• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Maya

Status
Not open for further replies.
sravna said:
Panchadasi says:

"Maya is the mirror that reflects Brahman; the reflected image of Brahman is called Isvara who controls Maya. It is like the lady who carries the mirror in her purse.

The lady is Brahman, the mirror is maya and the lady's image in the mirror is Isvara. Sat Chit: Sat (Being) is Consciousness (Chit) and exercises its Will to create; therefore, it is Being, possessing and controlling maya, and becoming matter through the gunas."

Let me give my understanding of what Sankara would have meant. Whenever you are associated with maya there comes the deviation from the experience of pure sat-chit-ananda. Even saguna brahman has to have the perception of the physical world as he is a personal God.

But since saguna brahman is not affected by maya he does not see innumerable reflections but knows he is the only truth in the physical world. While jivas see other reflections also and believe in that truth. Let me put it this way. When brahman stands in front of the mirror he see only himself but when jivas stand in front of the mirror they see innumerable reflections. This is from saguna brahman's and jivas perspective.
Click to expand...

Let me give a clarification to the above. By saying that jivas see a number of reflections , I mean they do not see the oneness of reality. I understand they themselves are only reflections.

Now Brahman self reflecting causes an image of of it. As I said such a reflection is like seeing oneself or knowing oneself. Saguna brahman is nothing but brahman reflecting and one who sees only the Truth. So let me try some equations:

brahman(1) + reflection (2) = jivas and physical world(3)


(1) + (2) = saguna brahman
(2) + (3) = maya
(1) = nirguna brahman
 
Last edited:
namaste everyone.

A Tamizh commentary of panchadashI, by shrI JnAnAnanda-bhAratI svAmigaL can be downloaded from here:
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/texts/panchadashi__jnanananda_bharati.pdf

The crux of mAyA lies in explaining (the 'how'--not the inexplicable 'why'--of) its relationship with nirguNa-brahman (NB), who by definition does NOT do anything except remain in its own pristine nature as sat-chit-Ananda:

• If mAyA is the 'power of brahman', this idea personifies brahman and makes it Ishvara, which NB is not, as Absolute Reality (AR).

• Can mAyA be NB in disguise? This idea implies a show but there is no audience here except NB itself, so it would mean that NB conducts the show for its own entertainment. But NB by definition is actionless.

• Can mAyA be 'something subordinate' to NB? This personifies mAyA and pits her against NB, like Lucifer in Christianity.

• The idea that NB 'derives its knowledge' from its reflection as mAyA assumes that even as absolute knowledge (chit), NB lacks something that it should 'derive' from a source it has projected. How much do we learn of our self by ourselves from a mirror image (reflection of our physique), or from our dreams (reflection of our mind) for that matter?

• The idea of NB as 'potential energy' and mAyA as 'kinetic energy' is fine as an analogy, but PE is by definition is the "energy that is the result of relative position or structure instead of motion, as in a compressed spring". The term 'relative' here implies either a second object or a second state in time. NB being infinite, eternal and absolute, what 'relative' could be there in it to cause its PE?

My purpose with these questions is not to raise objections to the ideas; nor does it mean that I have answers for them or a better idea of NB and mAyA. But I think we should think about these issues when we try to relate NB and mAyA.
 
sravna said:
Let me give a clarification to the above. By saying that jivas see a number of reflections , I mean they do not see the oneness of reality. I understand they themselves are only reflections.

Now Brahman self reflecting causes an image of of it. As I said such a reflection is like seeing oneself or knowing oneself. Saguna brahman is nothing but brahman reflecting and one who sees only the Truth. So let me try some equations:

brahman + reflection = jivas and physical world
( 1) (2) (3)

(1) + (2) = saguna brahman
(2) + (3) = maya
(1) = nirguna brahman
Click to expand...

Sravna,

How is it possible that the equation is + and =..I am getting confused.

I feel its not additions

Its like a Trigunatmika Prism of Maya here..when Brahman goes through the Trigunatmika Prism it refracts into Saguna Brahman, Jeeva and Prakirti.

So how does 1 +2 additions come in?

Kindly clear my doubt.
 
saidevo said:
namaste everyone.

• The idea that NB 'derives its knowledge' from its reflection as mAyA assumes that even as absolute knowledge (chit), NB lacks something that it should 'derive' from a source it has projected. How much do we learn of our self by ourselves from a mirror image (reflection of our physique), or from our dreams (reflection of our mind) for that matter?
Click to expand...

Dear Shri Saidevo,

My perspective is this. Let me not use the word "derived" . We can consider the knowledge finally gained in the physical world and that of brahman as equivalent expect that the receptacle or recipient of the knowledge in the former case has a transient existence. The former is a time bound version while the latter is a timeless version. So you can say the former is projected by the latter or the former is the mechanism of the latter depending on what perspective you want to use.
 
renuka said:
Sravna,

How is it possible that the equation is + and =..I am getting confused.

I feel its not additions

Its like a Trigunatmika Prism of Maya here..when Brahman goes through the Trigunatmika Prism it refracts into Saguna Brahman, Jeeva and Prakirti.

So how does 1 +2 additions come in?

Kindly clear my doubt.
Click to expand...

Ok Renuka if that is confusing replace + and = with "and" and "is" respectively.
 
sravna said:
Ok Renuka if that is confusing replace + and = with "and" and "is" respectively.
Click to expand...


Dear Sravna,

I am sincerely asking for my doubt to be cleared.
I was asking how is it possible to have +(as in addition) & =(as in equivalent) to sum up the Brahman equation?

May be the way I wrote it was not too clear.
 
Dear Saidevo Ji,

Can you please try to get a link for Khandanakhandakhadya of Sri Harsha cos there is info there about how Harsha Misra disproved logicians about their question on the existence of God etc.
 
Somethings naturally exist at a higher level - like the river flowing from the top of a mountain.

They have P. E inherently. No one needs to carry the river up and place it there.

Brahman is the supremo in every respect. He inherently possess the P. E.

If He allows it to descend like the water falls from the mountains, He allows it to express itself physically and become K.E.

Even otherwise Brahman is higher than Maya which gives it the required P. E inherently!
 
renuka said:
Dear Sravna,

I am sincerely asking for my doubt to be cleared.
I was asking how is it possible to have +(as in addition) & =(as in equivalent) to sum up the Brahman equation?

May be the way I wrote it was not too clear.
Click to expand...

Dear Renuka,

What I meant was when brahman as you say uses reflective aspect of maya, it becomes saguna brahman. This is the equation,

brahman + reflection can be called saguna brahman. With such a reflection happen the physical world and the jivas . Or in other words saguna brahman with the reflective aspect of maya causes the physical world and the jivas. That is the equation,

brahman + reflection = jivas and the physical world.

Now maya is nothing but the reflctive aspect along with the jivas and the physical world that are created.

So you have, reflection + jivas and physical world, defining maya.

Nirguna brahman is something which stands apart from maya or it is the term "brahman" alone in the equation.
 
namaste smt.ReNukA.

So happened that only a couple days ago I came across these links:
khaNDana-khaNDAdyam
http://www.archive.org/download/khandanakhandakh01hars/khandanakhandakh01hars.pdf
http://www.archive.org/download/khandanakhandakh03hars/khandanakhandakh03hars.pdf
http://www.archive.org/download/Kha...Harsa/Khandana-Khanda-Khadya.by.Sri.Harsa.pdf

Since they are in Sanskrit, you might try to explain how HarSha disproved logicians.

renuka said:
Dear Saidevo Ji,

Can you please try to get a link for Khandanakhandakhadya of Sri Harsha cos there is info there about how Harsha Misra disproved logicians about their question on the existence of God etc.
Click to expand...
 
saidevo said:
namaste smt.ReNukA.

So happened that only a couple days ago I came across these links:
khaNDana-khaNDAdyam
http://www.archive.org/download/khandanakhandakh01hars/khandanakhandakh01hars.pdf
http://www.archive.org/download/khandanakhandakh03hars/khandanakhandakh03hars.pdf
http://www.archive.org/download/Kha...Harsa/Khandana-Khanda-Khadya.by.Sri.Harsa.pdf

Since they are in Sanskrit, you might try to explain how HarSha disproved logicians.
Click to expand...

Dear Saidevo Ji,

Thanks a lot. Must read through when I get the time.
 
Visalakshi Ramani said:
Now that the things have moved to much higher plane,

it is better that I watch, read and try to learn something new!
Click to expand...

Dear VR Ji,

Vaanam Keezhae Vandhaal Enna
Ada Bhoomi Maelae Ponaal Enna
Maayam Ellaam Maayam
Idhil Manithan Nilai Enna
Vaada Raaja Va Va...
Idhil Mudhalam Mudivenna


[video=youtube_share;hOQ00hr-jUE]http://youtu.be/hOQ00hr-jUE[/video]
 
Let me give my views on the importance of maya. IMO it would be senseless to posit brahman without the presence of maya. Let's bring in the equation again:

brahman(1) + reflection(2) = jivas and the physical world(3)

IMO (2) & (3) is maya.

Since (1) and (3) are only different versions the latter being time bound and the former being timeless, absence of one would mean the absence of the other. So without maya, brahman or reality would really be void and there would have not been anything. But we know because of our existence that is not the case, we consider brahman's identity as maya indispensable and equally important as its identity as nirguna brahman which is (1) in the above equation.
 
sravna said:
So without maya, brahman or reality would really be void and there would have not been anything.
Click to expand...

Sravna,

Why are you sounding like a Madhyamika now?

Ok this is the Vedantin view when they refuted the Madhymikas:

In Pancadasi it says that there can be NO illusion without a substratum which is not an illusion.
The existence of the Atman must be admitted.
Even the void has a witness; if not it would be impossible to say "there is a void"
 
Last edited:
sravna said:
Let me give my views on the importance of maya. IMO it would be senseless to posit brahman without the presence of maya. Let's bring in the equation again:

brahman(1) + reflection(2) = jivas and the physical world(3)

IMO (2) & (3) is maya.

Since (1) and (3) are only different versions the latter being time bound and the former being timeless, absence of one would mean the absence of the other.
Click to expand...


Dear Sravna,

With respect to your view I would still beg to differ.
Absence of one does not mean absence of the other if you are dealing with Brahman in this equation.

Cos in the absence of Jeeva & Physical world and Maya,Brahman still verily exists.
There can never be a situation where Brahman does not exist.

Ekam Eva Advaitam Brahman.
 
renuka said:
Sravna,

Why are you sounding like a Madhyamika now?

Ok this is the Vedantin view when they refuted the Madhymikas:

In Pancadasi it says that there can be NO illusion without a substratum which is not an illusion.
The existence of the Atman must be admitted.
Even the void has a witness; if not it would be impossible to say "there is a void"
Click to expand...

Renuka, That is not the argument at all. I am also saying that there cannot be a void because our existence contradicts it.
 
renuka said:
Dear Sravna,

With respect to your view I would still beg to differ.
Absence of one does not mean absence of the other if you are dealing with Brahman in this equation.

Cos in the absence of Jeeva & Physical world and Maya,Brahman still verily exists.
There can never be a situation where Brahman does not exist.

Ekam Eva Advaitam Brahman.
Click to expand...

OK Renuka, maya is also said to be timeless in advaita. How do you account for that? How can maya be not there?
 
sravna said:
Renuka, That is not the argument at all. I am also saying that there cannot be a void because our existence contradicts it.
Click to expand...

Sorry I guess that line was a bit confusing and I could not grasp what you were trying to say.
 
sravna said:
OK Renuka, maya is also said to be timeless in advaita. How do you account for that? How can maya be not there?
Click to expand...

Dear Sravna,

When the word absence if used..it does not denote total void.
Maya lies in a dormant state when not "on duty".
I have used the word "not on duty" cos for a realized soul when Ishvara,Jeeva and Prakirti has been set aside..Maya the progenitor of all 3 cannot persists.

Sravna I used to word absence of Jeeva,Physical world and Maya.
Absence can also mean not being active or in a dormant state.
A student can be absent from class but that doesnt mean he has ceased to exist.
Maya is inherently in Brahman.
Just like how a seed has the inherent ability to grow into a tree.
So the ability is Maya and its lies dormant when "not on duty"


This is going along the lines of what I pasted today morning:

When the objective world is ignored,set aside,denied or discovered to be immanent in the Divine,the jeeva is no more.
Ishvara(personalized God) is also superflous and disappears.And when the Ishvara has faded out,the Brahman alone is.
When a personalized God,jeeva and prakriti(the objective world) are non existent in the developed consciousness of man,Maya the progenitor of all three cannot persists
 
Last edited:
renuka said:
Dear Sravna,

When the word absence if used..it does not denote total void.
Maya lies in a dormant state when not "on duty".
I have used the word "not on duty" cos for a realized soul when Ishvara,Jeeva and Prakirti has been set aside..Maya the progenitor of all 3 cannot persists.

Sravna I used to word absence of Jeeva,Physical world and Maya.
Absence can also mean not being active or in a dormant state.
A student can be absent from class but that doesnt mean he has ceased to exist.
Maya is inherently in Brahman.
Just like how a seed has the inherent ability to grow into a tree.
So the ability is Maya and its lies dormant when "not on duty"


This is going along the lines of what I pasted today morning:

When the objective world is ignored,set aside,denied or discovered to be immanent in the Divine,the jeeva is no more.
Ishvara(personalized God) is also superflous and disappears.And when the Ishvara has faded out,the Brahman alone is.
When a personalized God,jeeva and prakriti(the objective world) are non existent in the developed consciousness of man,Maya the progenitor of all three cannot persists
Click to expand...

Yes Renuka, Maya does not exist in a realized soul but it is always at work on a larger scale because there is an endless cycle of creation and dissolution of universes.

One more point with an illustration. Let's say brahman wears a magical mask and stands in front of a magical mirror. Assume when you wear the mask and stand in front of the mirror you have what is called the veiling effect and the projecting effect. The projecting effect places a masked reality and the veiling effect does not let you see through that masked reality.

So because of the projecting effect of the magical mirror multiple images are created. But brahman is not affected by the veiling effect and so he can see through the masked reality. So the magical mask does not influence barhman. The multiple images on the other side being masked are affected by the veiling effect. So when they see the mirror in front of them , or in other words when they perceive the reality, they do not see oneness.

In the equation,

brahman (1) + reflection (2) = jivas and physical reality (3)

The left hand side is like the object with mask in front of the mirror
The Right hand side of the equation are like images with masks,

Now brahman itself has to be considered from two perspectives. One is when you are talking about the physical world. In that case brahman is nothing but maya. This is because reflection is a power and power is something that produces an effect. It produces the effect of the jivas and the physical world. And maya is something that separates or produces effect.

So in the left hand side of the equation, brahman with its reflective power acts as maya.

When you talk from the spiritual perspective, brahman's consciousness is what is relevant. It sees everything as a whole experience and with all causes and all effects in unison. The experience is sat-chit-ananda which is the experience of nirguna brahman.

In the equation all the terms except brahman disappear. In this case thus brahman is nirguna brahman.

Brahman as maya and as nirguna brahman are two different perspectives which are necessitated by the existence of time constrained and timeless realities respectively.
 
Last edited:
Shri Sravna,

Having exchanged our views among couple of members here, let us consider that defining MAYA may be a tough task.

But, can we ponder on one singe question - Is MAYA a deliberate energy/force "created" by Brahman to server the very purpose of his creation OR MAYA just happen to exist on her own due to the existence of this physical world of Brahman?
 
Last edited:
Dear Ravi and others,

I have edited post # 46 and added more material. Kindly take a look.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top