Maya is maya

Home

Office Info

Health and Fitness

Adventures

Philosophy

Links

Maya is 'Maya'

by Peter Holleran

When the old worn-out phrases about Brahman and maya are parrotted from Sankara it is better to answer simply, So what! For still things remain the same as before, all the denunciation of the world has been merely maya and does not change its very real presence and actuality to us. The same applies to other persons and individuals. Is it not better to say that the ego, with its body, emotion, and intellect, is part of the persons experience than to deny it altogether?

"Instead of merely repeating certain sentences which you have read or been taught, think them over for yourself. If you were really the real could you become illusion? If you were the True, how could you succeed in deceiving yourself so far as to become the false? If ignorance , error, and illusion can happen to the One Mind, then they are just as powerful as It."

This world is rooted in the divine substance and is consequently not an empty illusion but an indirect manifestation of divine reality...The world is neither a trap nor an illusion, neither a degradation of the divine essence nor an indication of the divine absence.

He must not let the Ashtavakra Samhita be misunderstood. It does not preach mystic idleness and indifference. The world is there for both sage and student, and both must work and serve--the difference being mental only. Illusionism is not the doctrine except as an intermediate stage towards truth, which is higher. One must participate in God's work by assisting evolution and redeeming the world, not squat idly in peace alone. - Paul Brunton (PB) (1)

Nothing hides consciousness." - Sri Atmananda Krishna Menon (2)

"To be afraid of the world is the greatest bondage of all." (3) - Bengali Baba, guru of Swami Rama

We will now embark on an investigate the concept of Maya or illusion, which is subject to a similar treatment as Emptiness was in the preceding article, in the sense that upon examination it is found itself to be Maya or illusion itself. But, of course, there is much more to say than that. As in the previous article, we will alternately write in a scholarly, practical, risk-taking, humorous, provocative if not blasphemous manner! It cannot be otherwise, because the existant views must be introduced and clarified, even as they have often failed - and still fail - to deliver as promised. One can say that they have proven the test of time, but that now time has changed. Yet even that is not quite correct. For all through the centuries they have been debated, argued, fought and - yes, even in the East - killed over (references available on request). So, let us begin at the beginning. As is the case with many of our articles, we try to introduce much traditional material from many sources and points of view, as a capsule education on the topic, for ourself as well as the reader, while also trying to simplify traditional matters for a modern understanding wherever possible. If we fail in this task it is not for want of trying. As this is a comprehensive consideration, similar to "Emptiness Is Empty", the text is broken up with frequent sub-headings for ease of reading. There is no central argument built up gradually paragraph by paragraph, but rather topical sections that the reader is advised to read contemplatively, and to savor intuitively one at a time, as he feels so moved. If a particular section proves too dense he may simply go on to the next, without, in most cases, missing out on the essential themes of the whole.

In addition, we will be attempting to following the cautionary admonition of PB in regards to writing:

"Write what can be useful to others, what will simplify the teaching for them, and what will lead them to seek the source within their own being."

"When he writes at his best, what he writes may be on a higher level than himself." ! (4)

With these preliminary remarks out of the way, we shall begin.

Some traditional and non-traditional thoughts on Maya

PB writes of the traditional two-fold process (used by Sankara and Vedanta as well as the Buddhists) of negation-assertion in coming to a non-dual view:

Chandrakirti, a Mahayana Buddhist guru, said, "We teach the illusion of existence only as antidote to the obstinate belief of common mankind in the existence of this world"...The real truth is that both world and self exists in consciousness, that they are nothing else than Consciousness itself....In the higher philosophy the existence of the world is not denied...It is no less real than humanity. Only it must be understood that is is a manifestation of Mind, not an illusion. This being the One Reality, it follows that the world cannot be unreal...The Manifest is Mind; and so too is the Void. - Tilopa, The View of Mahamudra. (5)

He must not let the Ashtavakra Samhita be misunderstood. It does not preach mystic idleness and indifference. The world is there for both sage and student, and both must work and serve - the difference being mental only. Illusionism is not the doctrine except as an intermediate stage towards truth, which is higher. One must participate in Gods work by assisting evolution and redeeming the world, not squat idly in peace alone.

Of what use or help is it to tell the enquiring Westerner, The Hindu sage does not see the world; he sees only Brahman? If he does not see the world, then he does not see food in front of him, nor even his own body - both being parts of the physical world. Such statements merely create confusion for others. The Greek philosopher saw the world but understood it for what it really was. He did not need to deny its existence...It will be more correct to translate the term Maya not by unreal but by not what we think it to be. We must not deny the existence of the world - that would be lunacy - but we must try to get a correct understanding of its hidden nature. (6)

Of course, he does admit this is easier said than done:

It is all like a gigantic dream, with every human inserting his own private dream inside the public one. A double spell has to be broken before reality can be glimpsed - the spell which the world lays upon us and that which self lays upon us. The man who has completely awakened from this spell is the man who has gained complete insight. This faculty is nothing other than such full wakefulness. It is immensely difficult to attain, which is why so few of the dreamers ever wake up at all and why so many will not even listen to the revelations of the awakened ones. However, Nature teaches us here as elsewhere not to let patience break down. There is plenty of time in her bag. Life is an evolutionary process. Men will begin to stir in their sleep erratically but increasingly. (7)

The so-called Void, as profound of an experience it is in meditation, with all the fear and dread the ego may (or may not) face at its threshold, has, says PB, a counterpart in daily life, and that is detachment or non-identification. Thus, one can come to reality whether in and out of trance. The contention of jnanis or sages is that enlightenment itself is not the direct fruit of concentration, samadhi or meditative absorption alone (although that may be indeed be preparation), but rather is a discriminative knowledge or insight arising when the Self and Maya (illusion), or Self and World, are finally seen as non-separate, in the midst of any and all conditions and states. If the effort is only to kill the mind, they will say, how can such discrimination arise?

Papaji often said, nothing ever happened. Reminds me of a famous story about Krishna explaining the power of illusion that goes like this:

"The Sage Narada once asked Sri Krishna to describe maya. Sri Krishna said, 'Very well, but first you must go and bring me a little water to drink.' Narada went to a nearby village to get the water, and there he met a young woman to whom he was instantly attracted. They were married, had several children, and were very happy. Then came a terrible flood and all the houses were washed away. Narada was struggling in the water to hold on to his wife and children, but they were pulled away from his arms one after another. He was trying to stay afloat himself when he heard Sri Krishna's voice calling, 'Oh, Narada - where is my water?' Then Narada understood what maya is." (8)

Thus, illusion, whatever it is, is powerful, even for great sages of the past. Questions to raise at the outset, then, are the following: is our 'entanglement' in 'illusion' entirely based on just an innocent misunderstanding, as Adyashanti once remarked, or is it deeper than that, and, further, is there a divine purpose behind it, and if so, what is it, and can it even be put into words? These issues will be addressed as we proceed.

Maya and traditional Yogic-Vedantic relationship with the koshas; some additional associations

According to Swami Ranganathanda, in The Message of Vivekachudamani, the classic Vedantic text attributed to Sri Sankara, the subtle body is said to be the true man of Vedanta. (This is to be contrasted with the true Self of Vedanta, the Atman, one's eternal identity). The subtle body or inner organ (antahkarana, manas-ahamkara-buddhi, or sometimes higher manas-vijnanamaya-anandamaya koshas) is what is often considered the reincarnating soul in western thought. It is in Vedanta a beginningless superimposition on the true Soul (Atman) brought on by its own ignorance, or the power of Maya, Nescience, the Undifferentiated, the mysterious power of the Lord Isvara or Saguna Brahman composed of the three gunas: tamas, rajas, and sattva, however you want to look at it. Maya has both a veiling and a projecting power. The latter is activated by rajas and the former by tamas. Further, the projecting power is only manifested once the veiling power is active. Cultivation of sattvic buddhi in which the Atman can be clearly reflected is the Vedantic way to rid oneself of this primal ignorance. (9)

A word of clarification. While in some traditions within yoga-vedanta the subtle body generally means the astral-mental bodies, or pranamaya-manamaya koshas, and the causal the vijnanamaya-anandamaya koshas, in some schools the four internal instruments making up the antahkarana: Mind, Intellect (Buddhi), Memory (Chitta) and Ego (Ahankara) are sometimes lumped together as the subtle body. Then the causal body (considered a body by the definition of body as One that is prone to destruction) is essentially avidya or maya itself. We are not what we believe ourselves to be as a consequence of our natural, unquestioning acceptance of the gross and subtle bodies; i.e. we do not know our own self; this is our Avidya. It is the jivas false knowledge or Mithya Jnana. This allows the entry of attachment and aversion (raga-dvesha) into our lives. It is not karma per se that is harmful, it is action done because of raga-dvesha that is the source of our misery. Karmas performed under the influence of raga-dvesha lead to their fruits getting coded inside the subtle body. Not all these fruits can be reaped within the present birth. Therefore we have to take birth again. Hence the root cause of the continuous cycle of birth and death is our Avidya, or ignorance of our true self. Since this Avidya is susceptible to destruction through knowledge (Jnana), hence it too is a sharira (body). Consequently, ignorance too is referred to as a body in the scriptures (Shri Shankaracharyas commentary on the Isha Upanishad, Mantra 8). Avidya is the causal body since it is the cause of our falling continuously into the cycle of birth and death.

In this classification of koshas the anandamaya kosha or the 'bliss sheath', active in sleep, may be looked upon as Maya also. And so it was written in the Atmaram by Sri Samartha Ramandas, that "the bliss attainment of the yogi is Maya". It is a cover over the pure Soul, although so close that it has been considered almost an integral part of the (impartible) Soul.

Even though we think of Avidya (the causal body) as situated within us, and thus reap the fruits done through raga-dvesha, in actual terms the Avidya does not reside in us (Shri Shankaracharyas commentary on Katha Upanishad 2.2.11). This Avidya is not natural to the soul because the soul is ever pure and devoid of any Avidya-like contamination. Actually, Avidya or the causal body is not actually the presence of something (bhava rupa), rather, it is the absence of something (abhava rupa), namely knowledge or Vidya. Still, it said to have power until it is seen through.

[All of this must be recognized as seen from the relative, or vyavaharika, point of view. From the absolute, or ) and loses his name and personal identity to such a degree that there remains in him no trace of his I-ness and his own essence, thus losing himself completely, then it is possible that he gains an insight into the Reality through the Reality in so far as he is the Reality."

"The 'knower'