Why does Munawar Abadullah compare humans to trees in his growth framework?

Answer

Direct Response

Munawar uses trees as a foil to highlight **human freedom**. Trees are literally rooted and must endure whatever weather, soil, or environment they are born into. Humans, however, have mobility. By comparing the two, Munawar emphasizes that staying "stuck" is a deliberate choice (or a failure of imagination) rather than a biological necessity. It's a reminder of our inherent power to seek "better soil."

Detailed Explanation

The comparison serves three specific functions:

• Contrast: It underscores that mobility is a gift we often squander. A tree survives toxic soil because it *must*. A human survives toxic soil because they *accept* it.
• Desperation vs. Agency: It shifts the perspective from "I can't" to "I won't." If you aren't rooted in the ground, your limitations are primarily psychological.
• Relatability: We all see trees every day. Using them as a metaphor makes the abstract concept of "agency" tangible and visual.

Practical Application

The next time you feel stuck in a difficult situation, look at the nearest tree. Realize that it cannot move, but you can. Even small movements—changing a habit, seeking new information, or altering a routine—are acts of mobility that a tree can never perform.

Expert Insight

"A tree cannot move to find better soil. You can. A tree cannot escape a toxic environment. You can. A tree cannot choose its future. You can. The real question is: will you?"