In Buddhism's view, sentimentality and ruthlessness are really clear. All the manifestations of plant minerals and other substances are "color method", that is to say, all the manifestations of "color" are material forms, and only with the process of "mind method" can it be said that it is affectionate.
Historically, ancient people's understanding and classification of plant mineral microorganisms were different from those of modern people. Ancient people thought that plant minerals were inanimate, so they simply belonged to ruthlessness and so on. Modern people think that minerals are pure substances and plants are life. For microorganisms, ancient people only had vague rational analysis and classification, but no actual classification and naming, so it can't be said that the tiny creatures mentioned by ancient Indians are equivalent to the microbes and bacteria now, and the ancient understanding is based on the difference between animals and non-animals. Buddhism should emphasize both development and objective history. As a product of history, it has its own limitations in understanding, and there is no need to copy mechanically. We should know the difference between sentimentality and ruthlessness, and then judge by our own wisdom, not by what the Buddha said and didn't say.
Then, from the perspective of Buddhism and even practical physics, the life activities of plants mentioned by modern people do not actually include or consider the complete function of consciousness. Plants can indeed have certain stimulation and conduction reactions, and have certain biological current induction, such as the feeling of sound waves, the feeling of electric waves, and the adaptability to chemicals and living environment. But this belongs to the instinctive movement of biological cells rather than the active creation of consciousness, that is, being stimulated before feedback, rather than actively identifying, analyzing, thinking and then forming actions. Whether there are active nerve reaction activities and thinking activities is the key to distinguish sentient beings from ruthlessness.
"Love and ruthlessness, the same circle breeds wisdom", "Thinking is tangible, knowing is tangible"; I don't know how to accommodate the saying that "an explanation can also become a Buddha".
Actually, what you are asking here are two different concepts. The same circle breeds wisdom, and knowledge is in shape, which is the understanding of wisdom and prajna. An explanation can also become a Buddha, which refers to those parts of all beings that are particularly persistent and very exclusive of Buddhism, rather than saying that heartless things are an explanation. So this question is put in the second paragraph.
The so-called "wisdom is in the same circle and knowledge is in shape" does not mean that everything is intelligent and conscious, but that if our wisdom can be analyzed, we can detect anything, whether it is sentient beings or heartless material bodies, which is actually in line with the normal law of survival and causality. Zen often says that "green bamboos are full of dharma, gloomy and yellow flowers are nothing more than prajnaparamita", which does not mean that they are full of bamboos, nor that all the flowers and plants in the mountains are the crystallization of wisdom, but that the truth to be explained by Buddhism is the same in any environment and in any state. Bamboo and yellow flowers are means, bridges, boats and tools to realize Tao, but these means, bridges, boats and tools are not Buddhism, but their concrete application and performance. As the ancient Taoist in China said, where is the Tao? This sentence does not mean that everything is "Tao", but that everything is the expression of "Tao" and is included in "Tao". Understand this truth, we will know what is roundness and what is the "knowledge" we feel. What we are talking about is not the material object itself, but our own perception and understanding ability, and how we discover our "knowledge".
People who "explain" the Buddha's nature, then does he gradually appear heartless in reincarnation, such as vegetation, masonry, ancient tree roots and so on? After the karma is cleared, there is still a chance to grow roots and become a Buddha.
When "explaining" sentient beings, they are obviously "sentient beings", so naturally they will not say plant minerals. This explanation means that they can't believe in Buddhism. If they don't believe in Buddhism, they naturally have no chance to become a Buddha. But it doesn't mean that they don't have the seeds and basic conditions to become a Buddha, but because of various karma obstacles, they can't use and discover their original Buddha nature. Since it is a sentient being, it is naturally a reincarnation of all beings and cannot be presented as a heartless thing.
Confucian classics also say that ruthless law is also the embodiment of all buddhas and bodhisattvas in front of all beings. For example, in the Tibetan scriptures (I also divide it into tens of billions, which is convenient for wide distribution. It's still Yigen, who hears it and believes it. There may be good results, and diligent persuasion will achieve success. Still dull, long-term return. Or there is heavy industry, and there is no admiration. If you are equal, you are different and separated. I know it's all about being a man, a woman, a dragon, a ghost, a mountain forest, Kawahara, Hechi Springs, and benefiting people. There is a saying "jewelry, food, clothes, lamps, etc.". It is widely used to benefit the public. " This means that the Buddha will show all kinds of ruthless methods, such as jewelry, clothes, food, lights, cars and so on. , benefit all beings.
These words in the classics need your careful understanding, and they are put into use, not simply turned into things. Therefore, the last sentence of the Tibetan scriptures says that those who benefit others, those who are not polluted and respected, also benefit the public. Moreover, it's not that Buddha and Bodhisattva turned into rivers and mountains jewelry, but that they "revealed" the rivers and mountains jewelry, that is to say, what they revealed is secondary, just like a magician doing magic. It's not that the magician turned himself into something, but that he is using props to show what he needs. Transformation is an illusion and a kind of utilization. The purpose is to give convenience and help. What is transformed is the image, not the purpose, nor does it represent the true face of the dharma body.