This title perfectly captures the human paradox. Essentially, the world and the circumstances in which we live are constantly changing. However, human nature, our inner struggles, and the rhythms of life remain essentially unchanged.
Recognizing how we feel when things around us change but we remain the same is an excellent way to achieve balance. Nothing is permanent except change: day after day, nothing changes; but looking back, everything is different.
Life is full of paradoxes, such as the fact that everything is constantly changing, yet some things always remain the same. The key lies in realizing that, while our daily lives, technology, and the passing of the seasons are in constant flux, human nature, universal struggles, and the fundamental fabric of existence remain unchanged.
The concept of non-duality highlights the harmony between the two realities we deal with every day. On the surface, everything changes and the world is always in motion. Technology keeps improving, relationships change, and your surroundings—like the crowded streets of Rome—are constantly transforming. But deep down, nothing really changes because the fundamental elements of the human experience remain the same. We love, we struggle, and we seek meaning, just as people did hundreds of years ago.
This idea has always resonated with people who enjoy reflecting on profound questions. For example, the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus believed that everything changes and nothing remains the same: you can never step into the same river twice. The water flows and changes, even if the river’s course seems unchanging. The famous Sicilian novel *The Leopard* also explores this idea, suggesting that if we want things to stay the same, everything must change.
This suggests that sometimes it is necessary to change the external world in order to preserve one’s fundamental identity, values, and the status quo. In a world where everything is constantly changing, the only constant is change itself. If we can accept this concept, we can adapt to superficial changes while finding value in the things in life that never change.
As Heraclitus said some 2,500 years ago: “Nothing is permanent except change”—a saying hundreds of centuries old that is still true today and will remain so forever. This quote contains valuable lessons that encourage us to accept reality as it is. As the Buddha said in his first message after attaining enlightenment: “All things and all events are impermanent.”
In light of the current global circumstances of the 21st century, it is essential to recognize that the changes we are witnessing must be embraced in accordance with the spirit of the sanctity of life and the impermanence of the world—which is, in reality, a paradoxical natural fact—for the sole purpose of benefiting all beings in samsara and liberating them into the emptiness of reality, the dharmadatu, with a profound sense of compassion, infinite wisdom, and bliss.
Ultimately, in the past, many have been misled by the idea of trying to change the world. As the saying goes: “In the past, I tried to change the world; now I am trying to change myself.” It is an irrefutable fact that there is no subjective world common to all beings. The only things that exist in your world are your world, your being, and your existence—which are objective realities. It is you who have created the world you see, perceive, and experience.
You cannot expect to become a better person, attain a better state of being, or escape suffering by trying to change the world. The only way to change your world is to change yourself and become the person capable of changing what you expect from the world.
The term “world” refers first and foremost to the quality of the world. This quality encompasses both the individual and a single reality composed of two indispensable and interdependent energies, such as the mind and the body, or space and particles; in the same way, day and night form a single, complete day.
This can be achieved by cultivating a better world through inner realizations, a positive outlook, sound philosophy and psychology, meditation, mind training and transformation, as well as by cultivating the power of imagination, visualization, and concentration and healthy digestion and adequate health care.
Nāgārjuna established the Madhyamaka (Middle Way) in Buddhism by navigating a strict conceptual path between eternalism and nihilism using a paradox.
He did not argue that chariots do not exist physically, but rather that they lack an independent, intrinsic essence. In his philosophical Madhyamaka framework, he uses the chariot as a classical Buddhist metaphor to illustrate the concepts of emptiness (śūnyatā) and dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda).
Although this analogy originates from the Milinda Pañha (Questions of King Milinda), Nāgārjuna and his later commentator Candrakīrti formalised it into a rigorous deconstruction. Candrakīrti expanded Nāgārjuna's logic to create the Sevenfold Reasoning, a systematic analytical proof demonstrating that a 'chariot' cannot be found through analysis. As the chariot fails all seven of the following tests, it is proven to be devoid of intrinsic existence.
1. Not the parts: The chariot is not the axle, the wheels or the chassis in isolation.
2. Not separate from the parts: A chariot cannot exist independently of its physical components.
3. It does not possess the parts. The chariot does not 'own' its parts in the same way that a master owns a slave.
4. It is not dependent on the parts. The chariot does not inherently reside inside its components.
5. The location of the parts is not: The parts do not reside inside a pre-existing 'chariot'.
6. It is not merely a collection. A random pile of broken wheels and axles does not constitute a chariot.
7. It is not the shape: The specific configuration of the parts is also a transient, dependently arisen feature.
Chandrakirti’s sevenfold reasoning is a profound meditative inquiry used in the Prasangika-Madhyamika school of Buddhism to dismantle the illusion of an inherently existing "self" or "I". It uses a chariot as mentioned in the previous paragraphs and its parts as a metaphor to show that a person is merely a label designated onto an assembly of components, and possesses no independent, concrete existence.
The meditation systematically analyzes the relationship between the self (the chariot) and its basis of designation (the aggregates, or the chariot's parts) using seven logical points:
1. The self is not the same as the parts: The "I" is not identical to the body and mind (the aggregates), just as the chariot is not exactly the same as its wheels, axle, and frame. If they were the same, the self would be multiple (as many as there are parts) or perishable.
2. The self is not different from the parts: The "I" does not exist independently from or outside of the body and mind, just as the chariot cannot be found separate from its physical components.
3. The self does not inherently possess the parts: The self does not "own" or contain the body and mind—they do not relate like a person possessing a piece of property.
4. The self does not depend on the parts: The self cannot be said to reside within the aggregates, using them as a base.
5. The parts do not depend on the self: The aggregates are not contained within the self, and the self is not the "owner" that they rely upon.
6 The self is not the mere collection of the parts: The "I" is not the sum total or group of the aggregates, just as a chariot is not simply a pile of disassembled wheels and axles.
7 The self is not the shape or arrangement of the parts: The "I" is not the structural configuration or form of the body and mind, just as a chariot is not merely the specific shape of the assembled parts.
By analyzing these seven points, a meditator discovers that no inherently existent "self" can be found anywhere within or outside of their body and mind. This realization of emptiness ultimately helps free the mind from suffering and ego-driven clinging.
In order to prevent this philosophy from descending into absolute nihilism, Nāgārjuna developed the doctrine of the Two Truths. According to conventional truth, chariots exist in daily life. They function, carry passengers and are valid linguistic concepts. However, when analysed at the deepest level, the chariot has no permanent or unchanging essence. It exists only as a conceptual label applied to a collection of dependently arranged parts.
According to Nāgārjuna, when we search for the 'ultimate truth' or core essence (svabhāva) of any object, we find nothing. Everything exists only because it is interconnected with and dependent on everything else. This is the principle of Dependent Origination (Pratītyasamutpāda).
As things depend entirely on external conditions for their existence, they lack any inherent, independent nature. This total absence of independent existence is what Nāgārjuna calls 'emptiness' (śūnyatā).
The paradox deepens through a two-step realization, Firstly, the ultimate truth is emptiness. Secondly, the definitive and absolute fact about the universe is that all things are devoid of independent existence.
However, emptiness itself is empty, as it is not a tangible substance, magical ether, or higher cosmic plane. Emptiness is simply a conceptual tool used to describe the nature of conventional things. As emptiness relies on conventional things to be defined, it is ultimately empty and conventionally true.
Therefore, the ultimate truth is that there is no independent 'ultimate reality'. Ultimate and conventional truths are not two separate worlds; they are interdependent perspectives pointing to the same reality.
The core philosophical purpose of this deconstruction is not merely an academic exercise concerning ancient vehicles. The chariot is a metaphor for the human self. Just as a chariot is merely a label for its parts, the 'I' or individual is simply a label applied to the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness, all of which are in a constant state of flux.
When you realise this emptiness through things like contemplative practices and meditation, it frees your mind from attachment and suffering, because all pain and suffering comes from the idea of clinging to a substantial and independent self — the 'I' and 'mine'.
Geshe Gedun Tharchin
