What is the real nature of the apparent world?

What is the real nature of me, who is seeing this manifest world? The science that sets out to answer these questions is Vedanta.

From whom can we get answers to these questions? Whose words can we believe? Our mind often is in a quandary when faced with such questions.

What is science?
When we analyse any phenomenon deeply, closely and with utmost dedication with the help of our past experiences in life, we will get a clear picture of the real nature of that phenomenon automatically. For example, who hasn"t seen an ant? Still, how much do we know about ants? Not much. If out of curiosity or some other reason, when we develop interest in learning about ants, we will use a magnifying lens and closely observe the activities of ants. Gradually, we will learn a lot about the kingdom of ants.

What did we do to get deeper knowledge about the ants? We used some instrument (in this case, a magnifying lens) and followed the movements of the ants closely and uninterruptedly. We observed the habits and habitat of ants. This is called in-dept and comprehensive study.

There are hundreds of branches of science in the world. All of them have come in to being on account of such in-depth study. As the study becomes more and more deep, the subject becomes increasingly clear. Such clear vision of the phenomenon will felicitate further study. When we collect all the data in one place, they will take the form of definitions, descriptions, hypotheses, proofs and theories and will come to be called a science.

Even Vedanta is a science that has evolved in similar fashion. It is a philosophy that has come from analysing the life and the experiences of life. It is not something that was created by one person and forced upon others. In fact, if someone proposes a theory and tries to force it on others, it can not be science at all. The declaration of Bhatta Pada, a great scholar of Meemamsa is worthy of mention here.

Siddhaanugati maatram hi kartum yuktam pareekshakaih
Na sarva loka siddhasya lakshanena nivartanam

An observer should try to analyse the basis and background of what is visible before him. After analysing completely, he should understand its phenomenon. It would be wrong to discard something that is present before us and being experienced by us just because it does not conform to one"s theory. This is the purport of the above verse. Adi Shankara has also said " Na hi drishte anupapannam naama" - it means, "how can you negate something which is manifesting in front of you?"

Everyone is transacting by using the word "I". Who is that "I"? What is the world that is being seen by "I"? When these questions arise in the mind, that person starts analysing deeply. Consequently, it inevitably gives rise to definitions, arguments, hypotheses and proofs.

Observations of our predecessors
Let us assume that a person sets out to understand the human body. There is no rule that he should discard the observations and documentation of his predecessors. On the contrary, it helps if he takes in to account, the observations of those who have already worked in that field, his own learning process will become easy and faster. It does not mean that he should blindly accept whatever has been written or proposed by his predecessors. He can proceed after having personally verified what was established by them by subjecting it to experiments. By this, he can save time and can progress faster in his own research.

Similarly, even in Vedanta, there are some definitions and theories put forth by our ancestors based on Vedic scriptures and personal experience. If we analyse them with logical reasoning, our own research will progress faster.

All branches of science in the world are engaged in analysing and observing a part of the vast world that we see. Our Vedanta science is analysing the entire world (which is a sum of such parts) as a whole. Not only that, it also analyses the phenomenon called "I" which is continuously observing the world, its parts and the sciences which set out to explain the world and its parts.

In the example of the study of ants, although in the beginning there was only one entity ­ant. However, as the study became more intense and focussed, new names and definitions of various species of ants came up (some 8800 species of ants exist on our planet, most of them in the tropics). Unless a separate name is given to each species, it becomes impossible to continue a systematic study of ants. It may look funny and absurd to expand the science of ants to such an extent. Those who think like that can not understand even an iota about the fascinating world of ants and their behaviour.

The necessity of definitions
The above system holds good for every branch of science. It assumes more importance in Vedanta because it is a science that helps "Me" to understand and analyse "Me". It is imperative that each word in this Shastra should possess clear and unambiguous definition.

Our various experiences in life are somewhat confusing and haphazard. We modify and even change some of our own conclusions and assumptions. Many a time, we do such acts which are confusing and not clearly understood by us. In such a situation, it is very difficult to analyse ourselves. When we have set out to undertake such a difficult task, it is all the more important that we have unambiguous definitions.

Some of us do not accept when we say that our actions are inconsistent and eccentric. Let us verify with an illustration.

A newly wed couple is engaged in a serious discussion, which is about who has more love for the other. The husband, who thought more quickly, said to his wife "you are verily my life". He was most sincere in making this statement. He was so attached to his wife that he never ate without her company. He could not leave her even for a moment. Therefore, even the wife believed his statement in all earnestness.

Even as they were amidst their serious discussion, a tiger, having found its way from a nearby forest to this town, started advancing on the couple. As soon as the husband saw the fierce tiger, he stopped the serious discussion and fled immediately.

The wife too, somehow escaped and after a while, the husband and wife met again. "Why did you run away like that?" asked the wife.

"Who does not like to save his life?" said the husband. "But you had just told me "you are my life"" reminded the wife. The husband said, "when I said that, I did not mean the actual life. I only meant that you were very very dear to me".

Here, the discussion is, what exactly the word "life" meant. The wife understood it as something and the husband is now attributing another meaning to it. When the husband made that expression, did he have the proper understanding of the word? It can now be said with certainty that he did not have. If he we say that he had the proper understanding of the word, it would mean that he intended to deceive his wife. But in reality, he did not have such intentions. He simply did not know the proper meaning of the word he used. Therefore, he had inadvertently used the word "life".

In our life, we come across many such situations. Even in the lessons to follow, we will come across such examples.

If we want to overcome such misgivings, we must properly define the words we use and then only proceed.

What is meant by definition (Nirvachana)?