This is a jar –

It is made of clay – 

Can we conclude that the jar exists even when the jar is not manifested, solely on the basis of existence of the clay?

In this piece I will try to examine this proposition. Subsequently, we will try to learn whether you or me exist regardless of you or me manifesting in this name and form.

Let us take the clay as a pre-existing condition. In that case, the jar is an effect of the clay. Or, the clay is the cause of the jar. When only the clay exists, the jar is hidden. But the jar has to exist somewhere – in someone’s imagination or thought – to eventually manifest. But a thing in imagination or thought is not a thing to be perceived. We know a jar is a jar because we perceive the jar as a jar. 

However, if we take an example of a jar existing in a dark room, where we cannot perceive it due to darkness, the jar still exists. Hence, perception cannot be the only condition for existence. 

The clay that we see in the above image is a lump of clay. It is as much an effect of the clay, as the jar is. When we create a jar, we destroy the effect which is the lump of clay and create a new effect which is the jar. Naturally, the question arises – is the cause that manifests in multiple effects sufficient for proving the existence of all of the effects whether they are manifested or not.

To examine this, we can try to see what is the way in which this particular effect of the jar is created. To start with – we take the clay as the pre-existing cause, which had the effect of the lump of clay. We destroy the lump like form (the first effect) and create the jar (the subsequent effect). Even though the first effect is destroyed, the cause still remains. The cause does not destroy itself while creating a different effect. 

The particles which made up the lump of clay are perceptible in the jar. This leads us to believe in the persistence of the cause through the production of multiple effects. We can conclude that the cause exists before the effect is produced, because the cause persists through multiple effects and continues to be in existence, even when one effect is destroyed to produce another effect. For example, when you break the jar in two – the cause Clay will still be around, but the jar will be changed to parts of a jar.

Next, we examine whether the effect exists before it is produced.

As mentioned earlier, the manifestation of the effect points to its pre-existence. Manifestation means coming within the range of perception. For example, a jar in a dark room – when the obstruction to the perception is removed by bringing a lamp in the room, the jar is perceived. 

But what happens, when the jar is in the form of the lump of the clay. There is no obstruction of darkness, still we cannot perceive the jar. Does that mean that the jar does not exist?

To answer this, we need to understand the nature of obstruction. An effect such as a jar has two kinds of obstructions – when it has become manifest from its component clay then direct obstructions to perception such as darkness, a cloth cover, a wall between the jar and the observer – are the first kind.  While, before it has manifested – the obstruction consists in the particles of clay remaining as some other effect such as a lump of clay. And after the jar is broken, it creates new effects of broken pieces of jar – again as an obstruction.

In such scenario, a question may be asked that shouldn’t the effort then be directed solely towards the removal of the obstruction. Such as lighting a lamp, tearing down the wall or removing the cloth cover. I believe – all efforts towards removal of the obstruction may not necessarily be an act on the obstruction, at times they are an act on the effect as well and hence we cannot always conclude that the act is towards the removal of obstruction or an act on the effect.

The simplest example of this is the act of lighting a lamp to make the jar perceived in the room that was dark. The act of lighting a lamp may be thought of as an act towards removal of obstruction which was darkness. However, the other way to think about it is that the act of lighting the lamp covers the jar with light and what we perceive is a jar covered with light. Imagine coloured lights to further think about this example. In this scenario it is not about removal of an obstruction but an act on the effect which is the jar. But at other times, such as tearing down the wall – the act is towards the removal of the obstruction.

The point to note in these cases is that the effect is being thought of as existing and all the steps regarding the removal of obstruction are directed towards making the object manifest.

Let us take another stab at proving that the jar is existent even when it is not manifested. When we see a potter taking a lump of clay and put that on the potter’s wheel to produce a jar – if one is certain in the view of the evidence of potter, potter’s wheel, the lump of clay that the jar will come in to existence then it will be contradictory to say that the jar is non-existent. For to say that the jar is non-existent will be to say that the jar will not be. However, if one takes the view that the manifestation of the jar is yet to be but the jar to be produced does exist in its own future then that will be a correct view.

So then, what about us? We can again start with the cause. In the current manifestation, we exist in a particular space-time in this expanding universe. This is an observable fact. We can take the universe as the base cause for our existence. As in the case of the clay and jar, we can take the universe as always existent. Or, can we? What about the time before the Big Bang?

Time as we know it, exists only since the Big Bang. Before that there was no time. And we believe that there was no space either. But there was something. We do not know what that something was. So, we call that as a No-Thing – as in before the big bang there was nothing. However, out of that NoThing – something came. So the something was part of the NoThing and that is the cause of everything that is. The cause existed before space-time and continues to exist today.

Now, as we have established through the example of the clay and the jar, the jar exists in the clay as it is an effect of the cause. In the same manner, we exist in the Universe the cause, as an effect. We perceive each other because the effect is manifested now. However, we have existed before the potter put the lump of clay on the potter’s wheel and we will exist after the jar is broken. You and me are eternal, even when we do not experience the eternity in our current form.

This post is inspired by a section on the origin of universe from the Brhad Aranayaka Upanishad. May our lives be richer because you took time to read this post.