The World Does Not Exists The Way It Appears

The World Does Not Exist The Way It Appears.

We are accustomed to perceive the World as an independent entity. We never question our perception and understanding of the World. Thus, we treat the World as something outside of ourselves, something different than ourselves. Our parents never told us to question this, our schools and religions did not teach us otherwise. It seems there is no reason to doubt our perceptions. It appears to us that it has always been this way, why should it be any different today?. It seems that everyone agrees, but that assumption is very inaccurate. In fact, there is a large number of people who are questioning their perceptions and are discovering that their perceptions of themselves and of the World are opposite to how we and the World exists.

Let me elaborate. We all have a sense of self that seems and feels to be right here, completely separate from the World which seems and feels to be out there. This is what our senses are telling us. We all share this experience, but if that were true then I would have to be existing as my own-being, would have to established by my own independent nature, and anything in the World would have to exist as their own-being too. To have own-being means to exist as a separate entity that is partless and causeless that can set itself up. Is this how the World and I exists?

With a simple analytical analysis, it is quickly discovered that I do not exist as a singular entity that is partless and causeless, and nothing in the World exists that way too. Everything that exists from a Galaxy, the Earth, me, thoughts, time, atoms and abstract images exist precisely the same way. They all are made up of parts that exist without own-being, and all of them are caused and conditioned from moment to moment. The only difference between the World and me is in the name: me and World. The conceptual designation (the names) given to various forms caused by countless parts is the only difference between the World and me. For example, when my consciousness/mind perceives a collection of ever-changing parts that I named torso, legs, hands and heard, I gave that combination of shapes the name me. When I perceive all other collections of ever-changing parts causing many different forms, I named them the World. Other than the names me and the World given to various collections of parts that exist without own-being, there is absolutely no two separate entities that have their own-being established from their own side by their own individual natures. Therefore, The World and me are one and the same ever-changing selfless being, and exist conventionally as me and the World in names only, but not in reality.

If you like to read in more detail why no one , and no thing can exist having own-being please read furhter.

This is an order in which all things happened to each one of us:

1. First, there has to be an appearance before we can choose a name / label for that appearance. It would not make sense to create a name or label before seeing anything. For example: in a deep sleep where there are no appearances at all, we don’t create any designations or labels during that time. It’s logical to give names to appearances after they appear to our conscious mind. So, names or labels came after appearances. This is how things happen, and this is why we give names to them. The names that we choose are social conventions. We learn names as social conventions from our parents and in schools. We are entering a social agreement everyone in a given society agrees to. For example, when a specific appearance of a round, red, edible appearance takes place, our society agrees that this particular appearance should be named an apple. So, apple in the mere name given to this specific appearance. Thus, the appearance is not an apple untill we gave the name apple to it. So, an apple exists in name only, but not as own-thing that it appears to exist. The second example, conventionally we agreed that when there is an appearance of something that seems transparent, falling from clouds, that can be drunk, and feels wet, we will name “rain”. Therefore, rain is a name/label that we all agreed to chose and input or project onto this particular appearance. This is the conventional truth have we all agreed to. The drawback to our conventional view is that we automatically believe that the appearance and the name rain are the same and this is the ultimate reality of it. In fact, that is how we now see it. We perceive a real rain drop, as if the rain drop existed as its own-thing, by its own nature that we assume must be different from mine. We give a name first and next we assume each phenomenon or appearance exists by its own singular own-thing, with independent, built-in, individual, permanent core nature. This is the extent of teaching we receive at home and schools, through the highest form of education we acquire. Our education is a superficial understanding of phenomena/appearances. Conventional truth is satisfied with mere “looks” of things, giving them names to them, nothing more.

2. Where did the names, or labels come from? They came from the mind. We first learn names, words, and labels at home. Then we go to kindergarten and elementary schools where we learn more labels. We are shown pictures of appearances/phenomena and then a name is assigned to that appearance, that name is for us to remember. However, notice that nowhere in our education are we asked to understand or examine how the appearances or phenomena exist as if our names, words, or labels have anything to do with it all. Obviously, if phenomena appear to our mind’s consciousness and we give names to that appearance (via social convention) the appearance or phenomena is NOT the same as our name or label. To refer to our first example of rain.

The phenomena/appearance of the clear, wet, drinkable substance that occasionally falls from clouds is NOT rain, because rain is just a name given to this particular appearance/phenomena by our mind.

This question should arise in our minds: If this appearance, this phenomenon is not a raindrop, what is it and how does it exist? No one is asking this important question.

It now becomes more clear that there must be more to this, there must be an ultimate truth to the phenomena we named raindrop. Why should we all know it? You will be able to answer this question on your own as soon as we discover how all phenomena exist beyond the social convention. At the level beyond the conventional truth, all appearances or phenomena exist completely opposite to what we learned so far.

How do they exist?

Let’s take the phenomena/appearance that we gave the name/label/ rain to, in order to understand how appearance named rain exist:

Let’s take a drop of rain to understand rain’s ultimate nature.

1. Is rain its’ own permanent thing, existing as a singular own-thing? Is rain independent, having its own individual nature? If it was, we should be able to locate a single, permanent, independent raindrop. Let’s call that the real raindrop, inherent raindrop (possessing its own independent existence, own-being, that was self-established, able to set itself up, possessing inherent existence). Here we go: Is the right side of the appearance a raindrop? No, that is a right side of a raindrop. Is the left side of the phenomena one raindrop. No, the left side is not one raindrop. So, where is the one raindrop, where is the singularly existing, self-established raindrop? Well, there is no such entity as one raindrop existing as own-being raindrop at all. So, how does the rain drop exist? The raindrop exists in dependence on at least two halves and the name raindrop from the consciousness/mind. The phenomena we name raindrop exists because there were at least two parts (right and left) that our society agreed to give both of the the name raindrop. The phenomena we named raindrop exists without own-being because raindrop was not established from its own side by own nature, and a single raindrop entity can not be found on the phenomena that exists in dependence on the two halves (right and left). The appearance we named raindrop exists because of the parts causes that created them, and the consciousness/mind that gave name to the whole collection of parts and causes.

We can continue the analytical analysis further, is the left side the real raindrop? Is the top or the bottom the real raindrop? Is the top of the right side the real raindrop? Is the other right side of the first right side the real raindrop? Is the inside the inherent raindrop, or it is the outside the raindrop? Are the atom particles of H20 the inherent raindrop? Are the two hydrogen atoms the real raindrop? Is the single oxygen atom the real raindrop? Is the right side of the hydrogen atom the real raindrop? Is the right side of an electron the real raindrop? Is the bottom of protons the real raindrop? Is the left side of the nucleus the inherent raindrop? Maybe the smallest part named by our mind Quark of an oxygen atom is the real self of a raindrop? Not even that, because even a Quark of any atom is dependent on the left and right side, top and bottom sides. Even the top of a Quark is dependent on the additional left and right side, another top and another bottom, and that dependency goes on forever. When with the help of some newer, more powerful microscope we’ll perceive even smaller particles of a Quark, they too will not have their own independent self because they too will have to be dependent on a left and right side, top and bottom sides and each one of them is dependent on additional left and right side, another top and another bottom, and that dependency goes on forever. Nothing can exist without parts that are dependent on more parts, which are dependent on even more parts into infinity. Nothing has its own self because everything is dependent on countless selfless parts. Therefore, a raindrop is without its own individual, independent self.

2. Another fascinating fact about all phenomena or appearances is that all of them exist because of another phenomenon, which too existed because of other phenomena. Like in the previous point, that dependency on other phenomena goes on forever into infinity. In the case of our raindrop, there first had to be phenomena named cloud. A cloud is formed as a result of saturation of the air when it is cooled to its dew point or when it gains sufficient moisture. The phenomena named moisture is dependent on phenomena named rivers, and oceans. Rivers are dependent on the phenomena named mountains, where a phenomenon named snow accumulates. Therefore, there are no such singular, independent phenomena existing in and of itself because all phenomena/appearance is a result of other phenomena, which was a result of other phenomena, which… as you can see this goes on forever without any individuality, without any individual build-in separate nature.

No labeled phenomena/appearance can exist without labeled other phenomena that are dependent on countless other selfless named/labeled parts. These exist because of another selfless merely labeled phenomena, and once again this goes on forever into infinity. No phenomena have its own individual self because everything is dependent on countless also selfless phenomena. Therefore raindrop is without its own individual, independent self. A raindrop is selfless.

3. Another fact is that all merely labeled phenomena/appearance, which are without any inherent existence because they are all dependent on parts and other merely labels phenomena is that all are constantly conditioned and changing by other causes. For example, our raindrop when exposed to change in temperature will change to snow or hail. If a raindrop falls on a hot surface, the raindrop will change to vapor and rise upwards. Every phenomenon is not a fixed “thing” but an ever-changing event, without a beginning and without an end.

4. Finally, the most important point is that merely labeled phenomena do not gain any individuality by being labeled or named by our mind. They exist in the name or label only in a conventional, limited view. They appear to exist as independent of our mind because of our conventional view, because of our original label or phenomena. Names or labels come from our mind and are not phenomena or appearance. If we see a real raindrop we are hallucinating, because there is no such inherently existing raindrop there. This is the most important fact to recognize.

Why is this important, why should we understand the ultimate nature of all phenomena, beyond the conventional view?

To put an end to world problems we need to recognize our understanding of the conventional view as false.

If we learn to recognize the whole truth of the ultimate view we will come to the peaceful conclusion that I and the World are exactly the same. We are inseparable unity. We’re both exist without own-being. We are all one-selfless-infinite being.