The word ‘Model’ is etymologically related to the Sanskrit Māyā, from the root Ma: To Build’ and Manas [an early version of the modern: ‘Mind’].
A ‘Model’ is a creation, a re-construction of the original, not the real-thing but its re-presentation. A Model of Reality, not the Real McCoy.
A toy-car is a model. So is a doll’s-house. But the most important models are mental-models, the ones we build inside our heads using things that ‘double’.
Sign and Symbol that refer and come alive in such building blocks as the Alphabet, the Number System and other such kits of complex referencing signs. All mediums in fact conducive to referential traffic.
An understanding built on Assumptions and corresponding Beliefs, conceptualized in binary structures [True: False; Up: Down] and expressed in the vocabulary of Signs and Symbols [typically Language and Logic], is called a ‘Model’.
So what is my First Assumption? That there is such a thing as a ‘Me’ with such things called ‘Assumptions’ stuffed inside my head. Sort of like socks in a drawer.
In the hands of an accomplished architect, the complex architecture of building a house made up of ‘Subjects’ and ‘Objects’ can be an intricate, layered piece of Art.
The sprawling and sophisticated intellectual frame that directs and defends our entire contemporary way of thinking and living. Our ‘Man-Made Modeled World.
Shūnyam is not a Model. It does not mount on assumptions, nor take life in ‘Belief’, is not extended in binary divides, is not a concept, is not an idea.
Do note that there is nothing ‘Wrong’ with Models; nothing much ‘Right’ about it either. ‘Right and Wrong’ are themselves modeled ideas, as is the very notion of ‘Modeled Idea’.
To elaborate breezily on Model as an ‘Interpretation’ and equate a Modeled-Reality to an ‘Interpreted Reality’ is to miss the point. The very notion of ‘Interpretation’ is a Modeled-Idea. As is the notion of ‘Model’. [Fresh Academics and Deconstructionists are the most susceptible to this take.]