Reflections on impermanence

Kingsley Heendeniya

An electron cannot be painted red. Yet, physics, chiefly particle physics is today regarded as the source and the pathway to ultimate knowledge, whether mundane or supra mundane. It is thus common to read and hear educated persons proudly claiming that more than 2500 years before Science, the Buddha anticipated and upstaged physics.

Those who generally know little about 'Science' and nothing of what the Buddha actually taught are the most effusive in offering certificates to the Buddha. They ostentatiously quote how eminent scientists agree with the Buddha on this or that scientific theory or discovery.

Quixotically, among them are people who, with happy sangfroid, explain from ignorance of their ignorance, to the ignorant, the Teaching of 'impermanence' (aniccata) by the Buddha.

A thing, idea, thought or thinking is said to be impermanent if it changes, fades, alters or cease. Scientists tell us that the universe began with an explosion of a particle, a singularity, and that the resulting matter, living and non-living, flying away in all directions will eventually return to coalesce; and this is the ultimate of impermanence.

Whether true or not, this theory has nothing to do with the Teaching of the Buddha. He described the world, not explain it. He did not teach about the physical impermanence scientists and imbeciles see everywhere. The pharoas, in sarcophagi, hoped to re-use personal things made of gold when they return, because gold is regarded permanent.

Though no one knows if they came back, all their possessions were stolen, an aspect of impermanence taught by the Buddha the secret pyramid chambers could not stop. Aniccata is not about objective impermanence. Astronomers tell us that stars are forever decaying. Who cares?

Dukkha is the key to the Dhamma. Let me therefore describe it, albeit briefly. The word is commonly translated as 'suffering' but this is grossly inadequate. There is no English word to capture in one word its manifest all-encompassing meaning.

In Dhamma, the body (and mind) is regarded the same as the world. Why is that? The eye, ear, tongue, body and mind are things (Dhamma) with which we feel, perceive, intend and conceive the world within and around us, in reality and in imagination.

There is no other way that even the scientist with his equipment can experience the world. That is to say, everything that we can say about the world, about our experience of it, is necessarily inferential. The eye...mind are the Dhamma that limit inference.

Inference is always more of the same, from something, from the particular to the general.. In other words, the concept 'absolute' is false. Experience is relative to the eye...mind. That is why there is conflict, dispute, hate, aversion, dissatisfaction, tension, disappointment and sorrow. And contrarily, that is why there is pleasure, infatuation, lust, greed and love - all the myriad things that make us human - and fallible.

The Buddha showed, out of compassion for every one of us, that all of it is dukkha. All these things are conceivings dependently arisen - dependent on the eye...mind. In Dhamma terms, they are determinations or sankhara. The Buddha says, all determinations are dukkha (sabbe sankhara dukkha).

The question now arises: Are there determinations that do not determine other things? The answer is that there cannot be a determination that does not determine another thing (sankhata).

In short, whatever the eye...mind determines in the world of experience is that which in the immanent world is visible, heard, can be smelled, tasted, touched, imagined or thought by the eye...mind, to determine - and interpret - according to one's own unique or conventionally agreed determinations.

That is, the world of experience is necessarily subjective and relative. Everything, all knowledge such as it is, is inference. Not absolute. All worldly knowledge is thus liable to error, to change, fade, cease and yield place to some other knowledge.

Until inference leads (opanayikao) to insight, no one can experience the world (paccattam veditabbo vinnuhi) as it actually is (yatha bhuta). This is dukkha. Einstein does not say he had private experience of the velocity of light!

From the foregoing, it should become clear that the Buddha is speaking to us, at a first reckoning, about the impermanence of the eye...mind and of its percepts (salayatana). But there is much more to be understood, subtle and difficult. In Dhamma, 'understanding' does not imply intellectual comprehension of the meaning of what is seen, heard, smelled, touched, intended, imagined or thought.

Nor is it the 'wisdom' to evaluate things. Understanding (panna) is private insight or vipassana from contemplating and 'seeing' with the Eye of the Dhamma (Dhamma-Cakkhu) the underlying universal nature of all experience (Dhammata), of all conceivings. The Buddha did not teach about the dukkha of headache, cancer, bankruptcy, aging, death of loved ones, association with those we do not like, decay of things - of particular feelings and perceptions.

He taught about evanescence, fleeting, fading, change while standing and ceasing of ALL feelings and perceptions, of ALL things appropriated by the eye...mind. Thus, central to the concept of dukkha is the felt impermanence of things subjective, of things perceived by the determination 'mine', by 'me', belonging to me, by the self.

No common person (puthujjana) can have insight of this subjective arising, fading and ceasing aniccata. As soon as he sees it (dassana), has insight of aniccata of all things subjective (sabbe dhamma anicca) appropriated by the self (phassa paccaya), he instantly (sandittiko, akaliko, ehipassiko) ceases to be puthujjana and enters the path to full insight (parinna).

"When one perceives impermanence, Meghiya, the perception of not-self is established. When one perceives not-self, one reaches the removal of the conceit 'I am' (asmi mana, 'me', 'mine') - which is called Nibbana here and now." (Udana 4.1).

(The writer can be contacted at 2866196 for further discussion.)