Two Birds on a Tree / Reflection Theory

[Red_Drag0n]

Here's an youtube video on the analogy of Two Birds, by Swami Sarvapriyananda (an advaitin monk).

Here, he compares the tree with our physical body, and the two birds as our atmans. He says that there's actually one bird/atman within us and not two as the dualists claim.

By using the two bird analogy + the pratibimba vada/reflection theory he explains our true nature in this video.

• The higher bird, is our original 'bimba' consciousness.
• The lower bird on the other hand, includes all of these 3 things -
a) the reflected 'pratibimba' consciousness.
b) the causal body.
c) the subtle body.

Later in the video, He says that the lower bird flies away (to reincarnate into other physical bodies). I assume he was speaking of the jivatman.

Two questions arises here.
1) How can the lower bird which is nothing but a reflection of the original, fly away to reincarnate, leaving the original consciousness behind? Both were part of the tree called body. How can the reflection reincarnate without the original?

2) Followers of advaita holds on to this belief, that our subtle body (our individualized self that has all the mental imprints) alone reincarnates.
I told them that the subtle body surely reincarnates, but not alone. The jivatman (space inside the jar OR the tiny spark of light) which is the life giving principle, accompanies the subtle body.
The subtle body aka mind body aka antahkarana, on its own, is jada and insentient as told by Shankara in his aparokshanubhuti text.
Subtle body IMO, cannot possibly function on its own without the jivatman dwelling in it. Was i right or wrong? Also advaitins use the word 'soul' to address the subtle body and use the word atman for the spirit consciousness in us.

Please go through the entire video and then kindly answer these questions. Thanks

 

[Aupmanyav]

2) Followers of advaita holds on to this belief, that our subtle body (our individualized self that has all the mental imprints) alone reincarnates.
I told them that the subtle body surely reincarnates, but not alone. The jivatman (space inside the jar OR the tiny spark of light) which is the life giving principle, accompanies the subtle body.
The subtle body aka mind body aka antahkarana, on its own, is jada and insentient as told by Shankara in his aparokshanubhuti text.
Subtle body IMO, cannot possibly function on its own without the jivatman dwelling in it. Was i right or wrong? Also advaitins use the word 'soul' to address the subtle body and use the word atman for the spirit consciousness in us.

Please go through the entire video and then kindly answer these questions. Thanks

I am sorry Red Dragon, I cannot view and understand a video because of my hearing problem as you suggested, but here is my answer to your your observation listed at #2.

Let me mention that similes look good, but many times they obfuscate the issue and cause confusion. Advaita has many flavors. There is nothing that we can term as Standard Advaita, though we may term a view as more popular in Advaita. I hold the view that indivisible Brahman is the only thing that exists and that alone is sufficient for all observed phenomena in the universe (living or non-living) as well as the things that are beyond our observation (Dark Energy and Dark Matter). There is no proof or need to create further divisions like Jivātmā and Antahkarana.

By Antahkarana, I think you mean thought and the process of thinking. That is purely a function of brain. It is no entity that flits in and out of human body. The body itself is nothing other than Brahman. Actually, all bodies are nothing other than Brahman - (Dwiteeyo nasti; Nasti, Nasti, Na Nasti Kincana - There is no second; No, No, No, Not in the least).

Sankara is my guru (Brahma Satyam, jagan-mithya ..), but I would not go along with him when he complicates the issue needlessly.

The common understanding of the verse is that one bird understands the mystery of Brahman and therefore does not need to eat (does not get engaged in wordly affairs with āsakti), the other bird does not understand (therefore eats, engages in worldly affairs with āsakti). I would not go with Swamiji's convoluted explanation.

I wonder why Swamiji took 57 minutes to explain this simple thing which needs less than two lines of text for explanation and even then arrived at wrong conclusions? Surely my views differ from that of Swamiji.

 

[Red_Drag0n]

By Antahkarana, I think you mean thought and the process of thinking. That is purely a function of brain.

Yeah by Antahkarana i meant the whole psychological process (manas, buddhi, chitta, ahamkara). According to Vedanta darshana, antahkarana, is not part of the physical brain. It is the entire inner subtle body.
Since we are in the hindu religious forum, i'll only speak about what religious scriptures or religious philosophies have to say. The whole subtle body as per vedanta, is also known by names such as mental body or antahkarana. The brain is not antahkarana. The brain is a mere intrument of the physical body. When physical body dies along with the brain, the subtle body floats around like a ghost for the first few days around it's loved ones, and even in that state, it can think (process all it's thoughts) without the physical brain.

I hold the view that indivisible Brahman is the only thing that exists and that alone is sufficient for all observed phenomena in the universe (living or non-living) as well as the things that are beyond our observation (Dark Energy and Dark Matter). There is no proof or need to create further divisions like Jivātmā and Antahkarana.

Yeah i understand bro, but that's just one way of perceiving the reality. It's called paramarthika satya. But i'm trying to know or understand from the Vyavaharika point of view / the empirical reality. If one simply says everything is brahman , then it's incomplete knowledge. It's like saying that the human body from head to toe is made of cells and that is all one needs to know. The student who's learning anatomy won't accept such a traching. For he knows that only when the body is disected during anatomy session, we'll get to know the different types of cells and organs. By mithya Shankara didn't literally mean the world to be false or unreal. By mithya he meant all this nama rupa, names & forms are temporal. (Impermanent form of Brahman), since they again will return to their original non dual condition.

[Let me mention that similes look good, but many times they obfuscate the issue and cause confusion

Agree with you on this one.

 

[Aupmanyav]

According to Vedanta darshana, antahkarana, is not part of the physical brain. It is the entire inner subtle body.

Since we are in the hindu religious forum, i'll only speak about what religious scriptures or religious philosophies have to say. The whole subtle body as per vedanta, is also known by names such as mental body or antahkarana. The brain is not antahkarana. The brain is a mere intrument of the physical body. When physical body dies along with the brain, the subtle body floats around like a ghost for the first few days around it's loved ones, and even in that state, it can think (process all it's thoughts) without the physical brain.

Yeah i understand bro, but that's just one way of perceiving the reality. It's called paramarthika satya. But i'm trying to know or understand from the Vyavaharika point of view / the empirical reality. If one simply says everything is brahman , then it's incomplete knowledge. It's like saying that the human body from head to toe is made of cells and that is all one needs to know. The student who's learning anatomy won't accept such a traching. For he knows that only when the body is disected during anatomy session, we'll get to know the different types of cells and organs. By mithya Shankara didn't literally mean the world to be false or unreal. By mithya he meant all this nama rupa, names & forms are temporal. (Impermanent form of Brahman), since they again will return to their original non dual condition.

It my be so in some flavors, but it contravenes the saying of Tat twam asi, Aham Brahmasmi, Sarvan Khalvidanm Brahma, so'ham, etc. We are the whole of Brahman, 'Punamadah, Purnaidam ..'. What you mention is not an absolute position in Advaita. And, even in Vyavaharika, one cannot concoct things which are nonexistent. It is not that 'Everything goes in Vyavaharika'. No proof or evidence of a subtle body floating as a ghost. No thinking without a physical brain. In 'Vyavaharika', only our or anybody else's existence as an individual unit is an illusion and we do not realize or choose to ignore the underlying unity of all things. We take phenomena as real.

Sure, the human body from head to toe is made up of cells - that is enough for 'Vyavaharika'. But in 'Parmarthika' we go deeper. What are cells made up of? Atoms. What are atoms made up of? Electrons, Protons and Neutrons. What are these sub-atomic particles made up of? Six kind of quarks ('There are six types, known as flavors, of quarks: up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top.' - Quark - Wikipedia). What are these quarks made of up? Perturbations in four fundamental force fields. That is where we encounter 'Parmarthika'. There is no dual condition, that is only an illusion. Brahman is indivisible.

'Nama rupa is only a distortion in the matter of speaking', so say our books: 'Vāchārambhanam vikāro nāmadheyam, mritikettyeva satyam.' Only one thing is truth. IMHO.

 

[ajay0]

Here's an youtube video on the analogy of Two Birds, by Swami Sarvapriyananda (an advaitin monk).

Here, he compares the tree with our physical body, and the two birds as our atmans. He says that there's actually one bird/atman within us and not two as the dualists claim.

By using the two bird analogy + the pratibimba vada/reflection theory he explains our true nature in this video.

• The higher bird, is our original 'bimba' consciousness.
• The lower bird on the other hand, includes all of these 3 things -
a) the reflected 'pratibimba' consciousness.
b) the causal body.
c) the subtle body.

Later in the video, He says that the lower bird flies away (to reincarnate into other physical bodies). I assume he was speaking of the jivatman.

Two questions arises here.
1) How can the lower bird which is nothing but a reflection of the original, fly away to reincarnate, leaving the original consciousness behind? Both were part of the tree called body. How can the reflection reincarnate without the original?

The lower bird here is the body of egocentric impressions created through action prompted by cravings and aversions. It is this body of impressions that reincarnates.

This could also be a reason why Buddhism negates the individual soul as non-existent, because from the advaitan pov it is just composed of egocentric impressions or vasanas that has a beginning and an end . Awareness or meditation destroys these vasanas.

I would also exhort you to discuss all this with true advaitan scholars if your quest is a detailed knowledge of advaita. Otherwise, you will end up more confused and jumbled than before.

 

[Red_Drag0n]

The lower bird here is the body of egocentric impressions created through action prompted by cravings and aversions. It is this body of impressions that reincarnates.

This could also be a reason why Buddhism negates the individual soul as non-existent, because from the advaitan pov it is just composed of egocentric impressions or vasanas that has a beginning and an end . Awareness or meditation destroys these vasanas.

I would also exhort you to discuss all this with true advaitan scholars if your quest is a detailed knowledge of advaita. Otherwise, you will end up more confused and jumbled than before.

Yeah i too think that one should discuss these things with a man well versed in this philosophy, but as of yet, i haven't found such a man. So i guess for the time being, we'll have to continue this discussion here
I do know that it's the lower bird or causal/subtle body also kmown as soul, which is the storehouse of mental imprints, that reincarnates.

What i really want to know is that, can such a body alone reincarnate or does the jivatman dwells within such a causal/subtlebody and accompanies it during the reincarnation journey?
I always believed it's the presence of the jivatman that makes all these 3 bodies alive since it is the life giving principle. What is the advaitic belief regarding this? Thnx.

 

[ajay0]

What i really want to know is that, can such a body alone reincarnate or does the jivatman dwells within such a causal/subtlebody and accompanies it during the reincarnation journey?
I always believed it's the presence of the jivatman that makes all these 3 bodies alive since it is the life giving principle. What is the advaitic belief regarding this? Thnx.

I have stated earlier that the Self, when understood through meditation is the simplest thing in the world to comprehend, while the Self, when attempted to be comprehended through the intellect is the most complex and complicated thing in the world. The greatest truths are the simplest.

Here your question appears to me a similar complication of a very simple subject.

The Jivatman is Brahman plus egocentric impressions, and obviously it means the casual/subtle body as well.

It is the egocentric impressions that reincarnates and not Brahman which is omnipresent.

Also it is the presence of Brahman or pure consciousness that brings sentience. The other bodies are just part of prakriti and are not sentient in itself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What is the advaitic belief regarding this?

Which advaitic belief? Pre-Sankara advaita, Vishishta advaita, Bheda-Abheda advaita, Shuddha advaita, Guadapada's advaita, Sankara's Advaita, Achintya Bheda-Abheda advaita? Or other non-regular advaita like mine? Which one do you want? Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia

 

[Shantanu]

Which advaitic belief? Pre-Sankara advaita, Vishishta advaita, Bheda-Abheda advaita, Shuddha advaita,Guadapada's advaita, Sankara's Advaita, Achintya Bheda-Abheda advaita? Or other non-regular advaita like mine? Which one do you want? Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia

You forgot to include my Satya-advaita or truth accommodation Aup: that relates to Brahmanism too

 

[Aupmanyav]

Shantanu, I said 'other non-regular advaita views like mine'. That includes your view too. How can I forget you?

 

[ajay0]

Yeah i too think that one should discuss these things with a man well versed in this philosophy, but as of yet, i haven't found such a man.

I would suggest authentic scholars like Tattvaprahav and Atanu who are in this forum.

Beware of pseudoscholars though if you want to learn Advaita accurately. Pseudoscholars are like a beautiful woman in a mirage seeking a hug and kiss, only to find later on you have hugged and kissed a hungry python.

 

[atanu]

Here's an youtube video on the analogy of Two Birds, by Swami Sarvapriyananda (an advaitin monk).

Here, he compares the tree with our physical body, and the two birds as our atmans. He says that there's actually one bird/atman within us and not two as the dualists claim.

By using the two bird analogy + the pratibimba vada/reflection theory he explains our true nature in this video.

• The higher bird, is our original 'bimba' consciousness.
• The lower bird on the other hand, includes all of these 3 things -
a) the reflected 'pratibimba' consciousness.
b) the causal body.
c) the subtle body.

Later in the video, He says that the lower bird flies away (to reincarnate into other physical bodies). I assume he was speaking of the jivatman.

Two questions arises here.
1) How can the lower bird which is nothing but a reflection of the original, fly away to reincarnate, leaving the original consciousness behind? Both were part of the tree called body. How can the reflection reincarnate without the original?

2) Followers of advaita holds on to this belief, that our subtle body (our individualized self that has all the mental imprints) alone reincarnates.
I told them that the subtle body surely reincarnates, but not alone. The jivatman (space inside the jar OR the tiny spark of light) which is the life giving principle, accompanies the subtle body.
The subtle body aka mind body aka antahkarana, on its own, is jada and insentient as told by Shankara in his aparokshanubhuti text.
Subtle body IMO, cannot possibly function on its own without the jivatman dwelling in it. Was i right or wrong? Also advaitins use the word 'soul' to address the subtle body and use the word atman for the spirit consciousness in us.

Please go through the entire video and then kindly answer these questions. Thanks

Great post. But the questions are based on confusion of terms. In non advaitic circles, often atma is equated with the transmigrating soul. This is wrong. In advaita, following Vedanta accurately, the atma is non dual and does not move. atma is birthless and deathless.

The living being or jivatman or subtle body (prAna, ego-mind-senses) all signify the one and same 'reflected consciousnesses'. These are reflected variously in different sthula sharira (gross bodies).

What travels is jivatman-subtle body (prAna, ego, mind, senses) also sometimes called soul, which is a mirage.
...

An excellent explanation can be had in the following video. One may not see through all the metaphors.

One can also study:

In the last video of Swami Sarvedananda, there is a mention of chArvAka (materialistic) view that is especially notable.

 

[Red_Drag0n]

Thanks ajay0 for the advice ... and thanks to atanu, for suggesting me those videos.
So as per Advaita, the Subtle body IS the Jivatman. Okay cool.
I went through the first video (of Swami Tadatmananda). Here he clearly explaines that subtlebody/jivatman moves or transmigrates ... Later in his video (55:20) Swami Tadatmananda says, that we're not even the subtlebody but actually the all pervasive consciousness Atman.

He was right. How can we (the real I) possibly be the subtle body. Atman is nirguna, and subtle body is full of qualities and also it's known to be part of jada prakriti.
...
So i think what he means to say is that, the subtlebody only acts as a reflecting medium on which the actual Atman shines/reflects.
...
(i.e. The sookshma which is comprised of mind,ego,prana etc. has no consciousness of it's own since it's part of jada prakriti. It's the borrowed consciousness of the Atman that makes it seem like a conscious entity.)

This is what i was trying to say earlier. That it's the 'reflection' that turns the 'reflecting medium' sookshma conscious.

If i'm not wrong, Advaita calls both ... the reflection(atman) + medium(jiva) as JivAtman, since these two always act like one single individual entity. The medium sookshma stops existing only during videha mukti, and then atman alone exists, but until that happens, there will always exist these two, as one individual entity.

This was my interpretation. If you think i'm wrong then do correct me. @ ajay0 and Atanu