Are trees sentient?

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

[Mod note:] This topic was plit from this old thread of 2016: https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 23#p323823



Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:55 am
dzogchungpa wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Yup, that is a traditional point of view. So is the idea that woman have an inferior birth.
Are you insinuating that some traditional points of view are mistaken?
The idea that plants are not sentient is a cultural idea, it is not a hard doctrinal Buddhist position.

My point of view is, if it breathes, if it uses prāṇa vāyu, it is sentient.
If plants are sentient, does this not mean that is possible to give rise to sentient without Gandharva? That sentient can spring out from matter?
How can plants experience karma?
User avatar
Sādhaka
Posts: 1280
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Chopping down trees and Buddhism

Post by Sādhaka »

My own view is that plants are an unspoken gati, so to speak, somewhere between the preta and animal realms.

This kind of accords with Jainism; and the Buddha was rather silent on the topic.

Not that important of an issue, yet I respect plants based on my above said view on the topic
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Kai lord »

Kaji wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:45 am I have spoken to a Theravada monk on this issue. He told me that he had learned in Theravada that spirits and even gods often reside in plants taller than a certain heights (not just trees).
Those devas or gods are called elves in Europe mythology, basically, their homes are build on top of the tree like elves and dryads do and they are generally under the reign of the four heavenly kings
Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:35 pm If plants are sentient, does this not mean that is possible to give rise to sentient without Gandharva? That sentient can spring out from matter?
How can plants experience karma?
The smallest animals in Buddhism are widely considered to be unicellular organism like bacteria, can they experience karma? If you took medicine, did you kill them? According to some, we do. Then again, are virus in the animal realm as well?

Also echinoderms like starfish and sponges plus jellyfish are considered animals as well, can they experience karma?
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Chopping down trees and Buddhism

Post by Vajrasambhava »

Kai lord wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 11:11 pm
Kaji wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:45 am I have spoken to a Theravada monk on this issue. He told me that he had learned in Theravada that spirits and even gods often reside in plants taller than a certain heights (not just trees).
Those devas or gods are called elves in Europe mythology, basically, their homes are build on top of the tree like elves and dryads do and they are generally under the reign of the four heavenly kings
Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:35 pm If plants are sentient, does this not mean that is possible to give rise to sentient without Gandharva? That sentient can spring out from matter?
How can plants experience karma?
The smallest animals in Buddhism are widely considered to be unicellular organism like bacteria, can they experience karma? If you took medicine, did you kill them? According to some, we do. Then again, are virus in the animal realm as well?

Also echinoderms like starfish and sponges plus jellyfish are considered animals as well, can they experience karma?
My question is entirely different, anyway, a being to be sentient has to have some prerequisities, virus don't have just like cells don't have, this is both the point of view of science and buddhism. All sentient beings according to buddhism are animals (as humans are too) in this world, but not all animals are necessarily sentient beings
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Kai lord »

Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 11:42 pm
Kai lord wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 11:11 pm
Kaji wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:45 am I have spoken to a Theravada monk on this issue. He told me that he had learned in Theravada that spirits and even gods often reside in plants taller than a certain heights (not just trees).
Those devas or gods are called elves in Europe mythology, basically, their homes are build on top of the tree like elves and dryads do and they are generally under the reign of the four heavenly kings
Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:35 pm If plants are sentient, does this not mean that is possible to give rise to sentient without Gandharva? That sentient can spring out from matter?
How can plants experience karma?
The smallest animals in Buddhism are widely considered to be unicellular organism like bacteria, can they experience karma? If you took medicine, did you kill them? According to some, we do. Then again, are virus in the animal realm as well?

Also echinoderms like starfish and sponges plus jellyfish are considered animals as well, can they experience karma?
My question is entirely different, anyway, a being to be sentient has to have some prerequisities, virus don't have just like cells don't have, this is both the point of view of science and buddhism. All sentient beings according to buddhism are animals (as humans are too) in this world, but not all animals are necessarily sentient beings

Thats why I am still asking questions, because what living things are considered as animals isn't a settled issue in Buddhism. On one hand, you have people defining the minimum requirement of having at least two sense organ for a creature to be called animals.

Then on the other, you have popular buddhist websites that claimed:

https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/kill-im ... rite-pest/
....We wipe out thousands of bacteria, also sentient beings, daily when we shower and brush our teeth and disinfect our homes.....
http://www.khandro.net/animal_about.htm
.....They range in size from microscopic bacteria to gigantic sea creatures, and like other forms of existence....

And then you have people like me still asking questions.

https://journals.openedition.org/emscat/3865
....One interesting point of potential controversy involves the question of microscopic creatures such as bacteria. I have heard some contemporary Tibetans explain that bacteria are included within the semchen sphere, while others explain that they are better understood as plants.....
Even this Geshe admittedly doesn't know the answers....

https://www.lamayeshe.com/article/chapt ... 8-april-27
Ven. Marcel: Rinpoche, there’s a question about whether viruses and bacteria are considered sentient beings? And can we then take antibiotics?

Rinpoche: This question has been asked many times! I cannot say with certainty that they are sentient beings. However, we can discuss the question in relation not only to bacteria but to bigger sentient beings, worms.
So the debate continues........
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

Kai lord wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:02 am
Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 11:42 pm
Kai lord wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 11:11 pm

Those devas or gods are called elves in Europe mythology, basically, their homes are build on top of the tree like elves and dryads do and they are generally under the reign of the four heavenly kings



The smallest animals in Buddhism are widely considered to be unicellular organism like bacteria, can they experience karma? If you took medicine, did you kill them? According to some, we do. Then again, are virus in the animal realm as well?

Also echinoderms like starfish and sponges plus jellyfish are considered animals as well, can they experience karma?
My question is entirely different, anyway, a being to be sentient has to have some prerequisities, virus don't have just like cells don't have, this is both the point of view of science and buddhism. All sentient beings according to buddhism are animals (as humans are too) in this world, but not all animals are necessarily sentient beings

Thats why I am still asking questions, because what living things are considered as animals isn't a settled issue in Buddhism. On one hand, you have people defining the minimum requirement of having at least two sense organ for a creature to be called animals.

Then on the other, you have popular buddhist websites that claimed:

https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/kill-im ... rite-pest/
....We wipe out thousands of bacteria, also sentient beings, daily when we shower and brush our teeth and disinfect our homes.....
http://www.khandro.net/animal_about.htm
.....They range in size from microscopic bacteria to gigantic sea creatures, and like other forms of existence....

And then you have people like me still asking questions.

https://journals.openedition.org/emscat/3865
....One interesting point of potential controversy involves the question of microscopic creatures such as bacteria. I have heard some contemporary Tibetans explain that bacteria are included within the semchen sphere, while others explain that they are better understood as plants.....
Even this Geshe admittedly doesn't know the answers....

https://www.lamayeshe.com/article/chapt ... 8-april-27
Ven. Marcel: Rinpoche, there’s a question about whether viruses and bacteria are considered sentient beings? And can we then take antibiotics?

Rinpoche: This question has been asked many times! I cannot say with certainty that they are sentient beings. However, we can discuss the question in relation not only to bacteria but to bigger sentient beings, worms.
So the debate continues........
I understood your points. Thank you.
I think the problem Is not to establish if this or that animal or cell is sentient or not. The problem is, if plants are sentient, It means that a continuum can be reborn as a plant, this Is not teached by any Buddha since Is not a way for karma to have some fruition, Is not teached as a birth process since there's no womb, eggs, warm and wet, nor miracolous birth. Is not One of the six realm of Samsara as for example we can see from the Bhavachakra.
I know there are stories of monks and practicioners reborn as objects in Abidharma but i think it's not the standard way ordinary beings could ever experience Samsara. If from non sentient, sentient is possible, materialistic emergentism is right.
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Kai lord »

Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:45 am
Kai lord wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:02 am
Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 11:42 pm

My question is entirely different, anyway, a being to be sentient has to have some prerequisities, virus don't have just like cells don't have, this is both the point of view of science and buddhism. All sentient beings according to buddhism are animals (as humans are too) in this world, but not all animals are necessarily sentient beings

Thats why I am still asking questions, because what living things are considered as animals isn't a settled issue in Buddhism. On one hand, you have people defining the minimum requirement of having at least two sense organ for a creature to be called animals.

Then on the other, you have popular buddhist websites that claimed:

https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/kill-im ... rite-pest/
....We wipe out thousands of bacteria, also sentient beings, daily when we shower and brush our teeth and disinfect our homes.....
http://www.khandro.net/animal_about.htm
.....They range in size from microscopic bacteria to gigantic sea creatures, and like other forms of existence....

And then you have people like me still asking questions.

https://journals.openedition.org/emscat/3865
....One interesting point of potential controversy involves the question of microscopic creatures such as bacteria. I have heard some contemporary Tibetans explain that bacteria are included within the semchen sphere, while others explain that they are better understood as plants.....
Even this Geshe admittedly doesn't know the answers....

https://www.lamayeshe.com/article/chapt ... 8-april-27
Ven. Marcel: Rinpoche, there’s a question about whether viruses and bacteria are considered sentient beings? And can we then take antibiotics?

Rinpoche: This question has been asked many times! I cannot say with certainty that they are sentient beings. However, we can discuss the question in relation not only to bacteria but to bigger sentient beings, worms.
So the debate continues........
I understood your points. Thank you.
I think the problem Is not to establish if this or that animal or cell is sentient or not. The problem is, if plants are sentient, It means that a continuum can be reborn as a plant, this Is not teached by any Buddha since Is not a way for karma to have some fruition, Is not teached as a birth process since there's no womb, eggs, warm and wet, nor miracolous birth. Is not One of the six realm of Samsara as for example we can see from the Bhavachakra.
I know there are stories of monks and practicioners reborn as objects in Abidharma but i think it's not the standard way ordinary beings could ever experience Samsara. If from non sentient, sentient is possible, materialistic emergentism is right.
Yeah I was thinking about that and i reasoned that if an unicellular organism is regarded as animals, why not a multicellular organism like fungi and plants as well which are more complex than bacteria?

I also think that its easier to understand plants using similar unique animals like jelllyfish which is not born from womb, egg, warm or wet. In fact the reproduction of jellyfish is veey complicated and plantlike. So if a jellyfish belongs to the animal realm, why wouldn't plants as well?
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
Leaves of Light
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:45 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Leaves of Light »

Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:35 pm If plants are sentient, does this not mean that is possible to give rise to sentient without Gandharva? That sentient can spring out from matter?
How can plants experience karma?
In the Samvarodaya Tantra, chapter four, verse 4 it says:

"Grasses, creepers and trees have only the consciousness of inanimate beings (jada);
[whereas] living beings in the six conditions of existence (gati) live with consciousness (4)".

The translator notes:
"Skt: 'jada vijnanamatraka'; thus, 'are unintelligent (or motionless) (jada) and have only consciousness' is also possible".

http://abhidharma.ru/A/Tantra/Content/V ... tantra.pdf page 247

Monier-Williams' definition of jada:

1 jaDa mf({A})n. (cf. {ja4lhu}) cold , frigid Pan5cat. i , 12 , 4 Ka1vya7d. ii , 34 Ra1jat. iv , 41 ; stiff , torpid , motionless , apathetic , senseless , stunned , paralysed Ragh. iii , 68 S3ak. &c. ; stupid , dull Mn. viii , 394 (also %{a-} neg. , 148) Ya1jn5. ii MBh. (ifc. `" too stupid for "' , iii , 437) &c. ; void of life , inanimate , unintelligent KapS. i , 146 ; vi , 5o Nr2isUp. Veda7ntas. Sarvad. ; dumb "' Mn. ii , 110 Susr. ; ifc. stunning , stupefying S3ak. iv , 6 ; m. (g. {azvA7di}) N. of Sumati (who simulated stupidity) cf. Ma1rkP. x , 9 ; cold , frost W. ; idiocy W. ; dulness , apathy W. ; inanimate "' , lifeless , matter (opposed to {cetana}) ; n. water (= %{jala}) S3a1rn3gP. (Subh.) ; lead L. ; (%{A}) f. N. of a plant ( = %{jaTA} , Mucuna pruritus , Flacourtia cataphracta L.) Car. vi , 2 (ifc. f. %{A}).

It is perhaps most notable that there is the distinction between "inanimate, lifeless matter" and that (presumably indicating sentient beings of the six gati and four modes of birth) possessing or characterized by "cetana", viz.

1 cetana mf({I4})n. visible , conspicuous , distinguished , excellent RV. AV. ix , 4 , 21 ; percipient , conscious , sentient , intelligent Kat2hUp. v , 13 S3vetUp. vi , 13 Hariv. 3587 KapS. Tattvas. &c. ; m. an intelligent being , man Sarvad. ii , 221 ; soul , mind L. ; n. conspicuousness RV. i , 13 , 11 and 170 , 4 ; iii , 3 , 8 ; iv , 7 , 2 ; soul , mind R. vii , 55 , 17 and 20 ; (%{A}) f. consciousness , understanding , sense , intelligence Ya1jn5. iii , 175 MBh. &c. (often ifc. [f. %{A}] Mn. ix , 67 MBh. &c.) (cf. %{a-} , %{niz-} , %{puru-ce4t-} , %{vi-} , %{sa-} , %{su4-}).

This is of course only one viewpoint.
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

Leaves of Light wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 7:07 am
Vajrasambhava wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:35 pm If plants are sentient, does this not mean that is possible to give rise to sentient without Gandharva? That sentient can spring out from matter?
How can plants experience karma?
In the Samvarodaya Tantra, chapter four, verse 4 it says:

"Grasses, creepers and trees have only the consciousness of inanimate beings (jada);
[whereas] living beings in the six conditions of existence (gati) live with consciousness (4)".

The translator notes:
"Skt: 'jada vijnanamatraka'; thus, 'are unintelligent (or motionless) (jada) and have only consciousness' is also possible".

http://abhidharma.ru/A/Tantra/Content/V ... tantra.pdf page 247

Monier-Williams' definition of jada:

1 jaDa mf({A})n. (cf. {ja4lhu}) cold , frigid Pan5cat. i , 12 , 4 Ka1vya7d. ii , 34 Ra1jat. iv , 41 ; stiff , torpid , motionless , apathetic , senseless , stunned , paralysed Ragh. iii , 68 S3ak. &c. ; stupid , dull Mn. viii , 394 (also %{a-} neg. , 148) Ya1jn5. ii MBh. (ifc. `" too stupid for "' , iii , 437) &c. ; void of life , inanimate , unintelligent KapS. i , 146 ; vi , 5o Nr2isUp. Veda7ntas. Sarvad. ; dumb "' Mn. ii , 110 Susr. ; ifc. stunning , stupefying S3ak. iv , 6 ; m. (g. {azvA7di}) N. of Sumati (who simulated stupidity) cf. Ma1rkP. x , 9 ; cold , frost W. ; idiocy W. ; dulness , apathy W. ; inanimate "' , lifeless , matter (opposed to {cetana}) ; n. water (= %{jala}) S3a1rn3gP. (Subh.) ; lead L. ; (%{A}) f. N. of a plant ( = %{jaTA} , Mucuna pruritus , Flacourtia cataphracta L.) Car. vi , 2 (ifc. f. %{A}).

It is perhaps most notable that there is the distinction between "inanimate, lifeless matter" and that (presumably indicating sentient beings of the six gati and four modes of birth) possessing or characterized by "cetana", viz.

1 cetana mf({I4})n. visible , conspicuous , distinguished , excellent RV. AV. ix , 4 , 21 ; percipient , conscious , sentient , intelligent Kat2hUp. v , 13 S3vetUp. vi , 13 Hariv. 3587 KapS. Tattvas. &c. ; m. an intelligent being , man Sarvad. ii , 221 ; soul , mind L. ; n. conspicuousness RV. i , 13 , 11 and 170 , 4 ; iii , 3 , 8 ; iv , 7 , 2 ; soul , mind R. vii , 55 , 17 and 20 ; (%{A}) f. consciousness , understanding , sense , intelligence Ya1jn5. iii , 175 MBh. &c. (often ifc. [f. %{A}] Mn. ix , 67 MBh. &c.) (cf. %{a-} , %{niz-} , %{puru-ce4t-} , %{vi-} , %{sa-} , %{su4-}).

This is of course only one viewpoint.
Thank you so much. Really! ^^
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9454
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

The whole question of “sentience” is skewed if one assumes that any living object possesses some intrinsic existence (atman) beyond its component parts.

Are your blood cells sentient? Are roots, bark, and leaves sentient? Are pine cones sentient? Are your toes sentient? Does each toe possess its own sentience, or do they share a sentience? When the leaves fall off the tree, where does the sentience in each leaf go? Are the carbon molecules, and the water, in both animal and trees sentient? If I eat a juicy peach, do I acquire some of its sentience?

In other words, first ask,
Where does “sentience” reside?

If you can answer that, then you will know whether plants are sentient.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 11:37 am The whole question of “sentience” is skewed if one assumes that any living object possesses some intrinsic existence (atman) beyond its component parts.

Are your blood cells sentient? Are roots, bark, and leaves sentient? Are pine cones sentient? Are your toes sentient? Does each toe possess its own sentience, or do they share a sentience? When the leaves fall off the tree, where does the sentience in each leaf go? Are the carbon molecules, and the water, in both animal and trees sentient? If I eat a juicy peach, do I acquire some of its sentience?

In other words, first ask,
Where does “sentience” reside?

If you can answer that, then you will know whether plants are sentient.
Hi, what you say is interesting.
But i strictly referred to the fact if a gandharva can or cannot reborn as a plant to enjoy samsara.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9454
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:07 pm But i strictly referred to the fact if a gandharva can or cannot reborn as a plant to enjoy samsara.
In some Buddhist cultures it is thought that a consciousness can take up residence in a tree, mistakingly perceiving it as a human body.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:16 pm
Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:07 pm But i strictly referred to the fact if a gandharva can or cannot reborn as a plant to enjoy samsara.
In some Buddhist cultures it is thought that a consciousness can take up residence in a tree, mistakingly perceiving it as a human body.
So non-sentient can give rise to sentient?
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9454
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:33 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:16 pm
Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:07 pm But i strictly referred to the fact if a gandharva can or cannot reborn as a plant to enjoy samsara.
In some Buddhist cultures it is thought that a consciousness can take up residence in a tree, mistakingly perceiving it as a human body.
So non-sentient can give rise to sentient?
No, that’s the materialist view. That’s like saying a house gives rise to whoever moves into it. The house may turn a homeless person into an occupant, but it didn’t create the homeless person.

I think ‘sentient’ is a clumsy term. And in the diamond sutra it even states that ultimately there are no sentient beings to liberate.

Sentience arises conditionally, from causes. There’s awareness + whatever functioning conditions arise with that awareness that creates what we experience as sentience.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:42 pm
Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:33 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:16 pm
In some Buddhist cultures it is thought that a consciousness can take up residence in a tree, mistakingly perceiving it as a human body.
So non-sentient can give rise to sentient?
No, that’s the materialist view. That’s like saying a house gives rise to whoever moves into it. The house may turn a homeless person into an occupant, but it didn’t create the homeless person.

I think ‘sentient’ is a clumsy term. And in the diamond sutra it even states that ultimately there are no sentient beings to liberate.

Sentience arises conditionally, from causes. There’s awareness + whatever functioning conditions arise with that awareness that creates what we experience as sentience.
I see. That's really clear, thank you.
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Kai lord »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:16 pm
Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:07 pm But i strictly referred to the fact if a gandharva can or cannot reborn as a plant to enjoy samsara.
In some Buddhist cultures it is thought that a consciousness can take up residence in a tree, mistakingly perceiving it as a human body.
To stir things up further :stirthepot:

Some said that bardo being starts taking up residence in a single cell at the moment of conception when the father white element (Yang) merge with the mother red element (Yin) and the fundamental wind is present as well.
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Malcolm »

Leaves of Light wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 7:07 am This is of course only one viewpoint.
Yes. And the fact remains that plant life, like all life, refines the five elements, demonstrates community, communication, interaction, altruistic behavior across species, as well as hostility, etc. One can claim it is all mechanistic, and insentient, but one can make the same argument about two and four-legged beings, I.e. that everything we do and are is merely a function of chemical interactions.

The rebirth argument is not particularly convincing. So, in the end, Buddhists who insist on plantlife insentience are really just resting their arguments on passages from texts. That’s fine, but then, how does one pick and choose? Meru is false, but plant insentience is true?
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 2:31 pm
Leaves of Light wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 7:07 am This is of course only one viewpoint.
The rebirth argument is not particularly convincing. So, in the end, Buddhists who insist on plantlife insentience are really just resting their arguments on passages from texts. That’s fine, but then, how does one pick and choose? Meru is false, but plant insentience is true?
That's why, we have to know how statements and authority are cognized and known in Buddhadharma to declare if a phenomena occurs or not. Authorities based on texts are valid just if practicioners can experience the facts described on texts themselves through practice and realization, and sincerely i don't know if this Is possible or not. That's why I doubt everything for now
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Malcolm »

Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:45 am I understood your points. Thank you.
I think the problem Is not to establish if this or that animal or cell is sentient or not. The problem is, if plants are sentient, It means that a continuum can be reborn as a plant,
Unless plant intelligence operates according to principles which are alien to what we observe in animal intelligence. In other words, plants may be intelligent, but in a fashion distinct from the way we are intelligent, with different senses, different modes of communication, reproduction, memory, and so on. And, should this be the case, karma and so on would be irrelevant to plant intelligence, because of its utter difference.

Read Paul Stamets.
Vajrasambhava
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:24 pm

Re: Are trees sentient?

Post by Vajrasambhava »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 2:54 pm
Vajrasambhava wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 12:45 am I understood your points. Thank you.
I think the problem Is not to establish if this or that animal or cell is sentient or not. The problem is, if plants are sentient, It means that a continuum can be reborn as a plant,
Unless plant intelligence operates according to principles which are alien to what we observe in animal intelligence. In other words, plants may be intelligent, but in a fashion distinct from the way we are intelligent, with different senses, different modes of communication, reproduction, memory, and so on. And, should this be the case, karma and so on would be irrelevant to plant intelligence, because of its utter difference.

Read Paul Stamets.
I understand.
So, how Buddhadharma copes with these phenomenology?
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”