Modern physics has developed greatly in the last few
centuries, since the time of Newton and Galileo. But the development has come
at the cost of a special restriction. Modern physics has developed by
restricting its consideration to an external world, where objects co-exist in
space.
This restriction has an obvious advantage. Different
people see the same objects and the same structures that relate these objects
together. So modern physics can be standardized objectively, for academic
institutions and industrial corporations, on a national and global scale.
In particular, modern physical descriptions have been
highly standardized to carry out objective calculations, which are tested and
applied through standard instruments and machines. It's thus that modern
physics has been so successful. Its success is achieved by investigating an
external world of space and structure. Nature is considered here as a
mechanical construction, which is made by relating different parts.
But how can we go on to investigate experiences of
life and mind? The investigation then becomes reflective. It goes on from
structure, to consider meaning that has been expressed. Thus, nature is
considered further, as expressing meaning in our lives and minds. This leads to
sciences that are quite different from modern physics, because they consider
nature to include a component of mind.
In Sanskrit, nature is called 'prakriti', which
literally means 'acting forth'. This description most certainly includes
activities of mind that express a living meaning, from underlying consciousness.
Similarly, in ancient Greek, nature is called 'phusis', which implies a growth
of life with an expression forth of meaningful activity.
Many ancient sciences consider nature in this way, to
include our living faculties of body and of mind. In the old sciences, these
faculties are carefully refined and put to use, as an essential part of testing
and application. There is a contrast here with modern physics, which is applied
specifically through instruments that are fabricated and constructed from material
objects. The old sciences are more broadly tested and applied. They make a
further use of living faculties, which are cultivated and refined through a
reflective process of learning.
How then can living faculties be used in science? They
work through different levels of experience, as consciousness becomes
expressed, in the process of our lives. An old analysis is summarized in figure
1. It describes three levels, rising from an underlying ground.
Space
|
Different points
that co-exist |
World of
objects |
Elaborated
structure,
perceived by body |
Time
|
Changing
moments
that pass by |
Succession
of states |
Mediating
process,
conceived by mind |
Causality
|
Consequence
that carries on |
Unmanifested
potency |
Silent
seeing, at
the depth of insight |
Knowing in identity |
- The uppermost level is our outside world of space and structure, seen through our bodies. Here, meaning is articulated, in symbols that are joined into elaborated structures.
- The second level is a succession of passing states, which each of us experiences in time. The world of objects is conceived through this succession in our minds. Here, meaning is drawn out and interpreted, as our feelings and our thoughts keep on expressing consciousness and reflecting back to it. A changing stream of mind thus mediates between our inner knowing and the objects we perceive.
- At the third level, we experience continuity, of cause that carries on through time. Such cause must carry on unmanifest, as a quiet potency implying tacit aptitudes and capabilities that may be manifested later on. Here, continuity is carried by a silent seeing at the depth of insight, where changing states of surface mind are taken into lasting knowledge.
- Beneath the three levels is an underlying ground, from where our knowing is expressed. That ground is a consciousness whose very being is to know. It’s only known in identity, by returning back to what it is.
This analysis has been described in many different
places, perhaps most famously in the Mandukya Upanishad
and in Bhartrihari's Vakyapadiya.
In the Mandukya Upanishad, the
three levels are described as manifested in three states - of waking, dream and
deep sleep. And the ground is called 'caturtha' or 'turiya' or the
'fourth'. This description is designed for philosophical and spiritual enquiry.
In Bhartrihari's Vakyapadiya,
the levels are called 'vaikhari' which means 'elaborated', 'madhyama'
which means 'mediating', and 'pashyanti' which means 'seeing'. [In figure 1, these terms are represented in the
fourth column, at the extreme right.] And, in an extension of Bhartrihari's
description, the ground is called 'para', which means 'beyond'. The
description is designed for linguistic analysis, as language is used to convey
and to investigate what's known. So it is particularly relevant to scientific
disciplines. In what follows, an attempt will be made to explain it further,
level by level.
At the level of external space, language is expressed
in articulated structures. The expression works through names or symbols, which
are used to stand for particular things. As symbols are related together, in
symbolic structures, they describe corresponding structures in the world.
This structural description works like a map. The
symbols on a map correspond to places that they signify, in some represented
territory. And the relations between symbols correspond to represented
relations, between the places signified. Thus, through a mapping
correspondence, we use our structured pictures to perceive and to describe a
much larger world.
Modern physics works like this, through a
correspondence of external structures. For example, when a cruise missile is
guided towards its target, it uses an electronic map whose structure
corresponds to the territory where the missile has to travel. On-board cameras
detect expected landmarks in the territory and predicted reference points close
to the target, so as to guide the missile with great speed and accuracy. The
guidance is mechanical. It operates without the intervention of a living
pilot's faculties. Structure is here used as an operating mechanism,
independent of our living faculties. But structure is not only used mechanically. It also
has a living use, which works through education. A map can of course be used in
a calculating way, to specify a useful route and its distance to a chosen
destination. But this is not essentially how maps are used.
Maps also have a
living use, which enables us to think more clearly about the places where we
travel. Through that living use of maps, we can come to a better understanding
of where we are and where we need to go.
Such a living usage can be investigated scientifically
- as for example in the science of linguistics, which investigates our living
use of speech. But the investigation cannot be confined to structure in the
world. It must go on to a further consideration, of the process we experience
in our minds.
There is a crucial difference between the objects of
the world and the passing states of mind. In the world, different objects
co-exist and can therefore be combined into structures. But in the mind,
changing states don't co-exist. Each state replaces previous states, and is in
turn replaced. No two states appear together, side by side.
Accordingly, no structure can appear in mind,
combining different states. Whenever structure is perceived, it appears in a
world of objects that have been conceived by mind. Strictly speaking, structure
never does appear in the actual process of replacing states that come and go in
mind. At this level, only changing states occur, one at a time.
Each state of mind occurs in passing, with an object
shown appearing in the world. The object is that part of world to which the
mind's attention has been turned, at the present moment of time. This object is
particular. It appears at a narrow tip of mind's attention, while the rest of
the world is understood more broadly underneath. That understanding is
expressed from underlying consciousness, at the background of experience.
The object is thus taken in and understood.
Its perception is assimilated into a continued understanding -which carries on
in consciousness, beneath the changing states of mind.
As the cycle repeats, understanding is again
expressed, in further perceptions that get taken in and assimilated. The
changing states of mind are thus associated with a repeated cycle of learning,
which keeps on reflecting back and forth between the objects mind conceives and
a background consciousness beneath the changing mind. It's through this cycle
that we learn from experience. Without it, there could be no process of
learning.
But, as the mind thus mediates between the world and
consciousness, it functions through a living energy that does not act from any
object. It acts instead from consciousness, beneath all changing process and
all differentiated structure.
In the world of space and structure, energy is seen to
act from one object to another. Here, we observe a transacted energy, which is
carried and exchanged by objects. This energy is carried as a static or dynamic
potential, in objects and objective structures. From there, it is released to
act. In course of time, it is seen travelling through space, in moving patterns
of observed activity. This is the energy that is described in modern physics.
But, in the process of our minds, their changing
states are motivated by an energy that is inspired from consciousness. That is
the energy which we experience in our living faculties of feeling, thought and
action. It is what motivates our feelings, thoughts and actions to express a
continued knowing in the objects we conceive. In Sanskrit, that living energy
is described as 'prana', thus associating it with breath and speech.
It's here implied to be a subtle energy of inspiration, through which speech
expresses meaning and what's said is taken in.
That energy is not a transacted commodity. It does not
work through any mere transaction between objects, nor between our changing
states of mind. It only works by returning back to consciousness, from which
later states of mind and their objects are expressed. In the process of our
minds, earlier and later states are not directly connected. Their only
connection is through consciousness, from which each state arises and to which
each state returns.
How then can cause and effect be investigated in the
mind? How can we investigate the potency of living capability that
consciousness assimilates, beneath the changing states of mind? Such an
investigation must turn deeply back into the very capability that asks the
questions. The mental capabilities that do the questioning must come themselves
into further question, as the enquiry proceeds. That reflective application is
essential to the science of psychology. But it does raise a delicate question.
How can the enquiry continue to be scientific, as it reflects from structured
systems into the unstructured depth of consciousness?
One way of considering this question is to look at
different levels of scientific enquiry. An analysis is shown in figure 3. It is an interpretation of the old five
elements: 'earth', 'water', 'fire', 'air' and 'ether'. The old names are
somewhat metaphorical. They do not show different elements that combine at a
single level of the outside world, like the periodic elements of modern
chemistry. Instead, they are a division of experience into different levels,
which get more subtle as we penetrate more deeply into nature's phenomena.
Traditional
element |
Level of
appearance |
Perceiving
instrument |
Examining
disciplines |
'Earth'
|
Pieces of
matter |
External
body |
Modern
physics |
'Water'
|
Patterns of
energy |
Living
organism |
Biological
sciences |
'Fire'
|
Meaningful
information |
Conceiving
intellect |
Cultural
sciences |
'Air'
|
Conditioned
character |
Intuitive
judgement |
Psychological
sciences |
'Ether'
|
Continuing
existence |
Reflective
reason |
Philosophical
enquiry |
Unchanging ground of reality and consciousness |
'Earth' -- as divided matter in the world
At the level of 'earth', we perceive what
appear to be pieces of matter in the world. Here, it is taken for granted that nature
is perceived through our external bodies. Modern physics makes this assumption,
and it is necessarily applied through instruments that are fabricated through
our external bodies.
'Water' -- as nature's activated and transforming energy
On further investigation, it turns out that pieces of
matter are a somewhat crude appearance. What seem to be material objects are
more accurately described as fluid patterns of dynamic energy. We are thus led
to a level where nature appears through a changing flow of manifested
happening. This is the level metaphorically described by the old element 'water'.
This level is considered both in modern physics and in
the old sciences. In either case, energy is analytically described - as forming
complex patterns of vibration and radiation, in an underlying field
conditioning of space and time. But, in modern physics, the description is purely
structural and mathematical. It works entirely through structured calculations
and external instruments, which cannot rightly conceive how consciousness may
be expressed through a living energy.
In the old sciences, nature is considered in a less
restricted way. They do not confine their examination to perception through our
external bodies. Our observations of nature are no longer considered to take
place through external bodies and their objects, but instead through living
organisms and their faculties of mind and sense. These organisms are not merely
structured objects, but instead are meaningful patterns of a living activity.
They function through the living energy of prana, which inherently
expresses meaning from an underlying consciousness.
In the modern sciences that we currently call
'biological', the energy considered is the same as modern physics. The very
idea of a living energy is usually treated as illegitimate. But it is essential
to many of the old sciences - in particular to medicine, and to astrology and
alchemy. In this sense, they are more radically 'biological' than modern
'biophysics' and modern 'biochemistry'.
'Fire' -- as intelligible meaning found, in nature's ordered functioning
When patterns of activity are further considered, they
are understood to have a meaning. When their meaning is taken into count, it
turns out that they are not just moving patterns. They also function as
meaningful information, which tells us more about the world. We are thus led to
a third level, where nature is made manifest through illuminating
representations. This level is described by the old element 'fire'. As
information is interpreted, its surface show must get burned up, in order to
reveal a further meaning.
Here, in the use of information, modern physics is
confined to quantitative measurements and calculations of mechanical variables
like distance, time, speed, mass, momentum and energy. But older sciences go on
to a much broader and deeper use of information, as we describe and conceive
the world. They are thus cultural sciences, through which we educate our
conceiving intellects.
These cultural sciences include linguistics, history,
and diverse fields of literary and artistic studies. They do not work primarily
through structured calculation, but more essentially through a living process
of education. Their use of reason is to cultivate and clarify our minds.
'Air' -- as our climatic conditioning, by influential qualities and values
When information is further considered, it is found to
be comparative. It shows a relative conditioning of character, in the world and
in our minds. This is a fourth level, where nature manifests itself through
qualities and values that are intuitively judged. This level is described by
the old element 'air'. It's qualities and values have a pervading
influence, upon the objects we perceive and upon our thoughts and feelings. So
it is like a pervasive climate, which keeps on influencing what we see and
think and feel more narrowly.
In modern physics, this pervasive conditioning is
described by a mathematical 'field', where a quantified value is ascribed to
each point of space and time. But in the older sciences, quality and value are
more fully and directly investigated in the mind.
Such meditative practice is the basis of traditional
psychology. This science is concerned with the turning of the mind. In
Sanskrit, each state of mind is called a 'vritti'. Literally, a 'vritti'
is a 'turning'. The term is thus used to describe our mental states as cyclic
transformations, each of which arises through an outward turning from a common
background that stays present in them all.
It's through this outward turning that the mind
experiences what happens in the world. As anything that happens is perceived
and taken in, it leaves behind a conditioned tendency. In Sanskrit, such
tendencies are called 'samskaras'. They are assimilated at the
underlying background, where they continue quietly, like dormant seeds of
unmanifested potency. From that background, they influence the turning of the
mind, from one state of experience to another. It's only there that causality and learning can continue.
'Ether' -- as the background continuity of common principle
When changing character is further considered, it is
found to depend on continuity. This leads to a fifth level, where nature
manifests a continuing existence that carries on through change. This level is
described by the old element called 'ether'. It is a background
continuity, which pervades through space and time. It thus connects all
different objects and all changing states.
In modern physics, this level is described as the
'space-time continuum', whose geometry connects all events in the world. But
the old sciences consider more than geometry. They investigate a continuity
that's shared in common by both world and mind. It is thus both objective and
subjective. Objectively, it carries on as the background of external space and
time. Subjectively, it continues through each individual's experience, as the
knowing background which persists through differing appearances that come and
go. It thus enables an understanding of common principles, in the differing
phenomena that nature manifests.
That understanding is investigated by reflective
reasoning, in the sciences of philosophical enquiry.
In the end, all sciences are built on common ground,
beneath the change and difference of appearances. That ground is the basis on
which different scientists communicate. On it depend all scientific standards,
of accurate testing and of meaningful reference.
In modern physics, that ground is considered only as
an objective world, where all standards depend on objects and structures that
are commonly identified. However, in the older sciences, a further
consideration is investigated, by reflecting the investigation back towards a
ground of knowing that is shared subjectively. Such a subjective ground is
inherently impersonal. It is an impersonal reality which different people
share, beneath their changing personalities.
But is there such a ground, which is at once an
impersonal reality and a subjective consciousness? Can a subjective reflection
reach back down, to an impersonal knowing that gets usefully expressed in
effective feelings, thoughts and actions?
These questions are avoided by the mechanical testing
and application of modern physics. But they are kept open and alive, in the
working practice of older sciences that turn attention more directly to our
lives and minds. And this presents us with something of a challenge, in our
modern academic teaching and its instituted standards.
As sciences investigate more deeply, into inner levels
of experience, their teaching and their practice must become more individual.
Accordingly, as sciences become more inward, they become less suited to
external institutions, like modern universities and schools. This applies in
particular to disciplines of meditation and spiritual enquiry. Here, books and
scholars and institutes are inherently peripheral. The teaching centres on an
individual relationship, between teacher and disciple.
What's taught arises from an inner depth of
accomplishment, attained by the teacher. It is from there that techniques are
used and ideas are interpreted, to guide and inspire a corresponding
accomplishment in the disciple. Such an accomplishment works deep within the
personality. As it proceeds, it is meant to go further down, to a depth where
it becomes more impersonal and more dispassionate, so that a truer knowledge
may be found.
This is a kind of learning that goes far beyond any
academic jurisdiction. It cannot be rightly taught or tested or applied by
academics, in their institutional and scholarly capacity. But, on the other
hand, academics do have a role to play, in maintaining and presenting
information about the inner sciences.
Here, academics are in a somewhat tricky situation, as
they report on inner disciplines that cannot actually be taught in an academic
context. An admission is required that such disciplines are only being reported
in a limited way, by describing their ideas and techniques from outside. An
academic here is a very limited accountant, reporting superficially upon a
scientific practice that is learned and carried out elsewhere.
Thus, in a fundamental sense, reflective disciplines
of meditation and philosophy cannot be academic subjects. When academics
describe these subjects, their descriptions can't be more than theoretical. The
actual practice of meditating must be learned and applied through a reflective
journey. So also philosophical enquiry. In either case, the journey must go
back within. It must penetrate beneath its theories and descriptions, to an
inner depth of individuality.
One major difficulty here is our current notion of the
'individual'. This notion has become debased, by confusing individuality and
personality. The word 'individual' comes from the Latin 'individualis', which
means indivisible. This is its essential meaning. It refers to an inner unity,
at the centre of divided personality. The old sciences are intended to reflect
back there, in search of a knowing that is free from the bias and distortion of
our physical and mental partialities.
Ananda Wood
woodananda@gmail.com
Novia Ainun Baroroh (12410075)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar