The message behind the ultimate Truth is indeed a strong one. Like most piecings-together of truth, assembling the content of the ultimate Truth meant referring to already preexisting teachings and influences. What precise teachings, then, and what exact influences, were responsible for the ultimate Truth's coming to be? The answer to this question is that the ultimate Truth is an eloquent, bold fusing-together of science and religion. What was the nature of this "fusing-together", one may ask, and what specific areas of science and religion were involved?
The area of science contributing a vast source of knowledge toward the assembling-together of the ultimate Truth was Einstein's theory of relativity. The approach to time presented by the theory of relativity was, upon being introduced, radically different from what the entire world-view at that moment in history had been on how time works. What was it about this radical new approach to time that was different? To better understand this we are to agree upon the simple, logical notion that to exist within the boundaries of time means to be in motion. This is self-evident. What Einstein did that was so amazing was the practice of treating this motion as if it were motion through physical space! When time is dealt with in this manner, time is no longer a "phantom force" that we experience as the factor responsible for inflicting "change" on objects, but is rather straightforward travel in a physical direction. What did Einstein call this system of reasoning?
This system of reasoning took the form of a concept known as space-time. In breaking down this term we see the simple logic behind it: we are taking "time", the phantom force we believe to be separate from the universe, and making a conscious decision to treat it as being equal in nature to the existing spatial dimensions of the universe. It's that simple. Given that time is now not a phantom force that acts upon physical objects, we must come to the reality that for a physical object to undergo time means for it to be moving in a physical direction - a direction we will call "time-ward".
How would we define "time-ward"? The direction we call "time-ward", in a nutshell, is the direction that extends perpendicular to all of the spatial dimensions we believe to be separate and apart from time. This is exactly what we see within the diagram on the previous page in which the post, itself a 1-dimensional object, moves into the empty space in front of it at a right angle to itself. Let us clarify this aspect of space-time through further discussion.
Imagine that you have in your hands an elastic balloon, and a felt-tip marker. Next, fully inflate the balloon. Using the marker, place round "dots" onto the surface of the balloon, preferably evenly distributed. Now deflate the balloon. Begin to inflate the balloon once again. As the dots move outward - away from the centerpoint of the balloon - imagine them to leave distinct, linear trails behind them. Once the balloon has assumed a firm spherical contour in shape, you will see that the paths the dots have left behind are paths perpendicular to the surface of the balloon. This is space-time in action. Einstein, take note, called these paths world lines.
Let us examine how the concept of the 'world line' makes itself known in the ultimate Truth. In the final diagram on the previous page, the solid curved arc is considered to be the equivalent of a world line. As we've learned, this "world line" is a timeless expression of the ball's rise and fall. Although nothing is moving in this diagram, the curved arc still extends time-ward at a right angle to the post below it (the post itself also being timeless). Furthermore: a dot's journey along its world line, as described above, for what it's worth, does not only involve time, but, in ways we will not attempt to address here, involves gravity as well! Proceed to inflate the balloon until it is fully inflated, continuing to imagine the dots leaving trails behind.
Let us now assume that the dots have completed their journey "time-ward" - away from the centerpoint of the balloon. In a very real sense of the word, the dots, in moving time-ward, have aged. How so? Observe, if you will, an interesting aspect to this situation: for any given dot on the surface of the sphere, all of which have "aged", we do not see a single dot on the surface of a sphere constant in size that had "changed" over time (in which the dot was affected by some phantom force).
Rather, different locations along each dot's world line define instants in time of the documented "aging" of the dot. That is, we can access any given moment in the dot's history by retrieving the appropriate "cross-section" of the dot's world line: each cross-section is a unique "copy" of the dot. Let us now discuss the importance of the balloon's inflation. One will find, among other things, that each cross-section of the dot's world line lies a certain distance from the balloon's centerpoint (where the balloon's inflation began and where the world lines of all dots converge). Let us take this a step further. Because each cross-section lies at a unique distance from the balloon's centerpoint, given this reasoning, each cross-section could be said to correspond to a specific balloon size. Our direct means of accessing cross-sections of a dot's world line would be, given this reasoning, by designating this given balloon size: a unique balloon size, you see, exists for every moment in the history of the dot's world line. The 2-dimensional surface of the balloon "surrounds", so to speak, the balloon's centerpoint. What does this tell us?
What if we were to imagine all possible balloon sizes to be simultaneously given physical substance, as we did earlier with the ball-and-post universe? We would have before us a solid sphere. Therefore, locating an event in the dot's history is not a matter of when (assuming that the balloon is of constant size and that time is a "phantom force"), but rather of where (within the unchanging solid sphere)! This situation is similar to the unchanging physical object model of the ball-and-post universe: the question to ask concerning the ball-and-post universe is not a matter of how the ball's distance above the post changes over time, but rather of the 'frame' in the 1-dimensional universe that corresponds to the desired cross-section of the curved arc. It can be further observed that 3 dimensions (which in this case takes the form of a solid sphere) are required in order to express a 2-dimensional universe as an unchanging physical object. Equally so, it can observed that 2 dimensions are required in order to express a 1-dimensional universe as an unchanging physical object.
The surface of the balloon can be said to be much like a 2-dimensional universe: the 2 spatial dimensions of the surface of the balloon make up the 2 spatial dimensions of the 2-dimensional universe, and the third dimension is time - the space into which the surface of the balloon outwardly extends. "Time-ward" is any and all directions away from the centerpoint of the balloon, and is the direction in which all of the world lines extend (each world line meeting the surface of the balloon at a right angle).
How does this relate to the ball-and-post universe? With the ball-and-post universe, the universe is 1-dimensional, and the second dimension is time - the space into which the 1-dimensional universe moves time-ward (at a right angle to itself). As you will agree, visualizing a 1-dimensional universe (such as the ball-and-post universe) is far simpler than visualizing a 2-dimensional universe (such as the balloon universe). Making things as simple as possible in this manner was no accident: concepts are without doubt easier to grasp when all unnecessary complication is removed.
With the balloon universe model we have been studying, the model possesses a distinct centerpoint: a point at the center of the balloon that is surrounded by the surface of the balloon on all sides. How does this relate to the ball-and-post universe we have also been studying?
As you can see by examining the ball-and-post universe, there is no such "centerpoint" to surround. Is this a mistake? Not at all. It is simply another way of expressing how a universe (in this case a 1-dimensional universe) can extend into the next dimension at a right angle to itself. Portraying a 1-dimensional universe in this manner, as it would happen, makes it much easier for the ball-and-post universe to serve its purpose.
Is it possible, then, for a 1-dimensional universe to possess a centerpoint? By all means. Picture in you mind, if you will, a 2-dimensional balloon: a balloon possessing a 1-dimensional surface. The simplest way to envision such a balloon would be as an elastic, inflatable hollow circle. Such a balloon would, indeed, share the properties of the 3-dimensional version of a balloon we have come to know (a balloon possessing a 2-dimensional surface).
Firstly, a distinct centerpoint lies at the center. Next and quite clearly, the 1-dimensional surface surrounds the centerpoint on all sides. The surface, of course, is elastic and can be inflated. Finally, world lines extend outward from the centerpoint, and meet the surface at a right angle. This should not at all be difficult to visualize, given that one need only picture two dimensions in order to do so. In conclusion: if we were to imagine all possible balloon sizes to be simultaneously given physical substance in order to create an unchanging physical object, the result would be a solid circle.
What of our own universe (a universe consisting of 3 spatial dimensions)? We would have before us the challenge of envisioning a 4-dimensional balloon: the balloon we have been studying (which is a 3-dimensional balloon) with one extra dimension added. Such a balloon, rather than possessing a 2-dimensional surface, would possess a 3-dimensional surface.
How would we visualize a "3-dimensional surface"? Attempting to do so can be a source of great difficulty. In order to better understand things here, picture, in your mind, a fully-inflated 3-dimensional balloon (a balloon possessing a 2-dimensional surface). Further picture the centerpoint of the balloon. What do we need to know here? Through examination of the balloon, we find that all points on the surface of the balloon lie at the same distance from the centerpoint of the balloon. It is because of this fact that all world lines meet the surface of the balloon at a right angle. The surface of the balloon "surrounds", so to speak, the balloon's centerpoint.
The next feat before us is to perform the actual visualization of a 3-dimensional surface. Without doubt the most common way to visualize a 3-dimensional surface, and perhaps the simplest, would be to assume that a 3-dimensional surface is a large spherical mass. The main source of difficulty here lies in understanding just how a large spherical mass can be a surface. This brings us back to our study of how all points on the surface of a 3-dimensional balloon are of equal distance from the balloon's centerpoint. Having agreed upon how the surface of the 3-dimensional balloon "surrounds" the balloon's centerpoint, the goal before us, quite clearly, is to bring things "up a notch": to picture exactly where within the "large spherical mass" the centerpoint of the 4-dimensional balloon would lie.
In other words, where within the large spherical mass can the centerpoint be placed so that it lies at the same distance from all points on the large spherical mass? As can be easily concluded by studying things closely, this feat appears impossible to perform. To answer this question, then, would require the presence of an extra spatial dimension perpendicular to the 3 dimensions of the 3-dimensional surface of our universe: the 3-dimensional surface of the 4-dimensional balloon would "surround" the balloon's centerpoint. This is indeed a hotly debated topic. Perhaps hard to visualize, successfully doing so would, quite clearly, be without doubt a great accomplishment.
Let us assume, once again, that we have before us a "4-dimensional balloon", fully inflated. The 3-dimensional surface of this inflated balloon, as we've come to learn, "surrounds" the balloon's centerpoint as we've discussed in detail. Equally so, and as we've also discussed, all points on the 3-dimensional surface of the balloon lie at the same distance from the centerpoint of the balloon. Does a term exist, one may wonder, that provides a means by which one can refer to this inflated 4-dimensional balloon? Such a term does exist.
This inflated "4-dimensional balloon", in a nutshell, is the equivalent of what we would call a hollow hypersphere. A hypersphere, as we've talked about, is a sphere with one extra dimension added. A hypersphere is to a sphere, you see, what a sphere is to a circle. What if all possible balloon sizes of the 4-dimensional balloon were simultaneously given physical substance in order to create an unchanging physical object? As difficult as it may be to visualize, we would have before us a solid hypersphere (not to be confused with the "large spherical mass" spoken of earlier).
Now that we have seen how science contributed to the ultimate Truth, it is now time to examine the other side to the ultimate Truth's coming into being: what religious teachings were involved. By far, the religion around which the ultimate Truth is centered the most is none other than Buddhism. In what ways this is so will be made clearer as we move on. Before we proceed to study the influence of Buddhism upon the ultimate Truth, we must first, of course, be made familiar with Buddhism itself. This means being introduced to the most fundamental precepts of Buddhism, known as the Four Noble Truths.
The Four Noble Truths give us a "diagnosis" of the condition of this life, examine the evident aspects of it, and offer a "remedy" for the ailment of life. The Four Noble Truths are clear and simple. The "remedy" being spoken of here has a name: the Eightfold Path. The Eightfold Path is, evidently, the fourth and final truth of the Four Noble Truths. It is a truth that is broken down into 8 steps. Let us now learn of the Four Noble Truths. They are displayed below, to be studied and contemplated.
The Four Noble Truths:
I. This life has a certain negative quality to it.
II. This is because all of life consists of living up to the demands of countless worldly concerns.
III. The only way to overcome these worldly concerns is to extinguish all attachment to them.
IV. The Eightfold Path is the clear means through which worldly concern is to be overcome.
The Eightfold Path:
Having been introduced to the basics of Buddhism, we can now move onward toward a clearer understanding of the relationship between Buddhism and the ultimate Truth. Buddhism, as it would happen, and as you would probably guess, has a vast multitude of various teachings, concepts, and codes, all aimed at benefitting the individual. What we will focus upon, as it would happen, is upon the propositions made by Buddhism responsible for shaping the ultimate Truth. We will do so directly and promptly. The area of Buddhism of value to us here is the Buddhist teaching of the Three Characteristics of Existence.
These 3 "characteristics" describe in detail a frank summary of life in this present world. They are realistic and down-to-earth. The original language in which the Three Characteristics of Existence have been written is a language known as Pali. Each Characteristic is expressed by the word, in Pali, that is most commonly used to describe that Characteristic. Next and finally, I present an English word that expresses what I believe to be the underlying message that the word in Pali was meant to convey. Once this is done, I will address matters more thoroughly by confronting the traditional interpretations as to what each Characteristic means, and by then presenting my own personal, unique interpretation of each. In doing so I will show how these new interpretations relate to the ultimate Truth.
The first Characteristic of Existence, in Pali, is dukkha. This word, it so happens, is the word that gives the first truth of the Four Noble Truths its meaning. The traditional translation of dukkha is "suffering". This is an adequate translation. However, a deeper study into the meaning of the word in the original language tells us that the word can be used to describe a "negative quality". This life, as the first truth of the Four Noble Truths states, has a certain 'negative quality' to it.
Just what, one may ask, would be the cause and origin of this 'negative quality'? It is my personal belief that dukkha is the result of a nauseating predictability. Predictability of what? Time! Althroughout Buddhism we are reminded of the cyclic nature of things: minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years. These endless cycles are a result of nothing other than time. We have been going through cycles our entire lives, and it is very predictable that we will go through many more.
The second Characteristic of Existence is a clear product of the first. This Characteristic, in Pali, is anicca. The traditional translation of anicca is "impermanence". To understand the concept of "impermanence" means to realize that the universe is in a constant state of change. It is not difficult to see how the cyclic nature of things (which is the substance of time) and impermanence are related. To loop through the cycles of this time-ruled universe, furthermore and finally, is to age.
It is difficult to disagree, quite clearly, that what is in a certain state in this cycle will be in a different state in the next. As before, there is simply no way to establish an argument against the reality of change. How does 'impermanence' apply to the ultimate Truth? It is my personal belief that at the core of anicca lies an undeniable inevitability: aging and change are inevitable, and cannot be avoided - and throughout all of this we have nothing to blame but time.
The third Characteristic of Existence could be said to have been the result of a sound conclusion - a conclusion that is quite evident given the truths of the first and second Characteristic of Existence. This Characteristic, in Pali, is anatta. The traditional way of translating anatta is as a translation that expresses the idea of being "without self". What does it mean to be "without self"? In order to properly understand this proposal, what we must first do is define the term "self". According to the words of the Buddha, although the individual is supposedly without a self - which one can conclude given the first and second Characteristics of Existence - selfhood nevertheless exists. What, then, does it mean to have a "self"?
The Buddha says that selfhood is pure, real, and permanent. Understanding our "selfless" state means understanding that all of us, as we've learned by studying the first two Characteristics of Existence, have a common enemy: time. Being hurled through the cycles of time, we are constantly undergoing the private unfulfillment of the predictablity that these cycles bring (according to the first Characteristic of Existence). Equally so, we face the inevitability of the aging and change that are a very real part of life (according to the second Characteristic of Existence). Time robs us of our selfhood. If selfhood exists, so to speak, then where (or perhaps when) is it? The answer to this question, in a manner of speaking, is that selfhood is 'always' and 'everywhere'. What could be meant by this puzzling term? Continue reading.
Selfhood can be found wherever time is not. How is it possible, one may reason, for time to not exist, since it is impossible to go anywhere in the universe and not find the effects of time there? It is all a matter, as we've learned, of how we define time. As the ultimate Truth states, time is in reality a spatial dimension. What we call the passage of time is an illusion, as we've discussed, and is a product of the mind. This should be clearly understood. Moving along: it is my personal belief that the concept of anatta - "without self" - is intricately intertwined with the sense of insignificance one experiences as a result of his selfless state. Stated once again, time is the origin and cause of this state of insignificance. What does one do in response to this insignificance - that is, how does one make the transition from this state of insignificance, to a state of pure, real, permanent selfhood?
The solution is both elegant and sublime: one accepts his own selflessness. To do so is to transcend the boundaries of both space and time. As the ultimate Truth states, however, this is a very difficult task to accomplish and may take an enormous amount of cyclic time to fully complete. Once one has done this, though, he truly finds the selfhood that is 'always' and 'everywhere'. How would we define, finally, that which is 'always' and 'everywhere'? As the ultimate Truth states, this place is the universe as it exists outside of time. It is a place, as we've learned, that can neither begin nor end. It is a place where "aging" and "change" play no role - a place that, by its own nature, can do nothing more, and nothing less, than simply BE. Is there a Buddhist term for such a place? Yes, indeed - this place, in the mind of the Buddhist, is nirvana.
"I am smaller than the minutest atom, likewise greater than the greatest. I am the whole, the diversified-multicolored-lovely-strange universe. I am the Ancient One, the Lord. I am the Being-of-Gold. I am the very state of divine beatitude."
"This condition I call neither arising nor passing away, neither dying nor being born. It is without form and without change. It is the eternal, which never originates and never passes away. To find it is the end of sorrow."
Click arrow to return to The Ultimate Truth main page.| Comments, questions, feedback: jsfsite@yahoo.com |