Philosophia Perennis

Accueil > Le Bouddhisme > Wei Wu Wei : The Secondary Aspect of Time

Wei Wu Wei : The Secondary Aspect of Time

lundi 20 novembre 2017

‘Time’, conceptualised as an object, could never make sense, for it has no objective existence whatever. It is just our sequential living. It is, perhaps, the living itself of life. We objectify it by means of clocks, and persuade ourselves that clocks measure ‘it’, whereas what they are measuring is our life. When we miss or catch a train we miss or catch a clock. When we measure the duration of day and night, childhood and age, we are measuring our own seriality and calling it ‘time’. Tempus does not fugit : it is our sequential living which is seen as fleeting. ‘Time’ is an invention, a hypothesis developed by our urge to objectivise the subjective : the word represents an aspect of our volition to affirm ourselves as entities functioning in a universe of objects of which we are the autonomous subjects. We have invented it as an element of self-affirmation. There is no such ‘thing’, never was, never could be. It is an objectivisation of the sequential aspect of ourselves. It is simply our apparent duration which we have tried to separate from ourselves and have turned into a ‘thing’ in its own right. We have set it up as if it were something independent, made an image of it (Father Time), put it on a pedestal, sometimes worshipping it as a golden calf, sometimes regarding it as an enemy and using it as a coconut-shy ! Not in any circumstance of our living seriality is it ever any thing but that apparent seriality itself.

It follows, therefore, that the primary aspect of time, or duration, by means of which all phenomena become perceptible is an element inherent in our own subjectivity, and whatever we attribute to ‘time’ is part and parcel of our perceiving. Necessarily, then, it must be a dimension of what we are, indeed must it not be a direction of measurement which is other than the three which produce the appearance of form (length, breadth and height), which is volume ? What indeed can it be but a further direction of measurement [148] interpreted, not spatially like the other three, but rendered perceptible only as sequence or duration, that is an integral element in our phenomenalisation whereby we become apparent as objects — as objects which appear to last ?

But such directions of measurement, spatial or interpreted as sequence, are not objects as such. They are, so to speak, measurements of what we are from the centre of what we are, a ‘centre’ which being of infinity is ubiquitous. They represent conceptually what we are, measuring itself in order to manifest itself, noumenon becoming phenomenal by means of tri-dimensional volume and duration. They are conceptualised in order that what intemporally we are may be analysed and understood, but they have no objective existence as things-in-themselves. They are no more than a schema whereby we may comprehend, as far as that may be possible, this our intemporality in the process of becoming manifest as that temporal phenomenon.

(excertos de Wei Wu Wei, The Tenth Man, p. 147-148)

Voir en ligne : THE TENTH MAN

Un message, un commentaire ?

Qui êtes-vous ?
Votre message

Pour créer des paragraphes, laissez simplement des lignes vides.