If you ask me the question as a religious question, then note the difference. If you say this is a religious question, then I cannot give you any theory, then I will give you a method. Then I cannot say whether God exists or not; that is useless. Then I will give you a method and I will tell you, “Practice this method and then you will know.” Then you will have to travel far, and only when you have reached a particular state of consciousness will the answer come to you.
Philosophical inquiry needs no individual transformation. You ask me and I will answer you, here and now. Your change of mind is not needed. Ask me a religious question – the question may be the same, but you say it is religious – that means now a certain change is needed.
A blind man comes and asks, “What is light?” If he is asking a philosophical question I will propound a theory. It is irrelevant whether he is a blind man or not; theories can be understood by a blind man also, theories about light. He may not be capable of seeing light, but he can understand a theory about light. That is an intellectual affair. And, really, he may be more capable of understanding a theory, because he is not bothered by the light at all.
If you talk about light with a man who can see, he has his own experience about light. Your theory may suit his experience or it may not suit it; he will argue more. But to a blind man any theory will do. The only criterion will be to prove it logically. If you can prove it as a logical statement, the blind man will believe it.
But if a blind man asks it religiously, then something has to be done for his eyesight to be reclaimed. Theories won’t help. Some operation is needed, some surgery is needed, some method is needed, so the blind man can see. And unless he sees, there is no light for him.
Now a very difficult thing to be understood. Here is light…you close your eyes. Do you think there is light still when you have closed your eyes? Of course, logically, apparently, obviously, by closing my eyes light is not destroyed, light is there. I open my eyes and light is there; I close my eyes and light is there. With the closing of my eyes, light is not disturbed. This is common sense.
But physics says something else. It says light is a phenomenon to which your eyes are contributing – light cannot exist without your eyes. The source of light may exist, but light cannot exist. Light is your interpretation. Something, XYZ, is there, which my eyes interpret as light. If my eyes are closed there is no one to interpret – light has disappeared.
Take an easier example. We are sitting here. So many colors, so many clothes are here. But color needs your eyes; otherwise it cannot exist. You see a rainbow in the sky. Close your eyes, the rainbow has disappeared – not simply for you. Because a rainbow needs three things to be there: drops of water suspended, then sunrays crossing, and then an eye looking at it. These three things are needed for a rainbow to exist. If one element is lacking, the rainbow disappears.