ARE LAWS ETERNAL?

SOME VIEWS ON TIME AND

ETERNITY

Are laws eternal? Or, are they subject to time?

The question may be considered with an example.
The earth rotates on its axis everyday and as a result thereof a day
follows a night. We do not entertain doubt that there will be a night
that will not be followed by a day. Why? What is the reason for this
certainty? It is the belief that earth follows laws, and so, does the sun.
The earth moves round the Sun in 365 days, 5 hours and 49 minutes
maintaining its mean distance of 14,96,00,000 kms from the Sun and it
does this year after year without a break and thus do we have the
same seasons year after year. We sow our crops with the hope that the
seasons will follow one another in the same routine. And yet there is no
reason except our belief to support this conviction! Professor C D
Broad, in his book entitled ‘Scientific Thought’, states: “ Apriori, it is
not self-evident that there should be laws governing the emergence
and sustenance of the universe’, but science tells us that they exist.”
The same belief was expressed by the concept rta in the Rg Veda and
logos ine the Greek thought. Physics is more specific and tells us that
the planets follow the laws of motion and gravitation.

When were these laws born? Were these laws already there when the
universe came into being with the ‘Big Bang’ about billion years ago?
Or, were these laws born with the universe and are subject to time, just
as everything else in the universe is? Does ‘Times’ rule the laws? Or, is
it ‘Time’ that is subject to laws?

Overawed at the apparent powers that time seems to exercise over us.
Zoraster and his followers deified time and represented it as a Lion-
headed human monster. In India ‘Time’ was identified as a “ horse with
seven reins.’ “ (Atharva Veda XIX.53) Temples dedicated to ‘Time’ (kal
devta) are found at many places. The credit for initiating serious
thought into the nature of time and eternity goes to Svetasvatra and
Maithri.

“Time, inherent nature, necessity, chance, the elements, the womb or

the the person (should they) be considered as the cause?”
(Svetasvatra Upanisada 1.2, Radhakrishnan’s translation) Maitri quotes
and considers the statement. “ From time all beings flow, from time
they advance to growth, into time they disappear. “ (Maitri Upanisada
VI. 14) he further states that time is “murtamurtimart formed and
formless.” (Maitri Upanisada VI. 16) It is incarnate time out of which
beings flow. The formless time is not measured by sun and watch.

Time for the Jain thinkers is something much more real and they define
‘kal-anus’ as “innumerable substances that exist one by one in each
pradesa of the Lok-akasa.” ( Dravyasamgraha Gatha 22 b
Nemicandra) The term ‘substances’ need to be noted ‘Lok-akasa’ is the
space in which this universe exists Jainus believe there is space beyond
this universe too the Aloka-akasa—where ‘kal-anus’ have no
entry. There is no movement or change in Aloka-akasa. Aloka-akasa is,
for that reason, eternal. Buddha said, “Neither being nor non-being is
the truth. There is only becoming.” Individuality has no performance.
One state yields place to another state and each state is momentary.

These events take place in space and time (ksanikavad). Buddha’s

thought, so original and revolutionary, has been debated for centuries
and philosophy had to wait for Henri Bergson to finally reveal the
nature of ‘duration’ and say that movement was a correlation between
time and space. He says, “ For a conscious being, to exist is to change,
to change is to mature, to mature is to go on creating oneself
endlessly.” Change and maturation have time as their essence. Buddha
will agree and add that finally the conscious being must shed his
individuality and attain to nirvana. Bergson’s ‘Creative Evolution’ is
the nearest approximation we have to the ‘Dependent origination’ of
Buddhism.

Spinoza, like Svetasvatra and Maitri, ruled out time as a charecteristic

of reality because time involves duration and duration involves chan.
Essential existence for spinoza was eternity (aeternalis) Change,
according to Spinoza, as also according to Gaudapad, is incompatible
with reality. “Whatever has a beginning as an end is unreal“, Gaudapad
says in his Manduka Karika

Physics has finally declared that time is the 4th dimension of the
universe. This means that the time was born with the universe and will
end with the universe whenever dissolution (praley) takes place. Of
course the ‘time’ that constitutes the dimensions of the universe is not
the time that our watches measure. This latter is ‘incarnate time’ of
Maitiri and “ in it abides he who is called Savitra (Sun).” This time is
relevant to us on this planet only and has no relevance out of our solar
system. “Time’ as 4th dimension is measured in light years with one
light year being 9.6 million million kms of space. An event that is one
light year earlier at a distance of 9.6 million million Kilometers. We can
now describe the events much more accurately than we were earlier
could.

Not that all the phenomena stand explained; mysteries still remain. A
100-meter long train traveling at 2/5th the speed of light will appear to
be 80 meters long to an observer. On the other hand, if the train
travels for 60 minutes according to a passenger, the train will have
traveled for 15 minutes according to the observer. Why should one and
the same train appear 100 meters long to one person and 80 meters
long to another? And why should the same duration be measured 60
minutes by one person and 75 minutes by another while the two are in
the same universe? Bertrand Russell is lead to state that the “distance
in space, like periods of time, are in general not objective physical
facts, but partly depend on the observer.” “The objects do not exist
apart from the subjects perceiving them” Gautam Buddha said,
according to Buddhist of yogacara school. “Maya” - a vedantist will
say.
In short, time is a dimension of the universe and a necessary condition
for motion in the universe but it has no existence or function apart
from this universe. It will have run its course when the universe finally
disintegrates.

The laws, however, must already be existing before the events they
are to control start taking place. In other words, the laws must have
been in existence before the world process started. Further, logic
requires that the laws will continue to exist after this universe has
disintegrated. Two plus two will equal four in any universe that may
replace this one and two bodies having their masses will obey the laws
of motion and gravitation in the next universe, if there comes to be
any, The laws will outlive the universe. The question is: if the laws
outlive this universe, where will they exist?

In the universal mind or in ‘the absolute’, who “envelops this universe

and is the knower. The author of time,” (Svetasvatra Upanisada VI.2)
Bhrgu, as if in replay to Svetasvatra’s question, states: “ That, verily
from which these beings are born, that, by which, when born they live,
that into which, when departing, they enter. That, seek to know, that is
Brahman” (Taittitiya Upanisada III.i.i) Prphets and saints, idealists and
theosophists subscribe to this view.

Those who do no not believe in the existence of an eternal author of

the universe apparently believe that the laws exist on their own and
they need not have any mind or space to exist in. thought, according
to them can exist without a thinker.

Dr. L R Sharma