Dear Sundari,
I’d appreciate it if you could help me with this doubt that I haven’t fully resolved, regarding the very first of teachings.
Vedanta says: “If objects were really the source of joy, then the same object would give the same joy to everyone, but it is clear that they do not. Look at the obvious ones, like relationships and money. Do they make everyone equally happy?”.
I’d say I understand this almost fully, but a part of me still thinks the following:
“Yes, experience ‘X’ might not produce the same joy in everyone. But because we’re human, there is a category of experiences that do produce joy at a fundamental level. For instance, the experience of connection and bonding with other members of the tribe is included in this category. It is hardwired into the human program.
This does not mean that a particular manifestation of this category will produce the same joy in everyone; but that the category itself holds the potential to produce joy, regardless of conditioning. (Perhaps psychopaths are an exception?).
Your particular experience of human connection might not fit my situation and therefore will not produce joy, but an essentially-similar-experience adapted to my inborn and organic desire for connection, would produce it.
In other words, a piece of a puzzle might click, fit your situation, and release joy; but the fact that “your”piece doesn’t click in my situation, doesn’t mean there isn’t another one (that’s fundamentally similar) that would do the job. And this points to there being certain kinds of puzzle pieces (experiences)thathold the potential to release joy”.
As you can tell, this “logic” isn’t very strong. I guess it’s a remnant of having been deeply interested in the science of wellbeing for years. Perhaps that world depends on the idea that certain experiences increase happiness always? My main trouble, as you can see, is around the experience of connection, which for a long time I’ve thought of as fundamental for happiness.
As always, thank you for your help.
Sundari: I commend you for being thorough in your inquiry, but do not make the mistake of splitting hairs by falling in love with your doubts. The scripture does not make mistakes; if there is something that you do not understand, then as you know, the problem is with you. Assimilation has not taken place. Non-duality is very subtle, but there are no paradoxes in the teachings that cannot be undone because they are only seeming paradoxes. All the same, the teachings also create doubts as a function of assimilation, so it’s good to question.
The most problematic paradox in the teachings is the both/and perspective, which relates to the cause and effect teaching. When applied to your question, it means this: are you asking this as a jiva, from the point of view of mithya, or as the Self? From the perspective of the jiva, it may seem that there are categories of or similar types of objects that do give joy to (almost) everyone. Such as the human need for connection, for instance.
The both/and of the answer says this: assuming the creation is real, yes social connectivity is an important part of a happy human life for most. And from the point of view of the Self, seeing as there is only the Self and there are no others, who is there to connect with? When Self-knowledge removes the identification with the jiva and you know that the jiva and its world is not real, you are free to enjoy the natural tendencies of the jiva without the dependence on the objects for your happiness. Therein lies freedom.
Always press pause when you use the word I, or when you are having any kind of doubt, and ask yourself “who is speaking here/asking this question/having this doubt?” It’s almost always what we call ‘a level’, or satya/mithya confusion. Meaning, you are projecting satya, non-duality, onto duality. Discrimination, which is the ability to instantly and permanently differentiate between you/satya, the Self, and the objects/mithya that appear in you (all thoughts/feelings/experiences) 24/7, is called freedom from the jiva and for it – moksa.
As the Self, you are permanently satisfied and full regardless of the presence or absence of any object. An object is anything other than you – in this case, it’s the doubt you present in this email. Who is the knower of the doubt, and unaffected by it? Only you, the Self.
Much love
Sundari
