Author Topic: Jed Rant: About Maya  (Read 2426 times)

alyosha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Jed Rant: About Maya
« on: August 24, 2017, 11:04:24 am »
According to Shankara's Advaita, maya is neither real nor unreal:      https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiMwIfvmPDVAhXK2SYKHYOJAcEQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Freligioperennis.org%2Fdocuments%2FOldmeadow%2Fsankara.pdf&usg=AFQjCNElQEQiyv4hwMnhmMSIPC0PSSsO-w

There are those who worship Her:   http://www.crystalwind.ca/mystical-magical/pantheons-and-myths/hindu/maya-illusion

Philosophically speaking, maya was necessary (as a concept) to reconcile the singular reality of Brahman (eternal & infinte) with the duality of the world (ephemeral & finite) in the non-dual philosophy of Advaita.

"To logic maya is a puzzle. Wonder is its
garment; inscrutable is its nature"      - Mahadevan



And at the risk of being didactic (but since you brought up Advaita):

From the above link:

"Maya is a power or potency of Brahman, coeval with Brahman, completely dependent
on and inseparable from Brahman, neither independent nor real in itself. It is not different
from Brahman on pain of contradicting Scriptural declarations of non-difference, but it is
also not non-different from Brahman as there cannot be identity between the Real and the
unreal. Nor can maya be both different and non-different as such contradictors cannot
reside in one and the same thing. The relationship between maya and Brahman is thus
tadatmya, neither identity nor difference nor both. A similar dialectic exposes maya's
status considered in terms of the Real. Maya is not real because it has no existence apart
from Brahman, because it disappears at the dawn of knowledge, because it does not
constitute a limit on Brahman. However, it is not altogether unreal because it does project
the world of appearances. It is not both real and unreal because of contradiction.

Maya is not possessed of parts. If it were partite it would have a beginning and
consequently the Lord and the jivas which are reflections thereof would have a beginning.
Furthermore, maya with a beginning would necessitate another maya as its cause and there
would thus be a contingence of infinite regress. However, maya cannot be partless because
of the contingency of its not being the primal cause. It is the cause only of partite
phenomena, and cannot be both partite and impartite because of contradiction.

Maya, has a phenomenal and relative character and is an appearance only (vivarta). It
is of the nature of superimposition (adhyasa) and is removable by right knowledge. Its
locus is Brahman but Brahman is in no way affected by maya. Maya is beginningless
(anadi), for time arises only within it; it is unthinkable (acintya), for all thought is subject
to it; it is indescribable (anirvacaniya), for all language results from it. Because its
nature is outside the determination of normal human categories it is indeterminable
(anirvaniya) and indefinable. Maya, indeed, is most strange!"
« Last Edit: August 24, 2017, 11:08:52 am by alyosha »