emptiness

05/02/2017

In an earlier article, more on symbolic knowledge, we noted that the meaning of symbols (such as words) is usually determined with reference to other symbols. Without such reference, a symbol is essentially meaningless. This is reminiscent of ideas of emptiness and non-self in Buddhist understanding. I am not a Buddhist scholar but I won’t let that stop me presenting my thoughts on such terms…


When considering symbolic knowledge, we can take emptiness to mean exactly what has already been highlighted: that a symbol in and of itself is empty of meaning, is meaningless. Its meaning is in how it relates to other symbols. However, of course, the same can be said for those other symbols. So, in one sense, each individual symbol is meaningless.


The amazing thing is that, although in isolation every symbol is empty of meaning, it does not follow that the whole collection of knowledge is empty. There is meaning given by the network of relationships between the symbols. When taken holistically, there is meaning in the whole collection of knowledge. It is when we try to isolate a part that the meaning disappears.


For a mystic, the concept of emptiness does not just apply to the meaning of symbols but also to things in the ‘real world’, manifest things. We have to be very careful when thinking or writing about this because we use symbols (words) for communicating and thinking about the manifest world. A disciplined mind is needed to maintain the awareness of the difference between the words and the manifest world.


So, for a mystic, the actual existence of something in the manifest world is also empty, in the same sense as the meaning of a symbol is empty. In other words, the existence of anything is totally interdependent on the existence of everything else that is manifest in the moment.


One way to approach thinking about this is to consider obvious material interdependencies. For example, a tree is dependent upon sunlight for photosynthesis, and carbon dioxide in the air, and water, and nutrients in the soil, and certain microorganisms around its roots, and gravity, and a certain range of temperature, and a lack of particular toxins and predatory organisms, and, and, and…


However, such material interdependencies, though important, do not quite capture the mystic’s feel for the emptiness of things. This feeling is more in the moment and more totally holistic. So, for example, the existence of the coffee cup on the table in front of me, in this moment, is totally entwined with the existence of a leaf on a distant tree, also in this moment; as well as everything else in existence in this moment. (Incidentally, we know that we are in difficult terrain when I resort to drinking an espresso!)


To use a scientific analogy for this mystical emptiness, imagine the whole universe to contain only particles which are in a state of quantum entanglement with each other. Instead of the usual pairs of particles, imagine each particle to be entangled with every other particle. That gives something of the feel for the level of emptiness that a mystic perceives in the world.


Hopefully from the comments so far, it is clear that emptiness is not a nihilistic state of affairs. It is a holistic perspective. We could equally well have used the word ‘fullness’. One thing exists because everything else exists.


For a mystic, this view does not just apply to coffee cups and leaves. It applies to everything, including you and me. The individual human being is also empty. We have the attribute of non-self, just like everything else. This leads to the feeling-understanding of non-separation. When put into words, this feeling is stated as “I don’t exist” or “there is no I” or “I am all that is” or even “I am God.” Language fails us at this point.