On seeing

 

On seeing

I had always wanted to be a scientist. I remember the primary school days, before the textbook of science underwent fission into a bagful of subjects. There was an introductory chapter: the scientific method.

Going through it, "Keen observation" was a phrase that was imprinted on my mind. Now, with the experience of a few years in my practice of scientific method, I can definitely vouch for what was written in that book. Keen observation is the base on which hypotheses are built and also the crux of experimentation using which hypotheses are tested. As someone who wants to do their job well, keen observation is obviously something I would like to work on.

As vision-predominant animals, more than quarter of whose brain is dedicated to processing visual information, keen observation to us is mostly seeing what is there to be seen. That, unfortunately, is way more challenging than it sounds. 

What is challenging about it!? We do see things unless we consciously shut our eyes. Do we, though? If you ever listened to a chess player, they usually describe how good they feel about their form as whether or not they are “seeing things”. And every chess coach will tell you that more puzzles one solves, better will be our pattern recognition and higher are the chances that we “see things” in the game. Things which had always been there in the visual field, but hiding in plain sight. It does take discipline, consistency and steady effort to train ourselves so that we see these things.

The bigger problem though, is when more we know, the less we see.

Do we actually see that liquor shop that we pass on our way back home from work? When did we see the cages, our mothers live in? And when did we stop seeing them? Can we see “the human” rather than “mom, dad, friend or a threat”? More perplexing is the question: “Blessed with the bias to see a snake rather than rope, and gladly be wrong rather than dead, what is the inherent value of truth?” Should we practice seeing these things?

Poetry somehow traps meaning transcending the words, and to quote Kahlil Gibran, whose lines somehow feel like an answer to this question:

     Life is indeed darkness save when there is urge,

     And all urge is blind save when there is knowledge,

     And all knowledge is vain save when there is work,

     And all work is empty save when there is love;

     And when you work with love you bind yourself to yourself, and to one another, and to God.

 

If we start this practice of unlearning to see things, see them again, or see them afresh, where would it lead us? What will we see when we look in the mirror? Someone seemed to have tried this practice a long time ago, and they said,

 

मनोबुद्ध्यहङ्कारचित्तानि नाहंन च श्रोत्रजिह्वे न च घ्राणनेत्रे।

न च व्योमभूमिर्न तेजो नवायुश्चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहं शिवोऽहम्॥

 

न च प्राणसंज्ञो न वै पञ्चवायुर्नवा सप्तधातुर्न वा पञ्चकोषाः।

न वाक्पाणिपादं न चोपस्थपायूचिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहं शिवोऽहम्॥

 

न मे द्वेषरागौ न मे लोभमोहौमदो नैव मे नैव मात्सर्यभावः।

न धर्मो न चार्थो न कामो नमोक्षश्चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहं शिवोऽहम्॥

 

न पुण्यं न पापं न सौख्यं न दुःखंन मन्त्रो न तीर्थं न वेदा न यज्ञाः।

अहं भोजनं नैव भोज्यं न भोक्ताचिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहं शिवोऽहम्॥

 

न मृत्युर्न शङ्का न मे जातिभेदःपिता नैव मे नैव माता न जन्म।

न बन्धुर्न मित्रं गुरुर्नैवशिष्यश्चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहं शिवोऽहम्॥

 

अहं निर्विकल्पो निराकाररूपोविभुत्वाच्च सर्वत्र सर्वेन्द्रियाणाम्।

न चासङ्गतं नैव मुक्तिर्नमेयश्चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहं शिवोऽहम्॥