Trees

Trees are great. Don't believe us, take a look at these. Still don't believe us? Well, then just consider the important roles trees play in just about every religion ever:

• The Buddha reached enlightenment under the Bo tree. (Source)
• Adam and Eve were expelled from Eden for eating from the Tree of Knowledge.
• Jesus was crucified on a cross (formerly a tree).
• The Norse god Odin hung from the world tree, gaining knowledge of songs and runes in the process. (Source)
• The Upanishads feature a cosmic tree named Asvattha. (Source)
• The hundred-headed serpent Ladon guards a tree of golden apples in Greek mythology. (Source)

And that's just to name a few. So it's no surprise that tree imagery pops up once or twice in Lord of Light.

When Yama first meets Sam in a dream, he spies the Buddha sitting beneath "a massive tree, a tree such as did not grow upon the world, but rather held the world together with its roots" (3.331). The Dome of Heaven contains not only the Celestial City, but also the forest of Kaniburrha (5.18), too, and Nirriti's last words contain a reference to the Gospel of Matthew when he says, "Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit" (7.487).

So, what can we make of all this? Well, it seems that every major religion referenced in this novel—Buddhism, Hinduism, and Christianity—comes equipped with tree imagery. Perhaps this shared imagery suggests connecting points between all the different religions of the novel; a common root system, if you will. This would bring extra importance to Nirriti's last words, suggesting the importance of a religion is not what religion it is but what it generates. The differences that matter are practical more than anything else.

On the other hand, maybe Zelazny just wanted to keep the religious-tree-referencing streak alive and needed to include trees to give his mythological world that extra bit of veracity and zing.

What do you think? Are we missing the metaphorical forest for the trees here? Do have a different take on why trees appear so frequently?