Space - Ether - God - Freedom

Space

Whoever has dissolved into this universe has become all pervading and indestructible, but the substance which constitutes this universe is tangible and destructible. For example; in a room with no furniture there is emptiness. There is space within the room, and that space pervades the entire room. For sure that space existed even when the room did not exist. We have built the four walls of the room, just to enclose that space. That space existed even before the room was created. That space will exist even after the room is no more. The room exists, and the space exists as well. The room is created and some day will be destroyed. Once upon a time it did not exist, and some day in the future it will not exist anymore. But the space within the room has always existed; it exists now and will exist forever.

In fact, it is inappropriate to use such words as 'existed', 'exists', and ' will exist' - in relation to space - because that which has never come into existence, we cannot say that it exists. We can only say that something exists in relation to that which one day will not exist anymore. It is correct to say that a tree exists; it is right to say that a man exists. But it is inappropriate to say that existence ' exists' 

That is the reason why a person like Buddha, who is the ultimate flowering of religion, never said that god exists,. Ignorant people misunderstood him and thought that he was an atheist, but Buddha felt that it would be a big mistake to declare that god exists. Because when you say that something exists, you imply that it exists now, but it may not exist later. It is right to say that man exists; because he exists now, and tomorrow will not exist anymore. But it is not right to say that god 'is' or that god 'exists', because god simply means 'is-ness' - that which is. One is forced to say that god 'is', although it is not correct - it is tautology.

An empty space simply exists; it would exist even if the room was not there. We fill the room with objects like furniture, photos etc. Now there are two dimensions in the room; the space which has always existed, and all the objects which we have placed in the room in order to fill it. We are never aware of the space which exists within the room, we see only the objects that fill the room. One cannot see emptiness. When a chair is placed in the room, you see only the chair which occupies the space. If you remove the chair and all the objects in the room, you may say: "there is nothing left in the room". You will only notice four walls of the room; and if you remove those four walls, you will say that the room has disappeared. But these four walls are not the room itself. The word 'room' means ' empty space'. You do not even notice it. Because we do not retain within ourselves a memory of an empty space; 

You may understand that emptiness has no beginning and no end, but whatever objects you place in an empty space have a beginning and an end. Space is limitless; sky is limitless;

Objects are created and destroyed. That which is created and eventually destroyed is tangible, and can be perceived. That which is never created and never destroyed, is subtle and cannot be perceived. 

Subtle is not to be used to describe something which is part of tangible reality. It is generally used to mean something as 'small' but part of something 'big' .Subtle refers to that which is not tangible. What is tangible? Whatever can be perceived by all the five senses. It is also that which cannot be contained in a thought. So it is beyond all most minute particles. Subtle is not something which can be known, or unknown today which can be known tomorrow. Because both are tangible. It is unknowable that which cannot be known, which is beyond the known  or unknown.

Nothingness

Nothingness and everything-ness: these are two ways of saying the same thing, either in a positive sense, or in a negative sense. When we talk about nothingness, we choose the negative; when we mention the totality, the whole, we choose the positive. But it is interesting; nothingness is the whole, and the whole is nothingness. Nothingness is a whole because you cannot divide nothingness in two parts. No matter how much you take away from it, nothingness does not become smaller; no matter how much you add to it, nothingness does not become bigger.

Nothingness means you can neither ad, nor take anything away from it. The word 'totality' has the same meaning. When you start adding number it goes on and on and on.... till it is expressed as infinity. On the other hand if you start reducing numbers it goes negative till it is expressed as infinity. This is the place where nothingness and everything-ness meet.

So we have two ways of expressing the same infinity. Either we choose positive term, or the negative term. Same way there is no conflict between philosophy of Buddha and Shankara; They just differ in their choice of either negative or positive words.

Buddha uses words that have negative connotation. He says "Nothing exists. There is only nothingness. There is only nirvana". Nirvana means; blowing out the flame. The flame is extinguished. This is the truth; there is only nothingness"

Sankara says: "Everything exists; there is god, there is liberation, there is knowledge."He uses words which have a positive connotation. But amazing that both, Buddha and Shankara point exactly towards the same thing.

Freedom

Freedom is always double edged - in all dimensions of life. The soul is free. Existence is free; it does not depend upon anything else - apart from existence itself. Freedom always implies two choices. the soul can embark on both journeys, according to its wish; it can move into the world, into the body, into the bondage, or it can move beyond bondage, beyond the world, beyond the body.. These are the two possibilities. Both the experience of being in the world and the experience of transcending the world - are fundamental experiences and are unavoidable. It is impossible to experience peace, if one has not experienced turmoil; it is not possible to experience liberation, if one has not experience bondage. If a rich man wants to enjoy his wealth he will be able to do only when he loses it at least temporarily to realise that the wealth was worth possessing.

You need to be miserable before you can be happy; you need to lose it before you can find it. True being is attained only when you are no more. You need to be in bondage before you can be liberated. You need to be ignorant before you can attain knowledge.

Note : This is only a scribbling note. These are purely my understanding. These may or may not be the correct one. This is not to hurt anybody's feeling.