We cannot see atoms, yet we are convinced by all sorts of evidence that they exist. But how about slivers? Is there any evidence that they are real?
A sliver - in terms of its physical dimensions - is the size of the universe. So it would seem that we ought to be able to observe it; it is certainly big enough. Maybe too big. Perhaps we'd need a telescope in reverse.
And yet, according to definition, slivers do not exist for any measure of time. How then can slivers be thought of as be real? Will that fact get in the way? What's the current wisdom?
No matter what time the clock shows, it's always the present moment. We occupy no other space in time. We can't experience the past; it's gone. And the future never arrives; no sooner is it here than it in turn disappears. The future morphs instantly into the past.
But we may state this: the present is the current sliver occupied. It carries our consciousness the way that a function carries its derivative. Therefore, all of us experience a sliver's reality, subjectively, as the eternal present.
Well, gurus and guides of every creed recommends their followers to 'be here now', to be 'mindful', 'present', and to 'live in the moment'. We should always try to be surfing the crest of the present moment. It is the crux of our being: to live in the here-and-now.
No matter what time the clock shows, it's always the present moment. We occupy no other space in time. We can't experience the past; it's gone. And the future never arrives; no sooner is it here than it in turn disappears. The future morphs instantly into the past.
But we may state this: the present is the current sliver occupied. It carries our consciousness the way that a function carries its derivative. Therefore, all of us experience a sliver's reality, subjectively, as the eternal present.
To that degree we have that evidence.