[Advaita-l] Soul

[Srikrishna Ghadiyaram]

hariH Om !!

--- Anand Arul <arul_aanand at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Namaskars to one to all.
> 
> I have a question seeking answer from you. This has
> been in my mind for a long time. Recently I was
> reading "Synoptic Self" a book that attempts at
> explaining the Self-consciousness using neurological
> explanations. This reading sort of disturbed my
> faith
> in the soul-concept, rebirth etc.,. I sincerely seek
> your clarification in this regard.
> 
> My questions are briefly below:
> 
> 1. What is the need for a subtle entity called
> "soul"
> to feel conscious? What is the strongest proof given
> by our vedas to substantiate the soul? Advaita talks
> of a single soul pervading the Universe. However, I
> think it accepts an individual jeeva in the
> stranglehold of maya within each body's experience
> field. I am asking about this individual jeeva that
> I
> think I am.
> 

I do not think, the Vedas give any 'reason' to
'substantiate' their claim/declaration that there is a
'Soul/Self'. They simply declare the 'TRUTH'. It is
later effort to substantiate by reason and logic.

The whole concept revolves around conscious and
non-conscious entities. All matter including
'thoughts' are non-conscious. If you can read some
introductory analysis about pancha-kosa prakriya, you
will become clear why a conscious-self is the
substratum of what you think you are. 

Having established that the 'experiences' are due to
the upadhi (body, mind etc.) differences, it is easy
to understand that that consciousness can be 'ONE', to
give the appearance of life as we know it i.e
multiplicity of subject and objects.

By such an analysis and understanding you can conclude
that there is no 'separate' independent 'jeeva',
independent of that ONE SELF. jIvatvam is mithya i,e
one that appears to be real but infact is not real in
final analysis. Body and mind have to continue their
experiences. Don't confuse with it.


> 2. It is usually said that jeeva inside each body
> (tree, animal, bird or human) is the pOshaka one who
> nurtures and causes growth. However, we see this
> being
> not the case in many instances. If we pluck a
> half-ripen fruit from a tree and keep it outside it
> becomes fully ripe even when not attached to the
> tree.
> Nowadays we hear about scientists growing organs in
> laboratory using stem cells. Since all this is just
> a
> sequence of chemical reactions and cell
> multiplications, why can't life itself be a complex
> chemical process? Again, what is the need for
> something subtle in it?
> 
>    

Yes, Life itself is a process 'LAW'. But, whose law ?
Is it yours ? not mine, certainly. So, there is
certain order in the way things work in the universe,
whether a plucked fruit will ripen or not? at what
temperature and other conditions ? Answers to these
questions itself is 'Intelligence'. Scientists will
strive to uncover these 'facts' which reflect the
existance of this background 'intelligence'.

The bigger question is not,  if Life is a process ?
The concern is if this is a 'personal' process as we
know it now. Bring the question of 'subject' into your
question. 

While answering the above question, we just hilighted
only the 'intelligence' aspect of that ONE SOEL/SELF.
To that Impersonal Being, by  attaching the
individual/personal minds,  we made jivas; rather that
ONE became many jIvas. 

To conclude, Yes, Life itself is a process, ONE WHOLE,
UNIFIED process, spreading through all the worlds as
an interlinked process, as the Chandogya Upanishad
says.

Since we see some creation which reflects
'intelligence' we conclude that there ought to be an
intelligent 'Being' with that intelligence which is
LIFE itself. This word LIFE should be seen not as a
personal story, but chaitanyam.

Om Namo Narayanaya !!

Srikrishna


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/