All of us have felt the heat of the very same
age-old nagging clash between religion and science, both sniggering at each
other, claiming to represent the absolute truth in their own ways. The religion
finds it to be a formless and attributeless experience. The science, on the
other hand, goes into a direction, where everything has to be logically
qualified and calculated to build up hypothesis, and take us to the inviolable,
flawless and irrefutable knowledge, the final frontier of logical
understanding, i.e., the ultimate truth.
The problem here is that there is no fundamental
entity to define the absolute truth. Whatever you think is your own invention. All
we have is the cyclical transformation of multidimensional interplay of
matter/energy transformations. It has infinite possibility for the things and
phenomenon to be interpreted the way one wants, provided one takes orderly,
sequential steps in a specific direction to invent a temporary truth, a little
halt, on the energy highway. It’s a multidimensional infinite canvas, on which
the scientist can draw the lines with the brushstrokes of logic and reasoning
to invent a picture, just like a painter does on a two dimensional canvas. Now,
just because the scientist builds a hypothesis, it doesn’t mean that he has
arrived at something that was already there, existing in an abstract form to be
explored exactly in the shape and form it has been found now.
The scientists are driven by a dream to reach a
know-all stage. However, the more they try to know, the more they realize that the
sea of the unknown has in fact expanded instead of appearing to shrink. It is
just because there is no limit, no fundamental confines that will help them to
gauze the extent of their reach, and feel happy about the extent covered and congratulate
themselves over the less remaining domains to be covered.
There is no such thing as absolute knowledge. All we
have is an approximation of the apparent facts, gathered on the basis of the
level the researches we have attained. However, these attempts to understand
the reality enable us to build laws, hypothesis, theories and calculations that
help in channelizing the flow of energy in a closed set to ease our survival. It
is mere resource utilization, just like any other species is doing at their
level.
In the absence of a fundamental entity, the only
recourse left is the mystical way of experiencing it. In the absence of any entity
like the absolute truth, you cannot know it. If you cannot know it, you cannot
say or express it, and consequently you cannot prove it. The endeavor to prove
something draws on the presumption of some fixed entity. Therefore, the only
truth is that there is no fundamental, absolute truth against which we can
measure, evaluate something in the terminology of right/wrong. If at all there
is any reality beyond all supposed truths, all our versions of approximations,
it is there to be felt and experienced in totality. One pale version of truth
can be the experience of that totality in which nothing is permanent and
everything is getting transformed into a self-evolving pattern. In this
cyclical transformation, there is an infinite possibility for things to be
visualized and interpreted logically as well as illogically.
Now they say that Newton is proved wrong because his
gravitational laws don’t hold in case of black holes. Einstein is holding for
the time being. However, in future Einstein will have Newton’s fate because the
platform of understanding and approximation will take a shape where you need
more than what Einstein has offered. It only proves that Newton is not wrong.
At his level, he perceived and interpreted the evolution of things and
phenomenon around us. It had its practical uses and brought us to Einstein. How
can you reach the right destination, i.e., Einstein, following the wrong path,
i.e., Newton? Therefore, it’s beyond the concept of right and wrong because
there is no ultimately fundamental law to prove one right and the other wrong.
It’s a cosmic pool of infinite possibilities, where
you create your reality, your truth that practically holds on a little stage to
help you and serve you like your mother serves you dinner. You systematically
move in one direction on the basis of certain presumption, and even
expectation, because the genesis of scientific theories lies in certain
assumptions and acceptance. It is the seed of scientific approach, like a
banyan seed, out of which the freshly minted version of self-forged truth
sprouts forth. In fact, it’s just a fluid and expanding pool of approximate knowledge
and information. There is no such a thing as truth. The set of knowledge that
serves us the most, and consequently, turns dearest to our heart becomes our ‘truth’.
As the transformation of this energy is going around,
we use our logical portion of brain to create a ladder on which we first fix
one step then another and then still another. You reach a conclusion. This is
your own self-derived knowledge, which you accept as truth. It gives a
satisfaction that you have arrived home. We humans need to have fixed targets
and hence this obsession of taking transient knowledge as truth, or at least
the path to the final truth. So, on the highest step on your ladder that you
have built so far, you proudly look around and reach a conclusion to view your knowledge
as truth. All this is your own invention, not that it was something existing in
abstract for someone to come and find it. You have created a little hatchling
of truth from the open-ended possibility impregnated in the cosmic womb. The
problem arises when we take our efforts as the nearest representative of the
last truth possible.
Someone, moving from the same point, but in other
direction, can have a different approximation of knowledge, leading to a
different version of truth. And mind you, even that would have served us,
differently though, thus giving rise to a totally different picture of reality from
what we see it now. So it proves, it is not necessary that only this picture
was possible where we have reached. We have this picture because the best
brains visualized it to be this way. Those who proposed otherwise somehow fell
short in painting or forging their version to be accepted as a hatchling of suitable
truth.
It is thus an infinite cosmic river having the
multidimensional interchanges of energy transformations. We are just like a kid
sitting on the riverbank, scooping out a bit of water on the palm, and thinking
I have captured the seed of the ultimate essence of things. We use our
scientific inventions to scoop out a bit of energy from the ever-flowing river of
energy for our transitory purpose on the basis of certain parameters in a closed
system, which holds like our house weathers against a storm, and use it for
individual and collective comfort and convenience. These little pieces of
forged truths, basically knowledge packets holding for the time being, are the mere
means of convenience.
Absolute truth doesn’t lie in a corner in the cosmos
to be reached by building specific linearity in the flow pattern on the basis
of little portion that we can see. An ant sees a far less fraction of this
world than a human being. So in case there is a far more evolved intelligence,
having multiples of senses than we have, it will definitely have a broader view
of the flow and the consequent usage of it. Their forged set of knowledge,
leading to their truth, will be different from ours.
Our attempts to define the ultimate reality are
simply like drawing tiniest straight lines on the periphery of a circle having
infinite diameter. Now, a straight line is an attempt to simplify the path, to
understand, to have a view from this horizon to that. It may be convenient, but
it cannot replace the total essence of the infinite arc of which it’s a mere part.
The straight line bears a direct corollary to our scientific pursuits. You just
create a specific linearity on the basis of self-observed, in fact,
self-created laws—not that they exist as such in neutrality; these could have
been interpreted some other way also. For example, you may have a night-centric
civilization. On our planet earth, the nocturnal world is a minority; who knows,
under a separate set of self-created knowledge and understanding, you may have
a busily buzzing nocturnal world, where during the day you have just some
exceptions hitting the ground to play their role.
All we have is an ever-pregnant possibility for
things to adopt shape on the basis of concerted efforts that go systematically.
There are all the elements that can be picked up, like Humanoids in case of
earth, to reshape the channelization of this energy in a particular direction
that later on establishes itself as truth in that little corner. It’s futile to
treat this tiny endeavor at approximation of knowledge as the path to the
ultimate facts about the laws of existence. It is beyond right or wrong. It is
only about at what level a particular set of conscious beings harnesses the
waters of that cosmic pool, which is ever getting recharged by matter/energy
cyclical transformations.
The nature has provided us two spheres in the brain:
the left portion for logic and the right one for emotions and aesthetics. Just
because a scientist channelizes his logical creativity to hypothesize a
picture, it should not be accepted as having a copyright to hold the beacon to
understand the ultimate truth. The scientists say that they have to prove
everything. How can you say that the aesthetic part used in creating something
is off the mark? There is hardly any fundamental difference between the left
and right approach. In one case, you want to hurtle on the cemented highway to
reach the destination, while in the other you take a slow-paced recourse on
foot across the countryside. A painter in using his aesthetical tools to paint
a picture is just like a scientist using her logic to build up steps to
understand a bit more about the cosmic web. The canvas in the latter case has
infinite dimensions, out of which one can draw, with focused pursuit, x, y, z
dimensions to paint a picture of practical reality.
On the other hand, the aesthetic creator of a
different reality formulates her visualization using a softer version of
reality that is pliable without any hard boundaries. Here also there is hardly
any criterion of right or wrong. The best portrait born of an utmost
concentration and a mindless scribble have their own standing in existence.
Just because we find one better than the other doesn’t, in any way, mean that
it is nearer to the absolute truth. But yes, it may be closer to a human face
and that qualifies it to be a more acceptable version of truth. The art forms
have changed from mesmerizing natural portraits to the contemporary abstract
art. Can we define each other according to their relative terms to praise one
as right and the other as wrong? Similarly, the pursuit of science cannot also
be termed in a language like Newton was wrong and Einstein is right. The simple
fact is that now we see a bit more from the self-created ladder to look at the
interplay around.
The quantum physicists now accept that at the
tiniest levels deep inside the apparent things and shapes around, the basic
building blocks of this overall transformation aren’t permanent, fundamental
entities. These basically don’t exist as they appear on the superficial level.
Lot many realities surface once you have the onlooker on the scene. It gets
defined in a way, more or less, where either they have convinced themselves to
be, or where, on the basis of the ‘perception platform’ they stand upon, they
are able to take out a little sip of meaning from the hubble-bubble fluid
having many more possibilities of being logically defined, just like these set
of people are doing. Just like a painter using the aesthetic energy with the
help of her artistic sense, the scientists also create a different version of
painting with the brushstrokes of logic and calculations. This picture is
always open-ended. It is never closed and framed to contain the nutshell of truth.
Its one end is always open to include the reframed shots later on. It’s a book
of endless canvas sheets. There is infinite possibility to draw your portrait
as per your knowledge and understanding and, of course, the systematic and
institutional support.
Other intelligent forms elsewhere in cosmos must
have contrived their own set of knowledge, not necessarily matching with our
calculations. We create knowledge, not that it exists there to be explored and
retrieved. This is the beauty of this ultimate law, that you can contrive
smaller self-sustaining laws. The research is only about building the pool of
knowledge and information, not discovering something that abstractly existed,
waiting to be explored. It’s just one set of apparent reality fabricated with
the help of individual and joint abilities to project their understanding on
the screen full of infinite potential.
This basically is an infinite screen, where we can
project our own set of realities. The one that gets maximum acceptance to serve
the highest of the lot comes near to shake hands with the so-called truth. And
there is no limit to this filming. It can go forever. We can hardly afford the
luxury of having this feeling that OK this is the final point and beyond this,
there is no possibility of creating more viewpoints out of this cosmic
fluidity. This fluidity has infinite dimensions where you can, propelled by the
best brains among us, create a picture, a set of knowledge that we treat in
terms of being near to truth or otherwise. It holds as long as it serves us. It
allows that incessant flow to be molded and channelized in a way so that it
takes a suitable form. So the mystics just emphasize on ‘experience’ instead of
‘knowing’. The best way of using logical creativity lies in the use of
resources, instead of seeking the final frontier of truth.
Aren’t we merely a bit more sophisticated apes in
our language and contrivances to use resources to survive? They do khee-khee;
we have a bit more distinct, sophisticated khee-khee. They use resources within
a clump of trees; we do the same over a bit broader stage. There is hardly any
qualitative difference. So truth as such is not human-centric, just like this
existence isn’t. It simply cannot be. All the species have their own truth
forged by the best brains and brawn across their generations. So all the
debates and words, books and scriptures fall flat when it comes to represent
the ultimate truth. Simply because there isn’t any. All we have is an
ever-shifting stage. We try to gather foothold on this shaking stage and that
momentary stronghold, enabling us to stand and survive, appears like an imprint
of the ultimate reality. Words can get anything under the sun except conveying
the so-called ever-sought ultimate truth. These can pacify ego, bestow
commendable oratory, can help you build an impressive career in corporate,
politics or as a social reformer, but they hit off the mark when they claim to
have a copyright on the ultimate truth. Simply because there isn’t any. This
statement itself might come nearest to the biggest truth.
Now, we have lot of issues about global warming,
destruction of flora and fauna, forest fires, and more and more problems. We
are scared that earth may not remain suitable for humans anymore. Existence is
not bothered about such issues. However, we are entitled to be anxious about it
because we have created it. It’s natural for us to hold this wish to stay at
the level where we have evolved to. It’s a pleasant nostalgia. Dinosaurs are no
more by the way. During their time, they also ruled this planet. Hope you get
my point!
When the mother planet no longer remains suitable
for maintaining our current physiognomy, the primordial flow of energy will
take recourse to introducing artificialities into the human system so that it
copes with the changed climate. When it becomes totally unsuitable for the
mankind to survive here, it will take recourse, with the help of the further
use of this interplaying energy in the infinite pool of resources, to further building
on all the groundwork that has been done to paint a still bigger picture of
reality, enabling the humanoids to settle on other planets. To mother existence,
it hardly matters that in this little corner of the cosmos, where some
particular, incidental cyclical transformations have resulted in this type of
temporary screen on which the mankind is playing his self-created picture of
approximate knowledge.
Even if earth gets blasted suddenly, simply its
matter/energy will be sucked into the cosmos. It will spread across the quantum
field. It may get clumped with other celestial bodies. Will it even make an
iota of difference to the biggest picture in the cosmos? To us, of course, it
matters, as it means a sudden swipe at our reality that has been forged over
millions of years generally, and particularly during the last few thousand
years when the mankind took more concerted efforts to forge a truth that is
humanoid-centric only. However, on the cosmic scale, even now many stars are
breaking and new ones are getting formed. Does it concern us?
You move methodically, you build your hypothesis,
use logic, equations and calculations, all this while moving on a ladder that
you have created. It’s not that this is the only path that could have been
chosen. Just because you are moving in that direction, it doesn’t prove that it
is the only path. You can reach the summit from all around. Some channel
appears more convenient, the pre-existing suitability leading to a momentum
building up, some initial steps walking over the grass, leaving foot-tracks that
later turn into paved broad highways of our advancement. Nonetheless, there are
adventurists also. There truth lies in scaling the peak from the most
treacherous and risky path. So just that a sense of safety helps you arrive
through the so-called conventional path, a commonly accepted approximation of
knowledge passing off as truth, it cannot deny the existence of titillating
paths for many whose priority isn’t merely the safest path. They paint their
picture in totally different colors. It means that the present picture, as we
see it, wasn’t waiting for us to come and make it what it inevitably was
supposed to be. This transient energy could have been molded into other
realities also. The selected brains, who can forge the picture ahead, will
continue doing so from the platform of the already done work. But all this has
nothing to do with the absolute knowledge, the self-sustaining, self-surviving,
self-holding and ever-shifting ultimate picture. Somewhere in the ever-pregnant
womb, we just cash on the tendency to paint a stable picture, carrying the
genes of the ultimate law, to create tiny field channels to water our fields to
survive. So this mere fight to survive ought to be avoided from being termed as
the path leading to the absolute truth.
The mystics feel these traces of intuitive wisdom
and emphasize to sense and experience it. The scientists say, no we have to
understand it using our logic. But logic needs words, and words are incomplete,
contrived by us only to convey what we see and perceive, so the debate turns
endless, and will remain open-ended. It only proves that there is no final
point to be reached.
Finally, of all the humanoid churn-outs from the
infinite broth, the emotions bordering on positivity, love, care and compassion
are the brightest gems. They define the soul of our entire endeavors to paint a
better picture. Hold you paintbrush confidently. You owe it to mother existence
to contribute in forging a better truth.
