Concept of
"Maya"
Vedantic and Shaivistic
points of view
by Prof. K. N. Dhar
At
the very outset, it may be said without any fear
of contradiction, that in philosophy unalloyed
originality is a misnomer. It is actually the sum
total of the thinking on a particular subject,
collated, coordinated and brought uptodate by the
stalwarts in this field. It would, therefore, be
in the fitness of things to give a bird's eye-view
of the philosophic content supposed to emanate
from the word 'Maya', as discussed in the various
schools of philosopy in India, which has rightly
been taken as the raw material on which the
Vedantins and Kashmiri shaivites built their lofty
edifices later on.
In the earlier Vedas-the
first book of Humanity-'Maya' has been used in the
sense of supernatural or extraordinary prowess
attributed to the pantheon of gods. In more
ancient Vedic hymns it is praised as 'world
sustaining power'. But the later Vedic literature
comprising the upanishadic lore, it began to
convey the sense of illusion, though in subdued
tones. So, this philosophic content relating to
this word, had already been spelt out in the time
of upanishadas. The later philosophic treatises in
the classical age of Sanskrit must have taken a
cue from the meaning attached to this word in the
upanishadas and have remarkably kept its
intonation in tact. The succeeding philosophies
tried to provide the why and what of this kind of
import projecting from this word.
The logical Realism (Nyaya)
of Gautama a virtual reaction against Buddhist
scepticism has no concern for this word 'Maya',
but substitutes it with the appellations Doubt (Sanshaya),
fallacy (Hetuvabhasa) and Error (Mithya Jnana). To
speak precisely, doubt is wavering knowledge,
Fallacy is inconclusive knowledge and Error is
defective knowledge. All these three attributed of
knowledge definitely provide the base on which the
superstructure of 'Maya' was installed later on.
Atomistic pluralism (Vaisheshika)
of Kanada propounds the theory of (Abhava) with
respect to Maya. It is that very attitude of Neti
Neti (negation), on the contours of which
vedantins later on elaborated their theory of
Maya. This negation (Abbava) is an antithesis of
affirmation (Bhava), absence of distinction
between the two - The Existent and the
non-existent and the result is Error (Moha),
blurred perception.
The originator of Sankhya
system of philosophy Kapila substitutes Maya with
the avidya (ignorance) aspect of intellect (Buddhi).
It has been explained as non-distinction of 'Purusha'
from Buddhi called 'Akhyati' (non-apprehension).
To quote:-
"Just as a danceuss
retires after displaying her dance to the
audience; in the same way, Prakriti (gross matter)
manifests herself to the purusha (passive spirit)
retiring subsequently." This non-
apprehension of 'Sankhya' is actually the
precursor of Maya.
Patanjali in his
yoga-sutras asserts "when the persons
possessing a body mistake by their erring
intellect, this very body for the soul (Atman),
this kind of bondage is wrought by ignorance (Avidya);
its annihilation is emancipation (Moksa)."
While Sankhya calls it non-apprehension, yoga
terms it as mis-appreheosion (Anyatha- khyati),
which can be substantiated by misapprehending
one-the rope from the other-the snake, due to the
machinations of ignorance (Avidya).
The ardent advocate or
Mimamsa Philosophy Jaimani contends that it is not
non-distinction alone which engenders
misapprehension, it is also attended with false
identification (Akhyati), thereby erroneously
inferring non-distinction between the broken piece
of a conch-shell and silver. In this context, this
school of philosophy holds that it is
mal-observation coupled with faulty rememberance
giving birth to this invalid cognition. It further
argues that misapprehension is not a product of
wrong knowledge, but a mere negative factor of
non-perception due to weakness of mind. When the
valid cognition dawns, it restores the strength of
mind and misapprehensions do not recur. This is
the exact purport of Akhyati theory of these
investigating rationalists (Mimamsakas).
Interestingly enough, Badarayana composed his
Brahma-sutras getting inspiration from one of the
branches of this system of philosophy called
posterior mimamsa (uttara Mimamsa), commonly known
as vedanta-sutras also.
It will be intriguing to
note that none of the philosophic systems
enumerated above have used the word 'Mayas as
such, even though they have lucidly narrated its
essence and antecedents. They have refrained from
using the exact appellation 'Maya', but have
substituted it by 'sanshaya' (Doubt), 'Mithya
Jnana' (Error), 'Abbava' (Negation), 'Avidya'
(Ignorance) and 'Akhyati' (Non-discrimination),
representing all those constituents of 'Maya'
discussed thread-bare by the vedantins and shaivas
alike subsequently.
Gauda Pada while
commenting on the Vedanta or Brahma-sutras of
Badarayana, has used this word 'Maya' for the
first time in the classical period of Sanskrit
literature.
He has vehemently laid
down that Maya is unreal because it advocates
duality as between the Jiva (soul) and the Brahma
(Absolute Truth). This is like a dream seamingly
looking real but inherently unreal. Just as in
darkness the rope is imagined to be a snake, in
the same way, the self is also imagined by its own
illusion as having many forms. Actually in that
state of existence there is no production (utpati)
or no annihilation (Nirodha). To sum up, the
imagination being unreal, finds itself realized in
the non-existent existents. The objects are
neither different nor non-different (Na Naredam...
na prathak, naprathak); the sages have perceived
it as devoid of imagination and cessation of all
false appearance (Nirvikapla prapanchopashamah).
The absolute truth (sat) is immortal, beyond the
pale of birth and death, therefore it can not
admit of any change by its own nature (svabhava),
it is therefore, indivisible. All objects as they
appear to us are likened to a magical or illusory
elephant (Maya hasti), as it exists only or
appears to us existing only with relation to
experience. Hence, it is the experience which
bestows on it the characteristics of birth, death
etc. To quote: "By the nature of a thing is
understood that which is its very condition, that
which is inborn, that which is not accidental or
that which does not cease to be itself."
Gaudapada treats life as a waking dream, and
contends that world exists only in the mind of
Man. "The world of duality is mere Maya, the
Real being the non dual" (Mayamatramidam
Dvaitam, Adavaitam Paramarathatah ). Just as
sunlight falling on the finger appears straight
when finger is straight and crooked when it is
crooked, but in reality it is neither the one nor
the other. It is as space in vessels seems to move
when these are moved but in realty remain
motionless; just as the sun does not quiver when
its reflection quivers in the water, so the
non-dual Atman is one and changeless (Avikari) in
essence, but seems diverse through the association
with objects (Visaya)- a trick manipulated by
Maya; therefore, Maya according to Gaudapada is
the faulty representation of transcendental
consciousness into cosmic experience. When the
unifying balance between the consciousness
Absolute in personified Atman and the experience
condensed as in Jiva is disturbed, it is said to
be the sorcery of Maya. The Brahma and Jiva are
not parallel entities, forms and names, or
transforms itself into the world; this kind of
they are congruent. The jagat or samsara - world
of objects is transitory, it comes and goes, so
the pleasure and pain. It is actually non-existent
(Mithya), the ever-existent (Satyam)is only
Brahma. When mental experiences appear as real,
Maya is thought to have unleashed its jugglery.
However, it was left to
Adi Shankaracharya to condense and re-interpret
the content given in Brahma Sutras and Gauda Pada
Karika and furnish a firm footing on which the
Vedantic philosophy could survive triumphantly
unaffected by other schools of Indian thought.
Even though a host of commentaries is available on
the Vedanta-Sutra, yet the 'Shankara Bhashya' is
the tallest of them all. Hence, it should not seem
surprising that vedanta and Shankaracharya have
become synonymous. His is the last word on this
branch of Indian philosophy.
As regards Maya Shankar's
premise is that it is an antithesis of Brahma
because of being inextricably connected with the
world (Jagat). Brahma is real (Satyam) while world
is transitory or unreal (Mithya). It is definitely
part and parcel of Brahma-the very basis of
creation. As nothing can be created out of a
vacuum, in the same way Brahma being the only
eternal entity, the world does emerge out of it
only. At this stage Ignorance (Avidya) intervenes
to confuse the human mind and intellect by
mistaking the Finite form of Brahma with its
Infinite form. Therefore, ignorance is the
progenitor of Maya (Illusion), unreal seeming as
real. "Since Maya is deceptive in character,
it is called 'Avidya' or false knowledge, it is
not mere absence of apprehension but positive
error." Toys and pots made of clay, though
bearing different names and shapes from each
other, are nothing but clay; similarly this 'Maya'
through 'Avidya' gives rise to plurality without
scanning the inherent unity. When Brahma projects
itself into myriad forms and names, or transforms
itself into the world; this kind of activity
inherently of Brahma is called Ishwara with
relation to the world and the power to procreate
is alluded to as Prakriti. (Ishwarsya MayaShaktih
Prakriti). Therefore Maya is the energy of Ishwara,
His inherent force by which He transforms the
potential into the actual world." It has no
separate identity, it is in Ishwara as heat in
fire. Maya through the machinations of false
knowledge (Avidya) or erroneous perception (Mithya
Jnana) exhibits its modus operandi (Vyapara) in
two ways of concealment (Avarna) and
misrepresentation (Viksepa). It hides the truth
and at the same time mis-represents it. To
conclude, it would be pertinent to quote from
Shankara direct :-
"As the magician in
not affected by the illusion (Maya) he has himself
created, because it is without reality (Avastu),
so also Paramatman is not affected by the illusion
of a dream because the soul is not touched by
sleep or waking." The ever- erring factor
which disturbs the mental and psychic equilibrium
between the creator and his creation is Maya. Such
mental aberrations have relation to time and space
and in their context unity is regarded as
plurality, heterogeneity as homogeneity. This is in
brief the content of Maya as enunciated by
Shankara.
Monistic Shaivism of
Kashmir has the 'Shiva-Sutra' of Acharya Vasugupta
as its sheet-anchor. This shaivite scholar has
defined Maya as:
'Kaladinama Tattvanam
aviveko Maya.'
Non-discrimination of the
limited elements of authorship (kala) etc is Maya.
Non-discrimination (Aviveka)
has been explained by its commentator KshemaRaja
as follows: "Paramartha Svarupasya Aprathana
Svabhavah." The nature of non-projection of
the highest form of Truth.
This would clearly denote
that the stage of non-projecting or non-extending
of the supreme spirit is 'Maya'. In other words,
it would connote the inability of the supreme
consciousness (Samvit) to transfer its
consciousness to the objects around. This kind of
non-perception and subsequent non-identification
between the self (Atman) and the objects (Padartha)
will precisely convey the purport of Maya in
shaivistic thought: shaivism has treated maya as
shakti (Energy), even the primeval Energy or
Nature (Mula Prakriti). It is identical with the
immanent form of Shiva; His transcendental form is
unaffected by it.
Actually Maya is revealed
in the Pashu (animal) stage of the Atman fettered
by the impurities of action and perception, called
the impurities of Maya (Mayiya Mallah). On the
path of self-realization (Chaitanyam), it is to be
contended with at the initial stage when the Jiva
is bound by impurities (Pasha Badha) and when be
is dispossessed of these fetters (Pashamukto), he
becomes Shiva. So, the Maya is an ephemeral mental aberration between Jiva and Shiva, a stage
between the Pasha-baddho (Animal) and Pasha-Muktoh
(Subliminal) mental states, fleeting of course. It
is in flux and flow as long as Jiva is possessed
by non-discrimination (Aviveka); once this veil is
shattered, it takes to heels. It can no longer
seduce Jiva into wrong thinking even though being
a seductress (Vimohini). Hence, it is devoid of
permanency. It is actually a passing phase at
which uniform essence of creation is presented in
multiform, one seeming many. To speak briefly,
when one primoridal force is seen in multiplicity
through faulty mental projection, it is said to be
the working of Maya according to Shaivas; but at
the same time its influence is far from being
permanent, it is transitory and persists only till
the time the 'Sadhaka' or the realizer is at a
distance, or even at a discount from
self-realization. It is more or less the immanent
(Vishvarnaya) form of Transcendental Shiva (Vishvoteerna),
and inalienable ingredient of His self-conscious
spirit. This very approach of shaivas marks their
fundamental difference with the vedantists. The
shaivas take Maya as an inevitable aspect of Shiva
when releasing His shakti (Energy) from His
fountain-head. Even though He is universe
incarnate (Vishvarupa), yet He feels the urgency
of creating a universe, so that His shakti
(Energy) can have full play. This Maya is called a
veritable screen which conceals the real form of
things (Tirodhanankari) deluding us into believing
the multiform of universe, which in essence is
uniform. The moment, the realizer through his
perceptive cognition (jnana), takes the blue (neela)
and the yellow (peela) as one, and only one
entity, the Maya stops her machinations. Therefore
shaivas treat Maya as not as unreal but momentary.
As against it, the vedantists proclaim that Maya
is unreal (Ayathartha), coinciding squarely with
their thesis that universe is unreal (Jagat Mithya).
Shaiva scholars are at pains to argue that this
whole creation is a reflection (Abhasa) of the
Super-self which is real, omnipotent and
self-dependent (Svatantra): therefore, the
relation between the world of appearance (
Vishvamaya ) and that of Transcendence (Vishvoteerna)
is that of the reflected object and the reflector.
If the reflector is real, how can an object, its
reflection, be unreal; since the reflected object
has no separate entity from its reflector. Hence
Maya has to fulfill her role in transmuting
transcendence into immanence. It is thus a
veritable hide and seek between the primoridal and
subliminal aspects of the same force which is
Shiva. Vedantins taking Maya as a perennial
deluding force, treat this world as unreal,
illusory, but shaivas do not subscribe to this
view. As argued earlier, they take this world as
real-an image of superconsciousness (Chaitaynam)
which to all intents and purposes is
self-dependence (Svatantrva) incarnate. Hence
shaivas invoke Maya as the progenitor of the world
of objects as a whole (Sakala Janani), or as
Casual Matrix (Amba). The attitude of shaivas
towards the concept of Maya is positive,
affirmative in the sense that as long as the
equation between shiva and shakti is disturbed, it
has to be there. As against this, the vedantins
treat Maya as negation of vidya (Avidya). The
inherent ignorance of jiva makes it also a
permanent affair with him; As long as 'Jiva' is a
part of deluding universe, be cannot get rid of
it, he can not be emancipated. Shaivas contend
that a realizer can attain emancipation while
living (Jivanmuktavastha) in this world, that is
when his coalition (Jnana) is complete and does
not waver in seeming diversity around him, he can
attain bliss of unity, being in perfect health,
mentally as well as physically. The line of
thinking adopted by vedantins is that life being
false needs to be abjured, while shaivas treat
enjoying life (Bhoga) as a preamble to meaningful
renunciation (Yoga). In this context Abbinavagupta
has asserted emphatically that this world is
essentially Truth. Therefore, in vedantic school
of philosophy we come across with a galaxy of
ascetics having renounced all earthly concerns (Sanyasins),
but in shaivism we are confronted with spiritual
guides (Acharyas) who have owned life and also
have risen above it; with them matter is as
important as the spirit. These are rather
complementary to each other; hence they are averse
to caste taboos and kitchen puritanism. Their
approach is, to speak in nutshell, psychic and not
intellectual like those of the vedantins. They had
their eyes wide-awake and could even anticipate
the demands, the vagaries of mind would make on
human intellect later. They provided the panacea
in advance in terms of their emancipated and more
healthy outlook, so that human mind does not get
derailed into nihilism in future. In the context
of changing time and consequent outlook, shaivas
do possess an edge over all other Indian schools
of philosophy; Maya, with them is therefore a
fleeting psychic experience, as long as
'Self-Dependence' ( svatantrya ) is at an arm's
length. As soon as this kind of diversity ( Bheda
) is dismantled by the awakening of spirit (Chaitanya),
such enveloping clouds, prone to error, meet away
through the effulgence of spirit; The realizer
does attain shivahood being dispossessed of such
obdurating shackles as the Maya is called. At this
pinnacle of spiritual bliss (Paramananda), the
confusion between duality (Bheda) and Non-Duality
(Abheda), manifested (Kula) or unmanifested (Akula),
ceases permanently.
Vedanta preaches
equipoise and tranquility of mind labelling it as
Bliss (Ananda). This is mental bliss related to
thinking (Bhauda) which is limited in essence.
Hence, they have indulged in hair splitting
argumentation. Their approach is, therefore,
intellectual.
Distance between the
intellect and the spirit does also mark the
frontiers between the vedanta and shaivism.
Vedantists lay emphasis on mental Ascendancy,
while shaivas advocate vehemently spiritual
Transcendence. The conception of Maya as
illustrated by these two schools of Indian
philosophy hinges obviously on their respective
approaches.
Shaivism is a philosophy
is more realistic and universal than the Vedanta,
in is much as, it has made a happy amalgam of the
prevailing Shakta and Tantric beliefs in vogue in
Kashmir then; whereas vedanta is idealistic in
approach and self-contained in content, thereby
meant for only those who are intellectually more
advanced-the elite-so to say. Common folk with
common-place intellect have been by-passed, since
they can not comprehend the exact essence of the
brain-racking intellectual gymnastics indulged in
by the towering giants of vedanta philosophy.
Hence the conception of Maya as outlined by the
vedantists is above the average quotient of
intelligence possessed by an ordinary man.
Shaivism, on the other band, has given a straight
and simple definition of Maya, in consonance with
the average intelligence obtaining in an ordinary
mortal. It has abstained scrupulously from jig-saw
approach of the vedantists. To conclude, with
Shaivas, Maya is a psychic disorder, a passing
phase, while with the vedantins it is a mental
aberration entwining the human mind and intellect
permanently; they treat this world being
entrenched in the mire of Maya as a waking dream.
The shaivas look at it as
a seductress, a momentary disequilibrium between
self and self-consciousness." Therefore,
Abhinavagupta has most graphically unfolded the
import contained in Maya in this homely idiom:
"Maya is the unmixed
part of that transcendental self which engenders
the shade of distinction ( Bhedavabhasa ) in His
Self-Dependent power (Svatantrya Shakhti), which
does not stand in need of any aids."
In conclusion, it may
most fairly be emphasized that Indian outlook
believes in assimilation rather than in
segregation. It has made a heart-pleasing
compromise with all that is good and edifying so
the poet is not far from wrong when he asserts:
"Thou art Brahma-The
Creator, Vishnu-The Preserver and Thou art
Matter-the embodied soul, Ego-consciousness, the
Moon, the Sun, Nature of things, the Lord of
Jainas-Mahavira, the Illumined Sage-Buddha, Sky,
Air also Shiva and Shakti. By these different
names, 0 Goddess ! Thou art heard of and called by
the righteous."
Even though vedantins and
shaivas are at variance with regard to the
conception of Maya, yet their destination is
same-ennobling human intellect and awakening human
spirit. This is exactly the rhythmic jingle of the
heart-beats of Indian mind from times immemorial.
|
Download Book
