855. The absence of anything is not directly perceived. It is only the background that is really perceived, and the absence of a thing is superimposed upon that background.

–Sri Atmananda, “855. What Is The Absence Of A Thing?,” Notes on Spiritual Discourses: Volume II.

Let’s look at Atmananda’s three claims. First, one never actually perceives the absence of an arising. Second, what is really experienced is the background, which is pure consciousness. Third, if it seems as if the absence of an arising is perceived, this is because some imagining has been superimposed upon the background.

The First Claim: No Perceived Absence

One is invited to confirm this: Take any arising (any thought, sensation, or perception). To begin with, try to experience the absence of this arising. When it disappears, does some “ghost-like essence” of this arising remain? If it seems not to disappear, then aren’t you still experiencing the appearance of this arising?

Try very hard to experience the absence of this arising–and see that this is impossible.

The Second Claim: The Background Experienced

When it’s discovered that the “absent arising” (a misnomer) is not experienced, what is directly experienced? Thought-free consciousness!

This is to be confirmed experientially.

The Third Claim: Superimposition

However, it can seem sometimes as if “something absent” is being experienced. Realize that this “something absent” is simply imagination-arising.

Suppose that you see someone walking down the street. When you no longer experience seeing-arising, perhaps imagination-arising appears. All that’s actually being experienced is not the absence of that arising but the appearance of imagination.

Go One Step Further

When we explore the nature of “the first” arising, we find that it’s consciousness. When we experience the background alone, we see that it’s consciousness. And when we probe any imagination-arising, we understand, directly, that it’s nothing but consciousness.

Implication

There is, then, no death. If there is no death, how could there be any birth?

What makes us think that there ever was any independently existing arising in the first place?

If nothing ever arose (not suffering, not a separate self, not independently existing others, not a gross world, not a dream world, etc.), then doesn’t this mean that ajata–the non-origination teaching–is ultimately true?

And what, truly, can be said about ajata? Nothing.