entire universe and both the prakrutis – apara and para…in inert matters, Para prakruti is not manifested or is not functioning.

Would like to know the views of all …
Thanks and Regards

Uma

Hari OM Umaji, Pranams.

My thoughts -

There are not just two things, there are three things.

1. Upadhi (limiting adjunct which is inert/Jada)
2. Chaitanya (Pure Consciousness, Sat-chit-ananda)
3. Upahit Chaitanya (unholy marriage of the above two. We studied this in Adv E Vedanta as "Tadatmya")

Essentially what we call as "enlivening" is No #3.

Just like there are satellites broadcasting radio microwave signals everywhere however only through certain equipments they become manifest e.g. TV, computers etc. Similarly, in this creation we see some things "enlivened" and others don't look enlivened. Nevertheless it is the Pure Consciousness which is the substratum of all creation.

In my opinion - getting some 'name' and some 'form', is also "enlivening" because there has to be some Pramata (knower/seer) for that to happen. So this whole world is "enlivened", it is in the mind of God. Everything is dipped and soaked in consciousness....you, I, wood, rocks, stones, trees, ..everything that has name and form is enlivened by God...most wonderful it feels !!!

Thank you Padmajaji.

I do agree with your views - re Tadatmya..had forgotten about it.

And the example of radio microwave signals is really most suitable loved it. And still remember your very first example of sweeping and mopping

Thanks once again.

Uma

Hari Om. Pranams.

Here is another one for your pleasure ...when I was trying to make fried wheat flour modaks they were not coming OK so from that same material I made karanji instead and that came out really good. So a thought came to my mind that we always say that though the names and forms are different the material is same. However I realized from modak/karanji experience that, though material is same, each name and form has its own specialty..its own nature and that is the beauty of this world. God's creation is mind boggling !!!