AVG 2.8

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 8
प्रकाशो मे निजं रूपं नातिरिक्तोऽस्म्यहं ततः ।
यदा प्रकाशते विश्वं तदाहंभास एव हि ॥ २-८॥

PURPORT:
Light is my elemental nature, and
I am not disparate from light.
When the universe manifests,
then, truly, it is I that shine.

TRANSLITERATION:
प्रकाशः मे निजम् रूपम् न अतिरिक्तः अस्मि अहम् ततः ।
prakāśaḥ me nijam rūpam na atiriktaḥ asmi aham tataḥ ।
यदा प्रकाशते विश्वम् तदा अहंभासः एव हि ॥ २-८॥
yadā prakāśate viśvam tadā ahaṃbhāsaḥ eva hi ॥ 2-8॥
MEANING:
prakāśaḥ (प्रकाशः) = light/lustre/brightness
me (मे) = my/mine
nijam (निजम्) = innate/intrinsic/elemental
rūpam (रूपम्) = nature/appearance/form/mode
na (न) = not
atiriktaḥ (अतिरिक्तः) = different from/distinct from/disparate to
asmi (अस्मि) =  am [as in ‘I am’]
aham (अहम्) = I
tataḥ (ततः) = from that/from that/due to that/therefore/therefrom।
yadā (यदा) = when
prakāśate (प्रकाशते) = become evident or become manifest/make noticeable
viśvam (विश्वम्) = universe
tadā (तदा) = then
ahaṃbhāsaḥ (अहंभासः) = I will shine/I will show lustre [as in ‘I that shines’]
eva (एव) = alone
hi (हि) = surely/verily/truly ॥ 2-8॥

COMMENTS:
In these verses, Janaka continues in his happy state of understanding his own-self and tells Ashtavakra that he realizes that his innate nature is a form of awareness that he metaphorically juxtaposes with light - an illuminating, radiant form of clarity that enlightens and enlivens the very core of his being. He is conscious awareness and conscious awareness is him - a seamless union of awareness and the one who possesses it (as the verse beautifully lays out with the line "light is my elemental nature and I am not disparate from light"). This form of awareness allows for Janaka to participate in the universe of designated names and imputed forms fully cognizant of the underlying reality that lacks inherent essence. Janaka understands that for him to intelligently navigate a world that is conventionally designated by labels, patterns and conventions, he will need to reconcile his deeper understanding of reality (the idea of selflessness and the lack of any foundational essence) with everyday conventional reality. To this end, he understands that he will need to harmonize conventional truths, representational designations and everyday dualities that we are constantly confronted with. The knowledge that the designations and concepts like reality, self, spirit or soul all have their importance, legitimacy and efficacy when they are applied within an internal frame of reference that encompasses the latent impermanence of all such entities as well as the lack of inherent essence within any entity.

NOTES:
On the Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness: A concept developed within the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead where one commits the fallacy of misplaced concreteness when one mistakes an abstract belief, opinion, or concept about the way things are for a physical or "concrete" reality. Mr. Whitehead says that this is an error, but, it is merely the accidental error of mistaking the abstract for the concrete. Whitehead proposed the fallacy in a discussion of the relation of spatial and temporal location of objects. He rejects the notion that a concrete physical object in the universe can be ascribed a simple spatial or temporal extension, that is, without reference to its relations to other spatial or temporal extensions. Very similar to notions and concepts presented here where the foundational essence behind any one entity cannot be detected; instead, one can only perceive the dependent arising of existents and entities via the contingent interrelationships of constituent portions.

REFERENCES:
Alfred North Whitehead: Process and Reality, An essay in cosmology, Gifford Lectures Delivered in the University of Edinburgh During the Session 1927-28
Full essay here: https://archive.org/details/AlfredNorthWhiteheadProcessAndReality

AVG 2.7

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 7

आत्माज्ञानाज्जगद्भाति आत्मज्ञानान्न भासते ।

रज्ज्वज्ञानादहिर्भाति तज्ज्ञानाद्भासते न हि ॥ २-७॥

PURPORT:

The world appears to be perceived so

due to a poverty of self-awareness;

the impression disappears when

there is knowledge of the self.

Similarly, the snake is perceived so

due to non-cognition of the rope; and

disappears with its recognition.

TRANSLITERATION:

आत्म अज्ञानात् जगत् भाति आत्मज्ञानात् न भासते ।

ātma ajñānāt jagat bhāti ātmajñānāt na bhāsate ।

रज्ज्व् अज्ञानात् अहिः भाति तज्ज्ञानात् भासते न हि ॥ २-७॥

rajjv ajñānāt ahiḥ bhāti tajjñānāt bhāsate na hi ॥ 2-7॥

MEANING:

ātma (आत्म) = the self-model/the self-awareness/self

ajñānāt (अज्ञानात्) = from the ignorance of [referring to the self here]

jagat (जगत्) = universe

bhāti (भाति) = appears to be/perception of/knowledge of

ātmajñānāt (आत्मज्ञानात्) = from the knowledge of the self-model/from the knowledge offered by the awareness of the self

na (न) = not

bhāsate (भासते) = to occur to the mind/to appear to the mind ।

rajjv (रज्ज्व्) = rope/cord

ajñānāt (अज्ञानात्) = from the non-cognizance of/stemming from the ignorance of [referring to the rope here]

ahiḥ (अहिः) = snake

bhāti (भाति) = appears to be/perception of/knowledge of

tajjñānāt (तज्ज्ञानात्) = from the recognition of that/from the awareness of that [referring to the rope here] [compound of tat meaning ‘that’ and jñānāt meaning ‘from the recognition/awareness/perception of’]

bhāsate (भासते) = to occur to the mind/to appear to the mind

na (न) = not

hi (हि) = indeed/certainly/verily ॥ 2-7॥

COMMENT:

These verses further pry at the nature of reality, our awareness of reality and the self-model generated by our minds in response to conditioning, phenomenal interactions and sensory inputs. The very first line ('world appears to be perceived so due to a poverty of self-awareness') expertly teases out the indeterminacy as it applies to 'reality'. An indeterminacy of the metaphysical kind where, on analysis, entities neither exist nor not exist. Conventional reality that we encounter in everyday phenomenological processes clearly indicate that it will be absurd to posit that entities within objective reality are non-existent - the chair that I sit on right now is a solid wooden structure that supports my physical form - to characterize the chair as otherwise will lead to charges of incipient idiocy. On the other hand, it is seen that entities do not exist (in the deepest sense of that metaphysical term ‘exist’) when entities are analyzed as being devoid of any inherent existence and as lacking any form of 'true foundational essence' - a chair is only a chair since we classify, categorize and designate it so and our conditioned minds are habituated to characterize the article of furniture thus - there is no enduring quality or essence behind the concept of 'chairness' to be found within this universe, however hard one might look for such a quality (the same way there is no enduring inherent quality of selfhood, godliness, soul, creator or spirit). Yet, the self-model we generate over our formative years hardens and lends itself to a substantialist and essentialist perspective to our phenomenological experiences. It is this process of assigning substantiality and essentiality that leads to identification with the ego, the resultant attachment and the manifested possessiveness. Our awareness of reality is clouded by these factors.

Even as we understand that the small sliver of objective reality that we encounter (the part that we call conventional reality - eg. the chairs of the world) is but a poor and partial representation of objective reality, it is clear that the representation generated thus is exquisitely tuned by our evolutionary forces for us to continue to engage in two of the most fundamental activities that all sentient beings in this universe strive towards: procreation of the species and homeostasis to maintain various internal equilibria. Even as we understand that the full panoply of reality might itself never be knowable, we continue to actively believe and engage with the active hallucination created for us by our minds so that these two overarching objectives of sentient beings are accomplished. The evolutionary forces are thus tuned to mesh the twin objectives of procreation and homeostasis to the organisms inherent 'drive to stay alive'. This drive is reinforced every second by the mind actively engaging the organism in the following hypothetical feedback cycle: “there is a future state of being out there extrapolated from present state of sensory inputs; that future state contains 'you'; this 'you' will continue to breathe, live and exist in that future state; let me use all of the conventional reality made interrogable by the sense organs to construct this state of continuity; let me update this every second so that a semblance of continuity within conventional reality is achieved”; or, in other words, a state of active hallucination maintained and propagated every second of our waking and dreaming lives.

The continual flux of self-generated mental activity* that occurs within the mind in terms of recycling thoughts, emotions and memories help to further reinforce the active hallucination carried out by the mind by additionally embellishing the active narrative generated with appropriate strands of memories, emotional attachments (to memories) as well as learning and conditioning. This is a continuous process that happens from the time we are infants to the time we pass on to our elemental basics. Evolutionarily, I am of the view that the prefrontal mind (the thinking, planning and strategizing part of our brains) developed this model to counter the overwhelming feeling of impermanence that constantly assails the pre-frontal from all sides. Impermanence in terms of the continual decay that visits every existent entity to the flux that entities undergo up until the eventual dissolution of all entities (sentient or otherwise) to elemental basics.

Given this background of the generated self-model and the mind-wandering aspects of our phenomenological being, how do we attain a measure of equanimity? The overarching philosophy behind Janaka's lines here and the process (in my perspective) is to develop a specific contemplative mode - a mode that allows one to consciously experience the world from an inherently selfless perspective. The mode where one understands phenomena and our own actions by removing the self from the subjective and objective aspects of our being. I have seen the phrase ‘seeing out of emptiness’, observing without an observer’ and ‘impartial insight from choice-less awareness’ in this regard – all are good to describe this state of being. A mental posture of discernment and recognition where the observer neither increases nor decreases anything from what is present based upon the observers conditioning; instead, the observer indulges in a form of targeted examination of ‘thusness’ within the backdrop of inter-connectedness and impermanence. The observer in this mode will not act as an ‘agent of action’; instead the observer will only be what the word says and means – an OBSERVER who clearly understands that things experienced are neither real nor are unreal. Almost akin to the concept of turning the contemporary idea of eidetic reduction** on its head – where one works to eidetically reduce phenomena to a place where the reduction process leads one to an empty, essence-less awareness of reality (instead of finding an underlying essence). So, back to where we started, as Janaka alludes to – understanding the nature of reality as indeterminacy of the metaphysical kind where, on analysis, said entities neither exist nor not exist.

NOTES:

*The waking mind is often occupied with self-generated mental activity that are minimally inhibited by events in the present moment. These self-generated thoughts (called mind-wandering) allow us to connect our past and futures together, help with long-term planning and a source of creative inspiration. Although self-generated thoughts may be disruptive to the tasks of the moment, it is seen that autonomous self-generation of thought allows for the freedom to move from the here and now to a planned future state and thus reflects an evolutionary adaptation that allows the mind to perform actions that are not simply a reflexive response to the outside world.

** Eidetic reduction is a technique in the study of essences in phenomenology whose goal is to identify the basic components of phenomena. Eidetic reduction requires that a phenomenologist examine the essence of a mental object, be it a simple mental act, or the unity of consciousness itself, with the intention of drawing out the absolutely necessary and invariable components that make the mental object what it is. This reduction is done with the intention of removing what is perceived, and leaving only what is required. Eidetic reduction is a form of imaginative variation by which one attempts to reduce a phenomenon into its necessary essences. This is done by theoretically changing different elements (while mentally observing whether or not the phenomenon changes) of a practical object to learn which characteristics are necessary for it to be it without being something else. If a characteristic is changed, and the object remains unchanged, the characteristic is unnecessary to the essence of the object, and vice versa. That which cannot be eliminated is part of the example's essence.

REFERENCES:

Thomas K. Metzinger: Why Is Virtual Reality Interesting for Philosophers?

Thomas K. Metzinger: Are you sleepwalking now?

Thomas K. Metzinger: Minimal Phenomenal Experience The ARAS-model theory: Steps toward a minimal model of conscious experience as such.

AVG 2.6

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 6
यथैवेक्षुरसे क्लृप्ता तेन व्याप्तैव शर्करा ।
तथा विश्वं मयि क्लृप्तं मया व्याप्तं निरन्तरम् ॥ २-६॥

PURPORT:
Just as sugar produced from the sugarcane
is thoroughly infused within its juice;
similarly so, the universe is produced in me, and
is wholly permeated by me uninterruptedly.

TRANSLITERATION:
यथा एव इक्षुरसे क्लृप्ता तेन व्याप्ता एव शर्करा ।
yathā eva ikṣurase klṛptā tena vyāptā eva śarkarā ।
तथा विश्वम् मयि क्लृप्तं मया व्याप्तम् निरन्तरम् ॥ २-६॥
tathā viśvam mayi klṛptaṃ mayā vyāptam nirantaram ॥ 2-6॥

MEANING:
yathā (यथा) = as
eva (एव) = just
ikṣurase (इक्षुरसे) = in the juice of the sugar-cane (compound of ikṣu (इक्षु) meaning 'sugarcane' and rase (रसे) meaning 'within the juice')
klṛptā (क्लृप्ता) = produced
tena (तेन) = with that (as in within that juice)
vyāptā (व्याप्ता) = pervaded/spread through/infused/permeate
eva (एव) = thoroughly/utterly
śarkarā (शर्करा) =  sugar ।
tathā (तथा) = similarly/so
viśvam (विश्वम्) = universe
mayi (मयि) = in me
klṛptaṃ (क्लृप्तं) = produced/created
mayā (मया) = by me
vyāptam (व्याप्तम्) = pervaded
nirantaram (निरन्तरम्) = without interval/continuously/through and through ॥ 2-6॥

COMMENT:
This verse is a beautiful illustration of Janaka's supreme feeling of oneness with the universe where he maintains that there is no divergence between his own perceptual awareness of the universe that is generated by his self-model and the fact that the same universe is wholly permeated by him without interruption. The metaphor used to drive this point home is lucid and commonsensical in its clarity of vision - that of the sweetness of the sugar produced from the sugarcane juice utterly permeating all of the juice distilled from the sugarcane.
Looking back, it is now clear that the last three verses dealt with the concept of oneness; starting with the foam, bubbles, waves and water to the metaphor of the woven thread forming the fabric to the implied comparison using sugar cane juice and sugar.
In each of these three verses, the over-riding theme is one of a seamless inter-mixing of the observer (Janaka) and the perceived (the universe as generated by the self-model of the observer). Using these implicit correlations and metaphors, Janaka understands that all manifest phenomena are (at the end of the day) emergent complexity that arises in a dependent manner based upon prior inter-related processes, states and conditions. The emergent universe thus can be construed to have been erected upon an inter-dependent network of parts that are contingent upon each other (of which Janaka himself is but an interdependent moiety).
The additional motif that colors all three of these verses is the illusory and probabilistic nature of manifest reality and the simple truth is that one cannot make absolute statements about any phenomena whatsoever (be it the universe or the aurora in the skies or the purported soul within us). The traditional understanding that whatever we experience in our interactions with the world (and universe at large) has some underlying reality and a concrete existence independent of our observations/experiences is not true. It is now understood that the phenomena that we are observe are directly affected by the very process of our observing them (cue the Uncertainty Principle). This means that our observations are not objective and independent but relative. Put another way, one cannot make any statement and refer to the same an absolute fact – every statement, every sentence, every word stands contingent upon a framework of understanding that is built up in a dependent manner – this is the case with linguistics or with any other field of enquiry. This may be said about time and space too; the thinking that time and space are absolute universal phenomena and that the passing of time and the idea of space is the same for all people under all circumstances is untrue. It is now clear that the rate of passing of time is relative to its observer and space is curved by the presence of mass (cue the Theory of Relativity here). Indeed, at the level of subatomic events, causality itself, one of the fundamental planks upon which the erstwhile world-view was constructed become absurd. At this level, we can no longer speak of individual events and their causes. All we can do is to measure groups of events and assign probabilities of interaction and dependence to them. Thus we find causality being replaced by probability of interaction. We find that the nature of reality is not absolute in any sense of the word, but is relative in every sense of the word. The maxim that all reality is interaction is indeed true.

NOTES:
"What we normally call the mind is the deluded mind, a turbulent vortex of thoughts whipped up by attachment, anger, and ignorance. This mind, unlike enlightened awareness, is always being carried away by one delusion after another. ...Yet, however strong these thoughts may seem, they are just thoughts and will eventually dissolve back into emptiness. Once you recognize the intrinsic nature of the mind, these thoughts that seem to appear and disappear all the time can no longer fool you. Just as clouds form, last for a while, and then dissolve back into the empty sky, so deluded thoughts arise, remain for a while, and then vanish into the voidness of mind; in reality nothing at all has happened. When sunlight falls on a crystal, lights of all colors of the rainbow appear; yet they have no substance that you can grasp. Likewise, all thoughts in their infinite variety - devotion, compassion, harmfulness, desire - are utterly without substance. There is no thought that is something other than voidness; if you recognize the void nature of thoughts at the very moment they arise, they will dissolve. Attachment and hatred will never be able to disturb the mind. Deluded emotions will collapse by themselves. No negative actions will be accumulated, so no suffering will follow." – Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche from the book "The Heart Treasure of the Enlightened Ones"

REFERENCES:
Momen, Moojan: Relativism: A Basis For Bahá'í Metaphysics
Schaffer, Jonathan: Monism: The Priority of the Whole

AVG 2.5

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 5
तन्तुमात्रो भवेदेव पटो यद्वद्विचारतः ।
आत्मतन्मात्रमेवेदं तद्वद्विश्वं विचारितम् ॥ २-५॥

PURPORT:
Just as fabric, when examined,
assuredly is made of yarn;
thus so, the universe,
appropriately considered
is merely of the self-model.

TRANSLITERATION:
तन्तुमात्रः भवेत् एव पटः यद्वत् विचारतः ।
tantumātraḥ bhavet eva paṭaḥ yadvat vicāratā ।
आत्मतन्मात्रम् एव इदम् तद्वत् विश्वम् विचारितम् ॥ २-५॥
ātmatanmātram eva idam tadvat viśvam vicāritam ॥ 2-5॥

MEANING:
tantumātraḥ (तन्तुमात्रः) = just the thread (compound of tantu (तन्तु) meaning 'yarn/fiber/thread' and mātraḥ (मात्रः) meaning just/only)
bhavet (भवेत्) = is/it is
eva (एव) = certainly/assuredly
paṭaḥ (पटः) = piece of cloth/fabric
yadvat (यद्वत्) = just as/like
vicāratā (विचारतः) =  examined/pondered।
ātmatanmātram (आत्मतन्मात्रम्) = nothing but the self-model (compound of ātma (आत्म) meaning 'self-model' and tanmātram (तन्मात्रम्) meaning 'merely that/just that trifling amount/the mere rudimentary essence')
eva (एव) = certainly/only
idam (इदम्) = this
tadvat (तद्वत्) = that way/thus so
viśvam (विश्वम्) = universe
vicāritam (विचारितम्) =  considered ॥ 2-5॥

COMMENTS:
Janaka's metaphor comparing the universe as a vast bolt of fabric and each sentient being akin to a strand within the fabric perceiving the universe based upon our bespoke self-models is indeed a beautiful turn of verse here. To be noted is the fact that the universe and the entities within have no absolute existence, but, appear to arise and exist through dependencies, relations between dependencies and conditions* supporting the manifestation of phenomena in the universe. While the entities themselves are made manifest through these relations, it is understood that the number of relations that interact in a dependent manner amongst entities are indeed incalculable. Just as the yarn inter-twined gives rise to the dependently designated entity called fabric, so too is the universe inter-twined when considered appropriately via the lens of our individual self-models says Janaka joyfully. It is seen that once the dependencies, the relations between dependencies and the conditions themselves are peeled back, the universe as designated and interpreted by our senses starts to fall away - just as in an illusion**.

*A note clarifying the difference between the word condition as opposed to a cause: A condition is a cause which is necessary but not sufficient for an entity or a phenomenon to be manifest. A condition is that thing(s) which collaborates, participates and conspires for some phenomena in the universe to arise and manifest, but is not the sole reason for its arising and manifestation. Along the same lines, a cause can be construed as an event or a state that has within itself a 'power' to bring about its effect and has that 'power' as part of its essence or inherent nature. If one thus understands causes as self-inhering to bring about incipient effects, then one understands that pure causes do not exist whereas the existence of a variety of conditions will exist as conditions are events, states or processes that can be called upon to explain another event, state or process in a progressively iterative manner.

**It is interesting to note another aspect of the illusory nature of the universe in the following excerpt from Wittgenstein's Tractatus (6.371 - 6.372): "The whole modern conception of the world is founded on the illusion that the so-called laws of nature are the explanations of natural phenomena. Thus people today stop at the laws of nature, treating them as something inviolable, just as God and Fate were treated in past ages. And in fact both are right and both are wrong: though the view of the ancients is clearer in so far as they have a clear and acknowledged terminus, the modern system tries to make it look as if everything were explained."

AVG 2.4

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 4
यथा न तोयतो भिन्नास्तरंगाः फेनबुद्बुदाः ।
आत्मनो न तथा भिन्नं विश्वमात्मविनिर्गतम् ॥ २-४॥

PURPORT:
Just as waves, foam and bubbles
are no different than water;
so too, does the universe,
emerge from our self-model
and is not different from it.

TRANSLITERATION:
यथा न तोयतः भिन्नाः तरङ्गाः फेनबुद्बुदाः ।
yathā na toyataḥ bhinnāḥ taraṅgāḥ phenabudbudāḥ ।
आत्मनः न तथा भिन्नम् विश्वम् आत्मविनिर्गतम् ॥ २-४॥
ātmanaḥ na tathā bhinnam viśvam ātmavinirgatam ॥ 2-4॥

MEANING:
yathā (यथा) = just as
na (न) = not
toyataḥ (तोयतः) = from water
bhinnāḥ (भिन्नाः) = different
taraṅgāḥ (तरङ्गाः) = waves
phenabudbudāḥ (फेनबुद्बुदाः) = foam and bubbles; compound of phena (फेन) meaning 'foam/froth' and budbudāḥ (बुद्बुदाः) meaning 'bubbles'।
ātmanaḥ (आत्मनः) = from the self [in this context it is meant to be 'emanating from the perception of oneself']
na (न) = not
tathā (तथा) = in the same way
bhinnam (भिन्नम्) = different
viśvam (विश्वम्) = universe
ātmavinirgatam (आत्मविनिर्गतम्) = coming forth or liberated or freed from the self; compound of ātma (आत्म) meaning 'from the self' and vinirgatam (विनिर्गतम्) meaning 'to come forth/emanate/freed from'॥ 2-4॥

COMMENT:
There are two subtle truths hidden within this beautiful verse: the first of them points to the fact that shapes and forms (waves, foam, water and bubbles) that we experience and the names we attribute to these shapes and forms are products of our perceptual experience as we navigate the universe; the second truth is a restatement of the fact that the perceptual experience of the universe that emerges from our cognitive self-model is no different from our selves.
The waves, the foam, bubbles, water, our self-models, the universe - all of these - are products of experience fabricated by our sense faculties and assigned names and forms for our common navigational ease.
In essence, given the absence of an enduring essential self, the continuity of experience that we repeatedly traverse is primarily due to the flux of patterns with the names and forms and shapes we encounter. Both the continuity of experience as well as the flux with the names, forms and shapes are simply the result of the arising of interdependent causal factors and conditions. There is no permanency associated with either the experience nor the names, shapes and forms.
As a gentle aside, the names, forms and shapes we assign to objects encountered within our collective experience are guarded and cherished by society (and in turn individual egos that comprise society) so much so that instances of humans seen as deviating from these commonly agreed upon designations are deemed unfit to function within the structures of society. 

NOTES:
From the Phena Sutra (verses to foam) translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu*:
Now suppose that in the autumn — when it's raining in fat, heavy drops — a water bubble were to appear & disappear on the water, and a woman with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it.
To her — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a water bubble?
In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any feeling that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near.
To her — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in feeling?
Now suppose that in the last month of the hot season a mirage were shimmering, and a woman with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it.
To her — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a mirage?
In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any perception that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near.
To her — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in perception?

*I took the liberty to change the masculine references in the original to feminine. Because....

AVG 2.3

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 3

सशरीरमहो विश्वं परित्यज्य मयाऽधुना ।

कुतश्चित् कौशलाद् एव परमात्मा विलोक्यते ॥ २-३॥

PURPORT:

By renouncing the actualized body,

as well as the entire universe, and,

through a little bit of good fortune

and subtle teaching, I now perceive the 

the universe as a quintessence.

TRANSLITERATION:

सशरीरम् अहो विश्वम् परित्यज्य मया अधुना ।

saśarīram aho viśvam parityajya mayā adhunā ।

कुतश्चित् कौशलात् एव परमात्मा विलोक्यते ॥ २-३॥

kutaścit kauśalāt eva paramātmā vilokyate ॥ 2-3॥

MEANING:

saśarīram (सशरीरम्) = with the body (actualized)

aho (अहो) = O, wow! (as in an exclamation of wonderment at newfound knowledge)

viśvam (विश्वम्) = universe

parityajya (परित्यज्य) = having left or abandoned/with the exception of/excepting

mayā (मया) = by me

adhunā (अधुना) = now/at the present moment/at this time ।

kutaścit (कुतश्चित्) = through a little bit/subtle 
x

kauśalāt (कौशलात्) = good fortune

eva (एव) = only

paramātmā (परमात्मा)* = universe as quintessence (the straight translation from the Sanskrit will yield Supreme Self) 

vilokyate (vilokyate) = ॥ 2-3॥

COMMENTS:

These verses build directly off the previous where Janaka joyfully understands that it is by virtue of his sense faculties that he can affirm his own body; and, by extension, the universe is as manifested as revealed by him. 

In these verses Janaka, proceeds to ‘discard’ or renounce the ideas that have conditioned his mind into assigning substantial essence to anything around him – right from his own body to all of the manifest universe around him. Again, one must steer clear of a nihilist reading of these verses. When the body or the universe or any other existent entity is regarded as an illusory phenomenon, understand that it is illusory in terms of the inability for one (however hard one might try) to assign an essence that is core and fundamental to that entity. A core aspect that retains its form, nature, state and remains so without any dependent conditions or causes is not tenable. Such an entity cannot be found however hard one might look and analyze the fundamental structures of things. In this sense, the universe is empty and the body is empty. But, from a conventional perspective, understand that the universe is as it is manifest to us; stars, planets, water, hummingbirds and all.

Therefore, in these verses, Ashtavakra says that he understands that there is a distinct lack of an ultimate foundational essence within the body as well as the universe; and by giving up any notions of ultimate realities posited upon the body in the micro perspective and the universe in the macro, Janaka perceives the universe as quintessence. Janaka is overjoyed to have the good fortune and the subtle understanding from a teacher like Ashtavakra in helping him understand this aspect.

*Let me explain quintessence here: I chose to use the word quintessence here from a dual perspective – the first of them being a reference to the fact that Janaka has begun to understand that the intrinsic and central constituent character of the manifest universe (while conventionally tangible and manifested physically) is, from an ultimate perspective, without characterization – is ultimately empty of character. However hard we try to characterize, the result will only be what our limited-in-perspective sense organs tell us – and that result is limited and relevant just for us and our truths. The second perspective that one may gain from the word quintessence is its use within cosmology. In physics, quintessence is a hypothetical form of dark energy, postulated as an explanation of the observation of an accelerating rate of expansion of the universe. Let me explain a tiny bit here: In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy which is hypothesized to permeate all of space, tending to the acceleration and the expansion of the universe. Dark energy right now is the most accepted hypothesis to explain the observations since the 1990s indicating that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. We now know that much of the energy in the Universe is not 'matter'. Over the last 300 years, scientists studied the characteristics of matter and radiation. Today we come to understand that this represents less than 30% of the composition of the Universe. We simply do not know anything about the remaining 70% of the universe. In addition, we have been taught from grade school that most of the energy within the universe is not gravitationally attractive whereas gravity is always an attractive force. We now know that gravity can repel and the possibility of self-repulsive forms of energy follow from the results of the general theory of relativity. We now know that gravitationally self-attracting matter is a minuscule portion of the universe. Also, from a temporal perspective, we seem to be suspended at a fairly unique moment within cosmic evolution where observations inform that we are transitioning from a decelerating, matter-dominated universe to an accelerating, dark-energy-dominated universe. This means that the formation of large scale structures like galaxies and associated complexity that characterized the matter-dominated universe is reaching an end, and we now are rushing headlong into a universe that is without structure and 'empty' from a matter perspective.  This means that the future of our universe is governed and determined by the hypothetical quintessence resulting in dilution and an eventual cooling off of the universe. 

The use of the word paramātmā (परमात्मा) = ‘universe as quintessence’ seemed to straddle nicely between the philosophical thoughts of Janaka as well as a scientific perspective of the word.

AVG 2.2

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 2
यथा प्रकाशयाम्येको देहमेनं तथा जगत् ।
अतो मम जगत्सर्वमथवा न च किंचन ॥ २-२॥

PURPORT:
Just as I alone can affirm my body
by the senses, so too, the universe is
revealed by me - by dint of my senses.
Therefore, this entire universe is mine
or, certainly, nothing at all.

TRANSLITERATION:
यथा प्रकाशयामि एकः देहम् एनम् तथा जगत् ।
yathā prakāśayāmi ekaḥ deham enam tathā jagat ।
अतः मम जगत् सर्वम् अथवा न च किञ्चन ॥ २-२॥
ataḥ mama jagat sarvam athavā na ca kiñcana ॥ 2-2॥

MEANING:
yathā (यथा) = just as
prakāśayāmi (प्रकाशयामि) = illuminate/bloom/(used here in the sense of affirm or to understand ones’s body)
ekaḥ (एकः) = alone/single
deham (देहम्) = body/corporeal manifestation having appearance
enam (एनम्) = this
tathā (तथा) = in that similar manner/hence
jagat (जगत्) = universe (also means earth, but in this context, the entire manifest universe is more appropriate)।
ataḥ (अतः) = therefore
mama (मम) = mine
jagat (जगत्) = universe
sarvam (सर्वम्) = all/complete
athavā (अथवा) = or/rather
na (न) = not
ca (च) = certainly (normally is translated to ‘and’, but, in this case the use is for emphasis as in ‘certainly’)
kiñcana (किञ्चन) = anything [as in nothing at all] ॥ 2-2॥

COMMENTS:
These are beautiful verses - very profound and richly overlayed with meaning. The overarching theme here is the understanding that our sense faculties have the power to fashion our perception of reality in so far as the evolutionary limits of our sense organs allow us to so perceive.
The self-model that is organically accreted within our minds over our formative years is an amalgam of our sense faculties, response to stimuli, bio-regulatory functions and learned behavior.
In the first line, Janaka tells us that it is by the means of this self-model that our bodies are illumined thus to us. The very same faculties that illumine our bodies to us are the same sense faculties by which the universe itself is understood by us. Accordingly, the universe is a product of our perceptions in much the same way as our bodies.
The second line talks about the implications of the assertion in the first line - the fact that the way we perceive the universe is our very own unique perspective; the phrase 'this universe is mine' makes that abundantly clear - 'mine' in so far as a 'construed-of-my-own-understanding' kind of universe. The very final section of this verse brings home the preponderant implications of the message in a succinct  manner when it is understood by Janaka that the 'construed-of-my-own-understanding' universe is akin to an illusion that lacks any foundational permanency nor enduring essence. In this regard, from an ultimate perspective, the universe is as stated in the lines - 'nothing at all'.

AVG 2.1

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 1
जनक उवाच ॥
अहो निरञ्जनः शान्तो बोधोऽहं प्रकृतेः परः ।
एतावन्तमहं कालं मोहेनैव विडंबितः ॥ २-१॥

PURPORT:
Janaka said:
Ahhh, I am now free of attributes and beyond change,
I am of awareness and beyond nature.
Up until this time, I seem to have been befuddled
as a result of my distorted understanding.

TRANSLITERATION:
जनक उवाच ॥
janaka uvāca ॥
अहो निरञ्जनः शान्तः बोधः अहम् प्रकृतेः परः ।
aho nirañjanaḥ śāntaḥ bodhaḥ aham prakṛteḥ paraḥ ।
एतावन्तम् अहम् कालम् मोहेन एव विडंबितः ॥ २-१॥
etāvantam aham kālam mohena eva viḍaṃbitaḥ ॥ 2-1॥

MEANING:
janaka (जनक) = Janaka the seeker
uvāca (उवाच) = said/speaks ॥
aho (अहो) = Ahhh! (as in a happy exclamation)
nirañjanaḥ (निरञ्जनः) = spotless/blemish-less/pure [as in free of attribution and characterization]
śāntaḥ (शान्तः) = peaceful/serene/calm/tranquil [as in attaining a realm where one is beyond fickle change]
bodhaḥ (बोधः) = awakening/awareness
aham (अहम्) = I
prakṛteḥ (प्रकृतेः) = of nature
paraḥ (परः) = beyond [the beyond here refers to ‘beyond nature’ (as in beyond common state of understanding that most of us are used to)]।
etāvantam (एतावन्तम्) = this much/up until this
aham (अहम्) = I
kālam (कालम्) = time
mohena (मोहेन) = by means of delusion (illusion) and perplexity
eva (एव) = only/just/doubtless
viḍaṃbitaḥ (विडंबितः) = deceived or duped [as a result of distorted understanding, not as in cheated] ॥ 2-1॥

COMMENTS:
This chapter is mostly devoted to Janaka’s joyous assertions drawing attention to his state of pure understanding not only of his own self-image but his understanding of the dependent aspects of reality. His jubilation stems from his sense of being finally clear of the confusion in his befuddled mind. It is often said that awareness comes upon a seeker quite suddenly (I still await patiently). While the seeker spends time and effort chasing after the truth and gaining a measure of experience in understanding the various shades and layers that compose the truth, it is said that clarity, when it comes, comes with a suddenness that is difficult to describe. This is somewhat akin to erstwhile Zen teachers making use of linguistic devices that involve stark contrasts and deliberate tension inside of their teachings to jolt the seeker into understanding. The setting in this chapter is similar to such a situation – the dawning of a sudden state of awareness after Ashtavakra’s clarity in the previous chapter.

Brief notes on specific usages of terms within the verses:
1. 'Spotless’ and ‘free of attributes’ connotes a state of mind where one does not impose biases or a mindset of prejudice towards ones actions, thoughts and anticipated outcomes.
2. ‘Beyond nature’ connotes reaching a deeper understanding for awareness beyond our common everyday experiences.
3. The reference to ‘delusion’ [mohena (मोहेन)] here refers to the conventional nature of reality that we experience. The conventional truth that you and I encounter everyday are really what we ordinarily take as commonsensical truths. A conventional truth is reality made so by virtue of being fabricated by the mind, apprehended by means of a dualistic consciousness whose meaning and designations are commonly detailed by linguistic signifiers. All conventional truths and phenomena in the universe arise inter-dependently based upon causal conditions that are themselves dependent upon underlying causes and conditions. This truth masks the underlying state of reality that is far more complex and nuanced (and frankly of no use for us evolutionarily) - a complex and nuanced world of quantum interactions that in turn masks further fundamental principles that we may never uncover. It is this sense of conventional truth that is being talked about in reference to the word delusion. The delusion that there is a certain foundational permanency to entities around us - when all we can say for sure is the constant flux and latent impermanency of all existent entities.

AVG 1.20

Chapter 1 (Guidance on self-realization): Verse 20
एकं सर्वगतं व्योम बहिरन्तर्यथा घटे ।
नित्यं निरन्तरं ब्रह्म सर्वभूतगणे तथा ॥ १-२०॥

PURPORT:

Just as ubiquitous as space is outside
as well as the inside of a pot,
even so is the uninterrupted nature of
reality that pervades all existent beings. 

TRANSLITERATION:

एकम् सर्वगतम् व्योम बहिः अन्तः यथा घटे ।
ekam sarvagatam vyoma bahiḥ antaḥ yathā ghaṭe ।
नित्यम् निरन्तरम् ब्रह्म सर्वभूतगणे तथा ॥ १-२०॥
nityam nirantaram brahma sarvabhūtagaṇe tathā ॥ 1-20॥

MEANING:

ekam (एकम्) = the same/similar
sarvagatam (सर्वगतम्) = ubiquitous/prevalent everywhere/all-pervading
vyoma (व्योम) = space/can also be taken as the erstwhile word for ‘ether’
bahiḥ (बहिः) = outside
antaḥ (अन्तः) = inner/inside
yathā (यथा) = as/just as
ghaṭe (घटे) = jar/jug।
nityam (नित्यम्) = eternal/invariable
nirantaram (निरन्तरम्) = uninterrupted/continuous
brahma (ब्रह्म) = nature of reality of the universe. Given that the word Brahman has a set of diverse references within ancient Indian Sanskrit literature (with different senses and shades of meaning), I felt compelled to write a short note on how concept has expanded in so far as it relates to my understanding of the verses in the Ashtavakra Gita. The most ancient Indian Vedic idea of Brahman is taken to mean the "power immanent in the sound, words, verses and formulas of Vedas". The verses also suggest that this ancient meaning was never the only meaning, and the concept has evolved and expanded since. In this sense, another way to expand on the concept is as follows: Brahman does not connote the existence (corporeal or otherwise) of an entity either from a metaphysical (what is real and what is the fundamental nature of reality), ontological (nature of being or the kinds of things that have existence), teleological (apparent purpose, principle or goal of something) or a soteriological (salvation) perspective; instead, Brahman connotes a designation taken to represent useful principles that helps one in furthering their understanding of reality. In this sense, Brahman simply connotes the nature of reality of the universe.
sarvabhūtagaṇe (सर्वभूतगणे) = compound word of  sarva (सर्व) + bhūta (भूत) + gaṇe (गणे) meaning ‘in all existent beings’; the compound consists of  sarva (सर्व) meaning ‘all/everything’; bhūta (भूत) connotes "past" and "being" (bhūta has connections with one of the most wide-spread roots in Indo-European — namely, bheu/bhu-, has similar-sounding cognates in virtually every branch of that language family, e.g., Irish (bha), English (be), Latvian (but));  gaṇe (गणे) meaning ‘flock, troop, multitude, number, tribe, series or class’.
tathā (तथा) = so/thus ॥ 1-20॥

COMMENT:

This verse draws our attention to two relevant and interlinked aspects that we have been talking about throughout the length of this chapter and in my opinion, nicely pulls together a couple of themes that will find recurrence with forthcoming chapters - the first is with reference to the fact that sentient beings are as much intertwined intrinsically and extrinsically within the fabric of reality (that is perceived by the being) in very much the same way that empty space pervades both the interior and the exterior of a solid object (as stated in the verse); and the second aspect is to take note of the fact that the verse references idealistic designations (concepts like ‘brahman’ and ‘eshwara’) that have undergone a gradual process of reification (when such designations should only be understood in terms of what they are - language constructs that are commonly construed contingent upon an individual’s frame of reference). Let me elaborate a tiny bit.

The nature of reality perceived by humans is based upon our senses filtering and sampling a small portion of the purported 'full panoply of reality' up to the extent to which the sense organ is evolutionarily attuned to (in the case of the eyes, it is the electromagnetic spectrum that we are capable of sensing whereas in the case of our ears, it is a limited portion of the audible spectrum and so on). Overlay this small portion of reality that is discernible by our sense organs upon imperfect theories and concepts developed by us to explain phenomena (theories that are always incomplete and provisional as the language constructs used to develop such theories and concepts are themselves imprecise and open to misrepresentation) and one gets a sense of reality that is very much divorced from any actual state of reality - if ever there can imagined to be such a state.

Thus, the human being is saddled with a compounded dilemma - the aspect of reality as perceived by our sense organs that is truncated and limited and that the minuscule aspect of reality that we sense is itself subject to varying interpretations due to the imprecise nature of our language designations. Just to further compound and complicate our understanding, we tend to apply emotional overlays on the perception of reality so obtained by introducing our own notions of beauty, elegance, symmetry and duality. The sense of reality thus obtained is very far removed from the actual ground truth - which may never be known.

I find that we react to our flawed sense of understanding either via humility or hubris. Humility in knowing that the full sense of reality may never be known and the names, concepts, theories, premises and axioms developed as we attempt to understand are best dependent designations that are tuned to our frame of reference. Or, we can choose to react with hubris in the sense that we mistakenly try to assign names and forms and fabricate underlying substrates within our minds with concrete essences and give them labels and plant such fabrications upon pedestals of our own making.

The lines in this verse can be construed as one or the other. The purport I have cultivated and developed throughout this chapter was within the confines of the former - a reading in humility where one is really unsure of the nature of reality, yet comfortable and finding liberation within the knowledge that it pervades every sentient being in this universe.

I will end with the following bits of thought that came to me as I was reading these verses:

Understanding that the first step towards finding a path to choice-less insight is to gradually steer oneself away from attachments to hitherto comfortable well-worn paths that led to reification and eventual deification of concepts, states, subjects or objects;
and, that the universe that is so manifested by the dependent arising and forms of emergent complexity is really a temporal waypoint bookended between two states of very high entropic values; and, unless proven otherwise, all such emergent forms of complexity including consciousness, the self-model, the idea of the soul and intelligence are just so – the origination of interdependent processes marked by an absence of any underlying permanency or essence of any sort. Given that the preceding two statements are themselves contingent upon our linguistic designations, it will be a futile attempt to ascribe to these statements any proclamation of underlying truths.

AVG 1.19

Chapter 1 (Guidance on self-realization): Verse 19
यथैवादर्शमध्यस्थे रूपेऽन्तः परितस्तु सः ।
तथैवाऽस्मिञ्छरीरेऽन्तः परितः परमेश्वरः ॥ १-१९॥

PURPORT:

Just as the mirror exists
both within and without
the reflected image;
so too does the ultimate truth
exist both within and without
this body.

TRANSLITERATION:

यथा एव आदर्शमध्यस्थे रूपे अन्तः परितः तु सः ।
yathā eva ādarśamadhyasthe rūpe antaḥ paritaḥ tu saḥ ।
तथा एव अस्मिन् शरीरे अन्तः परितः परमेश्वरः ॥ १-१९॥
tathā eva asmin śarīre antaḥ paritaḥ parameśvaraḥ ॥ 1-19॥

MEANING:

yathā (यथा) = as (as in 'just as')
eva (एव) = just
ādarśamadhyasthe (आदर्शमध्यस्थे) = compound of ādarśa (आदर्श) meaning 'mirror' and madhyasthe (मध्यस्थे) meaning 'in the middle'; compound word taken together to mean 'conceived or established in the middle of the mirror'
rūpe (रूपे) = in the image
antaḥ (अन्तः) = within/inside
paritaḥ (परितः) = the word itself means encompassed or surrounded, but in the context of the previous phrase antaḥ (अन्तः), this is taken to mean 'without' or 'outside of'
tu (तु) = and
saḥ (सः) =  that (as in that mirror exists)।
tathā (तथा) = and so
eva (एव) = just
asmin (अस्मिन्) = in this
śarīre (शरीरे) = body
antaḥ (अन्तः) = inside
paritaḥ (परितः) = outside
parameśvaraḥ (परमेश्वरः) =  compound of param (परम) meaning 'ultimate' and eśvaraḥ (ईश्वरः) meaning 'best choice or boon [of a personal truth]'; the word parameśvaraḥ is taken together to mean 'the ultimate truth'. Please note that the root of the word eśvaraḥ comes from īś- (ईश, eś) which means "capable of" and "owner, ruler, chief of". The second part of the word eśvaraḥ is varaḥ which means depending on context, "best, excellent, beautiful", "choice, wish, blessing, boon, gift", and "suitor, lover, one who solicits a girl in marriage". The composite word, eśvaraḥ literally means "best of choices [for oneself]", "elite of alternatives [for oneself]". As a concept, eśvaraḥ in ancient and medieval Sanskrit texts, variously means God, Supreme Being, Supreme Soul, lord, king or ruler, rich or wealthy man, god of love, deity Shiva, prince or husband. I take it here to mean 'the best of choices bestowed through introspection that one holds to be the ultimate personal truth'॥ 1-19॥

COMMENT:

These verses use the mirror as an analogy for the ultimate nature of things; just as the mirror exists notwithstanding an image reflected upon the mirror due to an entity being present in front of the mirror or the absence of any reflected image due to the entity absent from the mirror, so too does fundamental truths exist regardless of our cognizance or not. The obvious leading question then will be the nature of the fundamental truth alluded to here. Given that each one of us really have to discover that truth that ultimately gives us a measure of liberation, I will briefly describe my interpretation of the same here in reference to the lines above.

I occasionally read about advances in quantum mechanics and what strikes me as singularly amazing is the fact that matter is fundamentally empty all the way down to its very core – in fact, we talked a bit about this very fact just in the very last verse. Science has advanced sufficiently for us to understand that external reality as perceived by each of our sense receptors is only a simplified version of the true underlying reality. Even this simplified version is only a minuscule portion of a vast unfathomable reality that is perceived by our specific sense organs. Humans perceive less than 1% of the entire electro-magnetic and the acoustic spectrum. Color in the sense that we designate it so is due to the conical photoreceptors within our retinas. In fact for animals without these conical receptors, a rainbow does not ‘exist’. The atoms that originated within the belly of some distant supernova that constitute our bodies are 99.9999999999999999% empty space. Most of what we encounter in our daily lives is, at its core, empty space. Let me explain a tiny bit.

If one breaks down matter, we start to run into the individual constituent molecules that comprise matter. On further examination, it is seen that the molecules themselves are composed of atoms arranged in specific patterns and configurations held together by nuclear forces that act across extremely small distances. On performing experiments that are designed to split up atoms, one finds a dizzying array of sub-atomic particles; particles that are positively and negatively charged like electrons and protons and particles without any specific charge like neutrons. The protons and neutrons seem to be crammed together in tight embraces within the central nucleus of the atom while the electrons inhabit what are akin to fuzzy clouds in spherical orbit around the nucleus. It is said that if an atom were scaled up to  the size of the earth, the size of the nucleus will be equivalent to the diameter of a basketball at the center of the earth. All of the rest is empty space within the atom. Using the energies from the collision of elementary particles, we are now able to peer inside protons and electrons. The insides of the particles are stranger still;  one finds particles to be composed of ever smaller, indivisible entities called quarks. Scientists cannot seem to sub-divide quarks any further as it experimentally seen that the moment one puts in enough energy to break apart a quark, the additional energy used up in splitting the quark spontaneously creates another quark and so on ad infinitum. These elementary quarks themselves are vibrational fields of energy that ‘manifest as particles’ on observation. In other words, deep down, there is nothing but emptiness amidst vibrational energy fields. The manifestations of the particles and the fact that we perceive the particles as hard, golf ball like structures are nothing but interactions of energy fields in appropriate ways governed by certain fundamental constants that have remained sacrosanct since the birth of the universe.

In fact, one can say quite confidently that all of manifest reality within our ken of understanding and perception is nothing more than such inter-dependent arising of fields. The inter-dependent arising of fields to form particles, the interaction of particles to form matter, the arising of manifest matter to form structures as fine as the gnats wing to galactic mega-structures millions of lights years in size are all the result of associations and inter-dependent arising of entities interacting with each other. Nothing whatsoever can be found nor will exhibit nor will arise in a manifestation that has any form of inherent essence (clarified in the next couple of paragraphs below). All of reality arises in interaction and all of such reality in interaction dependently gives rise to entities and existents. The emptiness that we see at the very heart of matter is a useful example and a constant reminder of this fundamental fact. Therefore, from science, one confidently avers that the dependent arising of all manifest entities is inherently essenceless that is conventionally real but is ultimately empty.

I will use an example here to clarify the concept behind the words inherent essence as it is underpins all of our known interactional reality. In trying to find the inherent essence underlying the fundamental meaning of word ‘A’, let us say that I look up ‘A’ within the largest dictionary in the world containing all of the words as we have designated. When I get to the word, I find that the meaning of the word is given in terms of relationships between other words and concepts known to us - word A is like B, word A is unlike C, word A is a synonym with D etc. Digging deeper to understand the essence of the word, now I start to look up the essence behind words B, C and D in the same dictionary. Now I find that all of B, C and D are given in terms of an entirely new set of relations that might or might not be connected to A, but now include relational connections to others words E, F and G. I can continue this way ad nauseam and I still would not find the inherent essence behind the word A. While the word A is conventionally real (we use the word A in our daily lives and use A to describe the names and forms around us in terms of conceptual constructions, there is seen to be a distinct lack of an inherent essence underlying the word A - or, for that matter, with words B, C, D and E and so on and so forth).

This lack of inherent essence is called emptiness. Given that even the word ‘emptiness’ itself lacks an inherent essence and is only designated ‘empty’ contingent upon our conventions and classifications, one can thus safely say that emptiness is also empty. Following up on the ideas of impermanence, one also understands that in addition to impermanence, nothing in the universe can be conceptualized in isolation. Going back to the dictionary example, one can stretch the analogy to realize that assemblages of inherently empty words form sentences and assemblages of such sentences form a paragraph and collections of paragraphs for a story and so on and so forth. The conceptual idea that words are inherently empty, but, conventionally real and thus conditioned based upon our commonly agreed upon designations can therefore be extended to sentences, paragraphs and the story. Extending the analogy, one can scale upwards from stories to books to libraries to buildings housing these libraries to cities to countries to worlds to galactic structures; they are all the same - inherently devoid of essence but manifested based upon dependent assemblages of constituent portions that themselves do have any inherent existence but are conventionally real and are conventionally designated as such because they are seen to be conventionally present and felt by our senses.

Thus, nothing whatsoever in our waking lives is imbued with individual autonomy, nothing exists on its own, no existent entity is real in and of itself. This does not mean that things do not exist. They absolutely exist. Never construe these statements in a nihilistic manner. Everything exists dependent on an another thing(s). This dependency upon an another thing is not just for the things’ identification (as, let’s say a ‘person reading’ can only be designated as such with respect to dependencies like the verb ‘read’; or ‘reading fast’ can only be designated as such with respect to ‘reading slow’), but, also for the things’ existence (as, let’s say a ‘person reading’ can only exist as such with respect to mutual assemblages of dependencies like ‘body’, ‘limbs’, ‘muscles’, ‘brain’, ‘eyes’, ‘reflexes’ etc.).  Thus, nothing in the universe can be conceptualized in isolation. Nothing has an inherent self-essence - from quarks to protons to souls to consciousness to supreme beings. Everything in the universe is conceptualized (in terms of its dependency and association with other entities) and designated (based upon our contingent classifications as such). Of course, in real life, we do run into these entities (quarks, protons, souls, consciousness, supreme beings etc.) in a conventional manner. They are all conventionally real, but, from an ultimate perspective non-existent when one tries to find any underlying eternal essence within the entity.

In conclusion, it can be said that if the ultimate truth is beyond the ken of thought and expression and can only be experienced when one had transcended all of our conceptual fabrications, then the ultimate truth of phenomena lies within their impermanence and their emptiness of inherent essence. If the ultimate truth were so for all phenomena, then the relative truth for all phenomena is that they ineluctably appear through the interplay of association, dependence and interaction. Essentially, the truths behind emptiness and impermanence teach us that there is nothing absolute, deterministic or supreme about the reality we encounter. Instead, we find a relative, dependently associated, probabilistic and essentially incomplete picture of reality with space-time as the featureless backdrop onto which the drama of our contingent lives are projected.