Passing away of Paul Cohen leads me on to thoughts on the 'anirvachaniya' of mAyA

[Guest guest]

Namaste all.

 

A few days ago Prof. Paul Cohen, Fields Medalist in Mathematics in 1966,

passed away at the age of 74. He was the one who finally proved the

undecidability of the Continuum Hypothesis (CH) and the Axiom of Choice (AC)

in the context of accepted norms of Mathematical Logic. Earlier in the

thirties, Godel proved that by accepting the CH or the AC no inconsistency

would arise which is not already in the system of Logic without them. In

other words, AC or CH cannot be disproved. It was Cohen who proved, in 1962,

that by denying the AC or CH, also, no inconsistency would arise. This

means AC or CH cannot also be proved. His method by which he created a

model with the negation of these axioms was technically called 'Forcing'.

It was for this discovery he was awarded the Fields Medal. Because of this

method of creating non-standard models of Mathematics, the whole field of

non-standard Mathematical Analysis arose thereafter. It was a culmination

of almost a hundred-year old search for the truth of the Continuum

Hypothesis. Don't ask me what the CH is. I will have to give you a whole

lecture on Foundations of Mathematics!

 

This 'undecidability' of the truth of CH and AC leads me on, in this

advaita forum, to talk about the 'anirvachaniya' status of mAyA. Before

1962, I had difficulty in comprehending the 'anirvachaniya' characterisation

of mAyA, though I could reconcile it as the magical power of the Lord.

 

The real status of mAyA cannot be expressed in terms of any set of words.

It is neither absolutely real nor absolutely unreal.

 

*nAsadAsIt vibhAtatvAt no sad-AsIcca bAdhanAt* (Panchadashi . First half of

VI - 129)

Meaning,

Since the effects of mAyA are undeniably manifest, its existence cannot be

denied. Being stultified by knowledge, it cannot really be said to exist.

 

From empirical reason therefore, it is indefinable.

 

*asvatantrA hi mAyA syAt apratIter-vinA citiM / svatantrA'pi tathaiva syAt

asangasyAnyathAkRteH //* (Panchadashi: VI - 132)

 

Meaning, MayA is dependent, for in the absence of the cognizing faculty the

effects of mAyA cannot be experienced. Again in another sense it is

independent too, for it can make the non-attached Atman appear to be

attached.

 

*codhe'pi yadi codyaM syAt tvaccodye codyate mayA / parihAryaM tatash-codyaM

na punaH praticodyatAM //* (Panchadashi: VI 138)

 

Meaning, By raising objections to the wonderfulness of mAyA we do not solve

the mystery. Besides, we also can raise serious counter-objections. What is

essential is that we should eradicate mAyA by systematic enquiry. Further

arguments are useless. So do not indulge in them.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

 

 

Have a look at my homepage at

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/

which now has a new enhanced look .