Acharya Prashant explains that the world (Jagat) exists for the ego (Ahankar). The moment one uses the word 'world', one is not talking about one entity but two. When we say, 'Let's talk about the world,' it seems like we are discussing one unit, the world. However, as soon as you say 'world', you are talking about two entities, not one. The second entity is the one who is talking about the world. The world itself does not come and say, 'Talk about me.' There is someone else who is seeing the world, who wants to discuss the world. The world is the seen (Drishya), and there is a seer (Drashta). There are two. These two, the seer and the seen, are interdependent. The world would not be talked about if there were no seer. And the seer of the world cannot exist without the world. A human being's meaning is the world, the universe (Sansaar). There can be no talk of the world if there is no human, and if there is a human, they are in the world. The human is dependent on the world, and the world is dependent on the human. These two are interdependent. If there is something that is truly real, it must be separate from and the basis of both these entities. If you want to posit a basis, then that basis will be different from these two and will be the foundation of these two. Or you can say that both are false, that everything is a dream, and end the matter there. If you can end the matter there, then for you, Brahman is equivalent to the void (Shunya). If you want to say that underneath these two lies their one, root, and pure basis, then you are talking about Brahman in its complete form. The common point is that you are not believing in the independent existence of these two. The fundamental superstition of the common person is that this world existed even without me, and my self-interest and happiness are separate from this world. The world is a deception of the eyes. It's not that something else is there and you are seeing something different; the issue is that you are seeing it at all. Is being and appearing the same thing? Do you have so much faith in your seeing that you say what is seen must exist? The ego considers itself the king. The world is certainly real. What is your proof? 'I am seeing it, I am the king, if I am seeing it, it must exist.' This is the same thing you say about yourself. 'I see myself, I have thoughts about myself, so I must exist.' How do you know you exist? The Upanishads, respecting you, said, 'You are That.' Buddha came and said, 'You are not.' In a way, Buddha is more correct. He gave us what we are capable of, what we deserve. The Upanishads gave us what we have the potential for. When a person's potential and dignity are addressed, it is said, 'Brahman.' And when a person's uncontrolled, unrestrained ego is addressed, it is said, 'void' (Shunya).