Logic, Invariance and Self

When we study logic, we first study the definition of a proposition or assertion: A statement that can be assigned a true or false value. For instance, a statement like "It is raining" is an assertion-- it could be either true that it is indeed raining, or false. But a sentence like, "Come here" is an imperative statement that is calling for an action, and not an assertion-- there is no truth or false value we can assign to it. 

Assertions can be strung together using several logical operators like "and", "or", "not", "if-then" and so on. Hence for instance if we have two assertions: "It is raining" and "Our basement is flooded", then a statement of the form: "If it is raining then our basement is flooded" is also an assertion. Verifying the truth or falsity of this assertion often proceeds by an attempt at falsification. For instance, if we observe that it is indeed raining, and our basement is not flooded, then we can say that the assertion is false. However, if it is raining and the basement is indeed flooded, it is not sufficient to deduce that the assertion is true. Maybe the basement is going to be flooded from an other source regardless of whether it is raining or not. Verifying the falsity of an assertion is easier, than verifying its truth. 

As we get more advanced in our study of logic, we often see the term "true", getting replaced by the term "holds". We don't say that an assertion is "true"-- rather we say that an assertion "holds" against multiple attempts at falsifying it.

The term "holds" represents a property of invariance-- indicating something that sustains or remains. Invariance is a weaker construct than truth-- and indeed truth is often defined as something that is eternally invariant, across time and observers. 

The term "dharma" that is characteristic of Indian thought-- comes from the root dhrt-- to mean something that "holds". The name for "Hinduism" in India is called "Sanatana dharma" where the term "Sanatana" means "eternal" or "universal." Hence, the "religion" of India can be seen as a quest for assertions that have eternal sustainability-- precisely what all scientific inquiry is about. 

In our mainstream education, we often learn of mathematical truths that have eternal invariance. For instance, every number can be written as a product of prime numbers, and the number of prime numbers are infinite. These assertions hold everywhere and always-- they were true during the time of dinosaurs and they are true today; they are true on Earth, Mars, or anywhere in the (physical) universe. 

While we spend most of our time searching for invariance in the objective universe outside us, Indian thought also has a lot of inquiry on what is invariant in our own subjective experiences. 

There is a story of the king Janaka (father of Sita and the king of Mithila), who was known to be a very good philosopher himself. He once had a dream in which, his kingdom is attacked and he loses his kingdom and is exiled. He goes into increasing desperation as he roams from place to place, searching for food and striving to survive. In this desperation, he cries out and wakes up, only to realise that it was all a dream. He wakes up to find himself back in his palace, with his servants tending to him, his family members concerned for him, and people treating him with deference. 

But the dream was so intense, that the king is not sure which was real. He asks the philosopher Ashtavakra as to which of his experience was real. Ashtavakra replies by asking, "When you were experiencing your dream, did you experience what you are experiencing now-- the comfort of the palace, the respect and deference from others, etc.?" to which, the king says no. And then Ashtavakra asks, "And now, are you experiencing the desperation, the desolation and helplessness that you experienced in your dream?" to which, the king says no again. 

And Ashtavakra replies, "Well then neither the experience of the dream nor the experience that you are having now in your waking state, are real. Both are bounded and temporary." 

The king is perplexed, "Neither of them are real?" Not even what we are experiencing now? What was real then?" 

Ashtavakra replies, "In your dream, were you-- the experiencer-- there, going through the intense experience?" To which, the king replies, "Yes, I was there." Ashtavakra goes on, "And now, are you here, feeling the experience of the palace and your waking universe?" To which, the king affirms that he is indeed here, experiencing all these now. 

"Hence," replies Ashtavakra, "you-- the subject, or inquirer-- is more real than your experiences. The inquirer remains invariant while objects of inquiry that create experiences in our minds keep changing."