Dear Ramji,
The definition of reality is said to be that which is unchanging, which always is. Then Vedanta goes on to explain why this is so. I used to think it was strange to begin with a definition which apparently comes of out nowhere, and then proceed to concoct a story to explain it. It seemed wrong. So then I thought, well, this definition must come about because of the teaching. And if it didn’t, then Vedanta is a fraud. So I am left with thinking that this definition is a result of or conclusion to be drawn from the “elimination of unessential variables”. In the latter case, the teachings can’t be a fraud. Could you please check this thinking and expound further?
James: Good question, Nick. The definition of reality as unchanging existence shining as consciousness is not arbitrary definition cooked up by some mystic or philosopher. It comes from a common sense analysis of experience based on two means of knowledge, perception and inference. Perception gives direct experience and direct knowledge and inference gives knowledge indirectly by reasoning from direct perception. Where there is smoke there is fire.
The eyes can’t perceive themselves but you know you have eyes because you can see. That’s inference. These two power are operating all the time in everybody. You can’t see the Self directly because the Self is the one that sees, so we have to use logic to remove ignorance of the Self.
Addition
People experience differences between one thing and another, between themselves and others and within themselves. But Vedanta says that there are no differences. At first you take differences to be real but when you hear Vedanta a problem is created because both statements can’t be true. Is what I think true or is what Vedanta says true? If you’re not ready to hear non-duality you will dismiss Vedanta and trust the conclusion you have drawn from your own experience. But if you are suffering and you think that your pain has something to do with the way you see things, you may be open to hearing more Vedanta.
How does Vedanta convince you that the way you see things…meaning duality, which is always confusing because it is synonymous with choice…is the problem? It uses logic to create the knowledge that takes away the belief that duality…separation, division…exists. What kind of logic? The logic of experience. The universe is set up in a completely logical way…look at the charts. But the teaching, the logic, adds a few things to what you already know.
It adds a Causal Body or Isvara to your personal experience. Karma yoga, for instance, starts with a wanting, doing person, which you know well, and it adds Isvara, the giver of the results, which you also know but which don’t know well.Why do I do something in an appropriate and timely way with the best intentions and get an unwanted result?
And also it adds bliss to existence/consciousness. You know you exist and you know you are conscious but you don’t know you are full and complete because you add your body/mind to consciousness. If you are full and complete you don’t need to get or keep anything. So the problem is solved.
Subtraction
What is another basic fact of your experience? You wake, dream and sleep. Think of the Mandukya Upanishad. It sets up a complete picture of experience which involves four factors and proceeds to eliminate he waker, dreamer and deep sleeper, leaving you as one non-dual unchanging factor, existence shining as consciousness.
