The Only Question

कालो कलयतामहम्।। 

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता 10/30),

कालो धाताहं विश्वतोमुखः।।

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता 10/33)

कालोऽस्मि लोकक्षयकृत्प्रवृद्धो लोकान्समाहर्तुमिह प्रवृत्तः।।

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता 11/32)

--

Does Time Really exist?

----------------©------------------

If Time really exists, how and in what way, what phenomenon this thing the Time is, or if it is not, may be truly such a big, greatest riddle, conundrum or illusion, the strongest faith, and the most amazing intrigue, bizzar miracle or the subject of investigation it may be, one hardly thinks about this 

So far I have not come across a single such a person, such a man who-so-ever, who could have asked this question. Everyone takes it as if for granted, that time is something that really exists, and in the same way, no one ever bothers if time is some-thing that really exists or not, why can't it could be dealt with accordingly as we deal so many other things also, that we think do exist. One could hardly doubt if those other things really exist or not. We are so utterly convinced about that these various things do exist, though always keep changing the form and perhaps the name as well. These many things are  tangible, could be touched, seen, thought of, imagined and their existence as such is a comprehensible and physically verifiable truth, a matter that could be grasped and understood also like so many other physical objects. 

But no scientist, no scholar, mathematician, physicist ever come forward and ask about the truth of, this thing is, that we call time.

How-so-ever cleverly or intelligently we try to talk about time, no one ever doubts if this thing what we are referring to as time, really exists or not! That never occurs to us. Isn't it a wonder, why we never ask this question, why we never doubt if the phenomenon that is time, has really an independent existence of its own -like those innumerable other physical objects? Is time only a hypothesis, a concept, an imagination, an inference, or a reality, a intellectually and mathematically verifiable principle?

The way we use time as a day to day term is also just fantastic. For all practical purposes, we can sure measure it and compare two or more such time-spans, and we tend to think that we know something about the character and the nature of time. Quite interesting and funny! This is time-frame without a content. 

How could we trust the different paradoxical aspects of time, that we come across all the time? How could we arrange these various notions about time that are so contradictory with one another?  The same length of time,  say a minute or an hour, sometimes seems to pass very slowly, while fast on other times.

Physical Time by the watch may be treated as the standard criteria for the measurement of time, but that too is relative, depending on and with reference to the solar time. And we have yet another criteria that is according to the study of the molecules and atoms. That seems to be far more authentic, and yet time keeps eluding us.

Had time been a real thing, so far we would have sure arrived at something final about its character, nature, and structure.

But just because such a time as such, doesn't exist at all, we couldn't find out so far.

This proves, that our very first assumption that time exists was somehow incorrect. There was an error in assuming and taking it granted that time really exists and that was the first and the primary hypothesis, the veracity of which we never even cared nor tried to examine.

This doesn't mean that time has no relevance or significance any. Time is the only bridge between the consciousness and the material existence and as such, time is of the utmost importance.

A characteristic point is :

Is the time of the dynamic or the static kind? 

Sometimes though we take it as if of moving kind, while on the other times tend to think that time moves not.

Could we perhaps think and define inertia post time? 

Have we ever noticed how this approach is a paradoxical one?

Maybe, our understanding of time itself is basically erroneous. Or, perhaps we could see and realize how to correct our approach and two ways of thinking about time could be reconciled.

Conclusion :

We can see, as change defines time, and time in the same way defines change, both these two inferences are interdependent and two aspects of the truth of time.

The same principle has been described as :

नासत्यौ - न असत्यौ - अश्विनीकुमारौ।

In Veda.

The two, the change and the time, none of the two is असत्य / untrue.

By the way the word equinox may be truly a cognate of अश्विनौ। 

According to

shrimadbhagavdgita ;

Though inexplicable and incomprehensible for the human mind, Time could be thought of as if having inferential existence as such, and could be dealt with accordingly.

***