Creation theories and the reality of the world, #8

[Guest guest]

Q: We see, feel and sense the world in so many ways.

These sensations are the reactions to the objects seen

and felt. They are not mental creations as in dreams,

which differ not only from person to person but also with

regard to the same person. Is that not enough to prove the objective reality of the world?

A: All this talk about inconsistencies in the dream-world arises only now, when you are awake. While you are dreaming, the dream was a perfectly integrated whole. That is to say, if you felt thirsty in a dream, the illusory drinking of illusory water quenched your illusory thirst. But all this was real and not illusory to you so long as you did not know that the dream itself was illusory. Similarly with the waking world. The sensations you now have get

coordinated to give you the impression that the world is real. If, on the contrary, the world is a self-existent reality (that is what you evidently mean by its objectivity), what prevents the world

from revealing itself to you in sleep? You do not say you did not exist in your sleep.

Q: Neither do I deny the world's existence while I am asleep. It has been existing all the while. If during my sleep I did not see it, others who were not sleeping saw it.

A: To say you existed while asleep, was it necessary to call in the evidence of others so as to prove it to you? Why do you seek their evidence now ? Those others can tell you of having seen the world during your sleep only when you yourself are awake. With regard to your own existence it is different. On waking up you say you had a sound sleep, and so to that extent you are aware of yourself in the deepest sleep, whereas you have not the slightest notion of the world's existence then. Even now, while you are awake, is it the world that says `I am real', or is it you?

Q: Of course I say it, but I say it of the world.

 

A: Well then, that world, which you say is real, is really mocking at you for seeking to prove its reality while of your own reality you are ignorant. You want somehow or other to maintain that the

world is real.

What is the standard of reality? That alone is real which exists by itself, which reveals itself by itself and which is eternal and unchanging. Does the world exist by itself ? Was it ever seen without the aid of the mind? In sleep there is neither mind nor world. When awake there is the mind and there is the world. What does this invariable concomitance mean? You are familiar with the principles of inductive logic which are considered the very basis of scientific investigation. Why do you not decide this question of the reality of the world in the light of those accepted principles of logic? Of yourself you can say `I exist'. That is, your existence is not mere existence, it is existence of which you are conscious. Really, it is existence identical with consciousness.

Q: The world may not be conscious of itself, yet it exists.

A: Consciousness is always Self-consciousness. If you are conscious of anything you are essentially conscious of yourself. Unself-conscious existence is a contradiction in terms. It is no existence at all. It is merely attributed existence, whereas true existence, the sat, is not an attribute, it is the substance itself.

It is the vastu [reality]. Reality is therefore known as sat-chit,

being-consciousness, and never merely the one to the exclusion

of the other. The world neither exists by itself, nor is it conscious

of its existence. How can you say that such a world is real? And what is the nature of the world? It is perpetual change, a continuous, interminable flux. A dependent, unself-conscious,

ever-changing world cannot be real.

 

>> taken from >> Be As You Are, The Teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi>> Edited by David Godman