85. Real, Unreal and Neither.

These are more words in the readings of nonduality messages.
There is only reality in a sense that we are used to. We say virtual reality, Real image, Real mirage etc etc. So in that sense unreality is non-existence in any perceivable form and hence not subjected to discussion.
However reality has another aspect to it that it must be real, irrespective of the perceiver or one's perception or sensing of it. Since the world doesnt exist without you, it cannot come under the head of reality, as the word is meant to mean. So, our reality is bogus, or with a flaw. What we think as real is actually unreal and since, seeming reality cannot be classified as unreal in a real sense, it should only be ‘neither’. All that was seemingly real, and is being now taught to be actually unreal, which by the meaning of the word, is meaningless, it now gets classified as neither. So, can it be possible that all three attributes, the real, the unreal and neither, be true, simultaneously? Could such be the power of reality or truth?

What is the message here and what could there be an analysis that can lead to a true understanding of all this or of the real seeming world and real meaning of what we are?

Reality that we speak of, is meant to be, as that of the world. Normally, we think that the world outside of us is real and cannot doubt that such reality can be disputed. What is actually happening here is more that, we think, we also- as this individual entity, is real and do not want this to be disputed at any cost. To justify this ‘want’ of ourself being real, we use the reality of the world as a scapegoat or supporting alibi.

What is real issue here? Why this argument about reality or otherwise? Can paradoxes be true?.

We think that we are an individual separate entity and that there is a world out there, separate and outside of such an entity called ‘me’ and this gives rise to a subjective me and an objective world. This statement is taken to be true or forms the basis of the belief in a world of objects, and provides reality to the world of fiction. It also provides the basis, that if the world out there is real, then this me that knows the real world is therefore real too. Such belief is the cause of all effort, which seems to be happening to such believed subject, trying to manipulate the outside world, to maintain his reality and that too in happiness. The effort of seeking to be happy, never ends and when such seeking bears fruit, seeking jumps to more seeking that can still be sought and maintains the illusory seeker unto death as a ‘me’ sense having an effort in all activities being owned as ‘his’.

So what is the truth, or reality of ‘me’ and the world?, the Real or unreal or neither or all?

Lets us start with what seems real. What seems real is that there is a ‘me’ out here and a world out there, that is separate from ‘me’. The reality of the world is as real as the reality of ‘me’. Can the world exist without me – is an unanswered question accept that it is believed by others that it should be so, after your so called non existence or death. Also, can I exist without the world is another question that should not be raised in such analysis, if the question should be answered in affirmative.

There if no difference between a objective world and an objective ‘me’. So what or who is the subject to which such an inclusive world (of me) is objective to?  If all contents of ‘knowing’ is objective reality, then, ‘me’, as this body-mind, that I think I am, is also a case which is objective to the knowing, as any other reality of the world. So if all reality is objective, including an assumed me, that was previously seeming subjective, but is already seen to be as objective as rest of the world, then, where is the subject, or that which knows all such objective reality?

What does ‘real’ mean? Can it exist separately outside its knower? Does the collapse of its knower, collapse its objects too, does the existence of objective reality always depend on the existence of a subjective knower?, if so what knows such formula of existence that has a subject and the world inclusive of me as objective to that subject. Is there more than one subject to know the other subjects?

This questioning can to eternity, without an answer because the basis of the question lacks reality. Objective world includes this ‘me’ as an object and so, this ‘me’ as a subject as its basis is at fault or ‘unreal’ –meaning- meaningless. When such a ‘me’ is meaningless as subject, the basis on which the world is objective to such a ‘me’ is also unreal or meaningless. The only meaning that can absorb all this meaningless reality is that, subject-object pattern of the world doesn’t exist as real. Or that such assumption as its base is unreal. So reality as assumed is meaningless, or there is no objective world and no objective me, as real. Unreal, being only to mean – meaningless would then be its reality in terms of existing separate from each other. So the world is not real. Unreality cannot be. So the world being unreal also has no meaning.  So the world is neither real nor unreal and hence neither.

So what is for real? The ‘feel’ in the knowing to a particular arising in consciousness makes feel a sense of reality to its contents, by making a ‘feel’ of the contents, as if apart from itself as the context called ‘knowing’. The Kitchen seems real apart from the contents of the kitchen the bedroom seems real apart from the contents of that room. However, removal of the contents is the removal of the context and so the contents and its context are seemingly or apparently split as two but in actuality are one and the same.

So when the feel of a snake is felt as real, it comes with an additional experience of a ‘fear’ as an experience of its presence to seal its feel of such reality. However the feel by itself has nothing to do with the snake, because when the snake is seen in an anticipated place like a snake zoo, this fear sensation is felt as a thrill. So apparent visual knowing, clubbed by apparent feel of reality, keeps the object called ‘me sense’ as a subject by a mere feel, appearing to a subjective knowing. The feel of objective knowing as ‘real’ is an experience that goes down memory lane and maintains a story line of all that seems to be objective to a subjective apparent ‘me. Such memory that maintains a story, excluding a ‘me’ to the outside world is responsible for all the ‘me’ sense and also the ‘feel’ of reality to an outside world. In the absence of a story line, the me and the world loses separate reality and independent existence as subject and object drops away. This also exhibits the emptiness of anything objective to the world. The world then appears or ‘feels’ as a dream and then such ‘feeling’ then seems real, but by now not to anybody, as all such bodies become part and parcel of the objective dream.

So reality is just a feeling and can drop away. When such drop happens, the ‘me’ sense and the you sense and the ‘other’ sense, being all parts of original assumed reality, fall away too.

Unreal is not an opposite of real, but just a way to explain the meaninglessness of an assumed reality. Outside of the feel in the knowing, there isn’t anything happening to be real, unreal or otherwise. So reality as independent entity or objective world is just another arising in consciousness to bring about a real objective world as if real. All is just the feeling of it and not It.