Impermanence
You are a flowing, changing, natural phenomenon
The international best-selling author Haruki Murakami is also a passionate runner, and he wrote a book entirely devoted to the topic. On reading it, many years ago now, I was moved by the way he expressed the idea of impermanence.
As he described himself running along the Charles River in Boston (USA), he spoke of his visceral experience of the ever-changing seasons:
“In the midst of this flow, I’m aware of myself as one tiny piece in the gigantic mosaic of nature. I’m just a replaceable natural phenomenon, like the water in the river that flows under the bridge toward the sea.” Haruki Murakami: What I Talk About When I Talk About Running (p. 91)
There is so much to unpack here. First, we have the idea of cosmic insignificance, because at least in terms of size, each of us is indeed a “tiny piece” in a vast universe filled with billions of galaxies and trillions of planets and stars.
Then there is the idea of each of us being a “replaceable natural phenomenon”. This is something I have covered from a scientific perspective in my writing here on MOL-BIO. In short, despite the illusion or sense within us that we are separate from the universe, we are, in fact, the universe. We are made up of the same matter (atoms) as all of the physical stuff that we can see around us.
Finally, there is the idea that we are an ever-changing, constantly moving flow, much like the water of the Charles River. Here is my take/interpretation of this. If we look at a river, it is not the same water from one moment to the next; the water molecules that pass under the bridge in this instant are quickly followed (replaced) by new molecules of water. The overall river is recognisably the same (at least on a specific timescale), but on a molecular level it is not the same. A similar description applies to us, too. There is a continuity over time in the arrangement of our atoms, thoughts, and memories, but on a molecular level, there is a constant turnover and renewal.
It is estimated that it takes approximately 5 to 7 years for almost all of the atoms in your body to be replaced.
The heat death of the Universe
Many ideas in science are revised over time and replaced by more accurate descriptions of reality. However, one of the most reliable principles is the second law of thermodynamics. Now it would be impossible to do this topic justice here, but I want to provide a brief overview.
The universe started in a highly ordered state. Over time, the universe expands, becoming more disordered. (Technically, it is entropy that increases over time, and it's an important distinction for another day.) Eventually, in an astronomical number of years (way beyond anything we can make sense of in our minds), the cosmos will reach a state of maximum entropy, sometimes called the heat death of the universe. In this scenario, the universe will have expanded to the point that all heat/energy will be spread out so evenly that there can be no meaningful change from one moment to the next. No interesting structures will be able to exist. There will be no planets, no life. The last stars will have burnt out.
I know that sounds bleak, but I want to celebrate the concept of change here. You see, the only reason meaningful things like you and me can exist is because of change.
Because the cosmos started in a highly ordered state, it unravels towards higher entropy. But it is the very process of unravelling (change) that allows finite ordered structures like planets, stars, and life to exist.
The process of biological evolution in its purest form is also change. Without death (differential survival and reproduction), life would exist in its own kind of static, meaningless, heat-death. Instead, because of variability over time, we have a biosphere of ever greater complexity, one of its greatest “creations” being that of the human brain, which, as far as we know, may still be the most complex “thing” in the universe.
“endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” The Origin of Species, Charles Darwin
When a religious zealot tries to rubbish the idea of evolution, they often do so by attacking the description of natural selection. That is to say that they challenge the scientific description of the mechanism of how organisms change over time. And when approached honestly, there is healthy scientific disagreement in this area. But there is no serious challenge to the idea that species change and do so drastically over vast timescales.
Embracing change
Buddhist philosophy describes that our confrontation with a changing reality is a source of Dukkha (which is loosely translated as suffering). Importantly, it makes clear that change is not the source of our suffering; instead, it is caused by our mind's attachment to the idea of permanence. The discomfort is because our expectations of reality are out of alignment with the actual, impermanent nature of existence.
The beauty that we see when we look at a river is because of its unpredictability; on one day, it may look calm, reflecting a mirror image of the sky and surroundings, and on the next day, powered by heavy rainfall, it may become a chaotic, crashing torrent. I enjoy both.
Each of us is a “replaceable natural phenomenon”, and we owe our existence to the process of change.
Thanks to Erin Kenny for the video of me at a river in Pitlochry, Scotland. I play the guitar, the video was made in Canva Premium.
References and reading list for this article:
What I Talk About When I Talk About Running- Haruki Murakami
Until the End of Time- Brian Greene
Buddhism: plain and simple- Steve Hagen
Acknowledgement
I am grateful to Danielle Visconti-Keller for the inspiration/motivation for the topic of this article.
I love that you connected Murakami’s work with a cosmic/scientific perspective of change within us!! I really enjoyed his book and it’s so cool to see a whole new piece inspired by that Charles River quote
Beautiful reflections. Thank you