यथैवादर्शमध्यस्थे रूपेऽन्तः परितस्तु सः ।
तथैवाऽस्मिञ्छरीरेऽन्तः परितः परमेश्वरः ॥ १-१९॥
PURPORT:
Just as the
mirror existsboth 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment