[Advaita-l] mAya and avidyA are not synonyms

Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Thu Dec 8 05:24:45 CST 2016

praNAms Sri Kripa shankara prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Just a few points for your consideration :

Maya simply means that which is not. mAyAmayamidam akhilam hitva - says Shankara. In the Gita and elsewhere, what is spoken of is Yoga-maya. Here the emphasis is on yoga and not just maya.

>  gowdapAda too in kArikA says that which is not there is called mAya :-) And Lord says mama mAyA durityayA, saMbhavAmi Atma mAyayA and claims that mAya belongs to him and he is controlling it and though which he looks as it he has birth, as if he has body etc.  Yes, mAyA is not there independently apart from brahman, its svarUpa is brahmAnanya the Shakti is svabhAva of brahman ( see for example Itareya bhAshya introduction and mama svarUpa bhUta madeeya mAyA).  When shankara clarifies Shakti ShaktimatOH ananyatvAt, it is quite obvious that mAya does not have any independent existence apart from brahman.  mAya as such is not there what exists is brahman only in its full glory. And another name for this mAya is 'mUla prakruti' and sometimes it is called akshara also..And this 'mUlaprakruti' is nothing but brahman is the declaration of bhAshyakAra : yA mUlaprakrutiH abhhyupagamyate tadeva cha nO brahma.  It is because of this reason the author of bhaja gOvindaM in continuation says : brahmhapadaM tvaM praviSa viditva.  sarvaM khalvidaM brahma and shankara clarifies this by saying : sata eva dvaita bhedena anyathAgruhyamANatvAt na asatvaM kasyachit kvachit iti brUmaH.  

Creation theory gets negated in the adhyaropa apavada scheme. Gaudapada says - adav ante cha yannasti vartamanepi tat tathA. 

>  Yes, no creation, no dissolution, no mukti, no sAdhaka in pAramArthika in pAramArtha what is there is brahma and only brahman nothing else...ekamevAdviteeyaM neha nAnAsti kiMchana.  

You said brahman creates by the help of Shakti. In that case Brahman is a karta and not nishkriya. Brahman is involved in the creation using the instrument called shakti like potter making pots using a cart-wheel. 

>  this Shakti is ananya from Shakta, kindly see above.  He is not writing the creation theory using a pen different from him, it is inherent (svabhAva) in him.  If we think mAya is brahman's karaNa which he is holding in his hand as a separate tool for creation then that is avidyA kalpita.  Shakti ShaktimatOH ananyatvAt.

‎Vagarthaviva sampriktau vagartha pratipattaye- just as word and it's meaning, Parvati and Parameshvara are non-different. That means we cannot relieve Brahman from the responsibility of creation by passing it over to shakti. Because both are non different. That is why Gaudapada clearly rejects all the tattvas(in the pAramArthika) .

>  Yes, you are right this situation does not arise for those who sees no different between Shakti and shaktimAn.  If this Shakti is a separate force, which brahman calls and attain it for the purpose of creation then the above objection stands.  But that is not the case in ananyatvaM.  

Similarly an ajnani sees difference everywhere but a jnAni knows the truth - Brahma satya jagan mithyA jivo brahmaiva na paraha. 

>  After realization, jnAni would not have any 'mithyA' darshana OTOH he would have only satya darshana or samyak darshana or Atmaikatva darshana.  In that bhUma drushti sarvaM brahma mayaM.  Left, right, top, bottom everything brahman only there exists nothing apart from THAT.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list