Human beings, those who are here, their image is constant. Once they are gone, is their living image also gone from here? Why?

 Based on Vedic concepts, my understanding is that there are three basic elements to a human being, a jivatma or spirit soul, a subtle body, and a gross body.

We only see the gross body, and when it’s gone it’s gone, and the ingredients are reintegrated into material nature.

The jivatma and subtle body are transferred to a new gross body which develops around them. That we can see after birth and for its duration. The jivatma is the same but the subtle body is modified to fit the new gross body so that the person identifies with the new body as the self.

Although the subtle body is constant, because it is always changing due to various influences and desires, it would be unrecognizable after some time even if we could see it.

When we say someone has changed, although sometimes it refers to the physical body, more often it refers to the subtle aspects of mind, consciousness, attitudes etc. So a person can change to become nicer or nastier while their body, (allowing for age), stays basically the same. So the change is on the subtle level not the gross level.

The jivatma never changes, but it also never manifest as itself until it is liberated from the gross and subtle bodies. So we never see the real person, we only see the gross body that is based on the subtle body, neither of which are the jivatma, the actual person.

These points are covered in Bhagavad Gita.

The material body of the indestructible, immeasurable and eternal living entity is sure to come to an end; therefore, fight, O descendant of Bharata. Bg 2.18

For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain. Bg 2.20

As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones. Bg 2.22

The living entity in the material world carries his different conceptions of life from one body to another, as the air carries aromas. Thus he takes one kind of body and again quits it to take another. The living entity, thus taking another gross body, obtains a certain type of ear, eye, tongue, nose and sense of touch, which are grouped about the mind. He thus enjoys a particular set of sense objects. Bg 15.8–9

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What does Lord Krishna says about death in the Bhagavad Gita?

Lord Krishna says death both exists and doesn’t exist. Bhagavad Gita straddles the two worlds of the absolute and the relative. Krishna speaks transcendent truths but applies them in the temporal, mundane world. This is the role of a guru. He must reveal what is beyond sense perception but through the medium of sense perception. He must explain what reality is, using what is not reality. Krishna says that for the soul there is neither birth nor death. (BG. 2.20) Obviously, for matter, there is no death because it’s not alive. So the soul doesn’t die, and matter doesn’t die, and there are only these two energies in the material world (BG 7.4–5), so what is death?
Read more

Action in Inaction and Inaction in Action as per Bhagavad Gita

Under the laws of karma, every action carries a reaction. Only by having zero personal attachments and desires can one avoid reactions Theoretically, if we don’t perform any action there won’t be any reaction which is what we want right? But it’s not possible to live in this world and not perform any activity. People may sit silently in meditation trying to control and empty the mind, but this is still activity. They must eat something, breath, move around a little, so even though they may appear to be inactive, there are still reactions being chalked up, so they are not ‘inactive’ because reactions are accumulating. So actually they are performing actions even though aiming for inaction. This is the meaning of seeing action in inaction. Another person may be active, but their consciousness is completely devoid of any personal desires or interest in their activity so there will be no reaction. It’s as if they were inactive.
Read more

Difference between Shrimad Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita

Bhagavad Gita is mainly philosophical. It was spoken by Krishna Himself and is the conclusion of all the Upanisadas. In this unparalleled dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna everything that is important in life is mentioned. In itself it is complete but it is very concise and Krishna deals with one point after another without elaborating. It serves to orient a person so that they know who they are and what they should be doing. While Bhagavad Gita is only 700 verses, Srimad Bhagavatam is 18,000 verses, but the conclusion is the same. The difference between Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita is in the detail. For example, in Bhagavad Gita Krishna says: This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction, O son of Kunti, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again. Bg 9.10
Read more

What is human fallibility and redemption as per Bhagavad Gita?

A human is a spirit soul in a human body. The spirit soul or jivatma is always pure, but due to its tiny size it can fall into illusion and think it is its body. In its embodied state the jivatma is fallible. Once we are under the illusion that we are our ‘human’ body, we are restricted by the limitations of the body. We have imperfect senses, we make mistakes, we fall into deeper illusion, and we cheat. These are the basic failings of humans and the result of them is that we make errors. The theological concept of redemption is to be forgiven and freed from the consequences of these errors. It’s more commonly used in Abrahamic religions. In Christianity I believe Christ is understood to be the redeemer of all mankind by his death. Judaism and Islam don’t agree with that understanding but the core principle of being forgiven and freed from bondage is still present and dependent on the Lord’s mercy. The understanding in Sanatan Dharma is that the Lord can forgive and free the living ent...
Read more