Vedic scholar questions 'maya theory'

[Guest guest]

On the issue of theory of Maya and the possible harm it has done.

 

I had an interesting chat with Rev Swami Bhajanandaji when I visited Belur. He was of the same opinion as this Vedic Scholar. He said that It is only after the Maya theory became firmly established in India (post Shankara) that we stopped bothering to defend ourselves and India was successfully invaded by the Muslims. We seem to have paid a heavy price for subscribing to the Maya theory. And yet, we are told that this theory was powerful enough to re-establish Hinduism in India. The resolution lies in re-examining what is meant by Maya and how easy it is to misinterpret this term which can result in disaster for the whole nation.

 

Sw Vivekananda was very specific when he talked about 'Maya.' He explained that Maya should not be interpreted as a mirage or an illusion. Maya is just a statement of fact about the nature of the world we live in. It is certainly not an illusion, else why should we bother with anything. The famous example used by Shankara of the rope appearing as a snake gave rise to this misinterpretation. The best example of maya is now available in modern Physics. Compare these comments about the nature of reality from the fathers of Q.Mechanics.

 

The world is not made of sticks and stones or smaller versions of sticks and stones. The only thing we can say with absolute certainty is that the world is not made of 'matter' - it is made by quantum and the only thing we can say about the quantum is that it is not matter. Matter that we experience is in fact nothing like the quantum but we have to learn to live with this paradox and deal with it teaches modern Physics. This is Maya.

 

jay

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

with a christian-based upbringing and education maybe i have a

different interpretation on Maya - in the way it seems that it just

implies there is more than ONE reality.

 

there is a Maya reality but because it is transitory it should have

less primary value than the soul/eternal reality which is unseen (or

at least difficult to perceive) but exists and should be our primary

focus. i think in christian terms it's what is meant when Jesus said

" if your right arm offends you - chop it off - or pluck out your right

eye " etc. (i know i haven't quoted that quite right but similar!).

 

that maya exists and we exist within it but our priorities are the

wrong way round and that when we put as primary value maya and not (is

the word 'daya'??) the other - then we make an error of judgement.

 

in seeing this maya as the primary reality we see the rope as the

snake --- but when one is so fortunate as to be a saint or similar

then you can see things the right way round and live in the world but

always holding onto the priority of the daya-ness. in christian

terms, you can be " in the world but not of it " - that is, not a part

of the illusion that it is the primary reality when it is the

secondary. and in that way - all your actions will reflect the true

primary reality - and by so doing show others their true nature and

help them work toward their eternal selves - because otherwise all

their energy is expended on the maya-side and they will work like

crazy for some worldly gain (to own a new car etc.) but barely lift a

foot for God or for their soul.

 

so from a christian point of view - it would be to see maya as a

reminder that the world exists and wonderfully so - with all its

delights etc. but that there is a deeper and more important reality

beyond that, that exists just as vitally, more so really, but is

unseen (or difficult to see) - and concern with that reality and how

our actions reflect within that reality is of importance, not this

one, because that one is eternal not temporal.

 

so it is not not to care about the maya or say it doesn't exist but

just to put it in its right place.

 

well, it is an outsiders point of view - i don't know whether it

differs enormously. it is often strange how ones cultural upbringing

is reflected within language and unthought of things - at the Vedanta

centre last Sunday, swami dayatmananda was remarking on the fact that

the English say 'giving up the ghost' --- whereas the hindus say

'giving up the body'... a different point of view entirely!@!!??

 

:-)

 

all the best

 

elly

 

 

Ramakrishna , " Vivekananda " <vivekananda wrote:

>

>

> On the issue of theory of Maya and the possible harm it has done.

>

> I had an interesting chat with Rev Swami Bhajanandaji when I visited

Belur. He was of the same opinion as this Vedic Scholar. He said that

It is only after the Maya theory became firmly established in India

(post Shankara) that we stopped bothering to defend ourselves and

India was successfully invaded by the Muslims. We seem to have paid a

heavy price for subscribing to the Maya theory. And yet, we are told

that this theory was powerful enough to re-establish Hinduism in

India. The resolution lies in re-examining what is meant by Maya and

how easy it is to misinterpret this term which can result in disaster

for the whole nation.

>

> Sw Vivekananda was very specific when he talked about 'Maya.' He

explained that Maya should not be interpreted as a mirage or an

illusion. Maya is just a statement of fact about the nature of the

world we live in. It is certainly not an illusion, else why should we

bother with anything. The famous example used by Shankara of the rope

appearing as a snake gave rise to this misinterpretation. The best

example of maya is now available in modern Physics. Compare these

comments about the nature of reality from the fathers of Q.Mechanics.

>

> The world is not made of sticks and stones or smaller versions of

sticks and stones. The only thing we can say with absolute certainty

is that the world is not made of 'matter' - it is made by quantum and

the only thing we can say about the quantum is that it is not matter.

Matter that we experience is in fact nothing like the quantum but we

have to learn to live with this paradox and deal with it teaches

modern Physics. This is Maya.

>

> jay

>

[Guest guest]

It is pure nonsense to say Advaita has accelerated the invasions and attacks on India.

 

Shankara was a man of Action.Otherwise why should he bother to debate with different scholors in the country

and rescue it from Atheists and Agnostics.

Sankaracharya also is said to have consecrated the Badrinath Narayan Temple after recovering the idol from

 

Hun thieves.

 

First of all India has been under attack right from the times of Alexander,Huns and Sakas.

And most prominent of the men who raised the banner against foreign invasions

mentioned by them were Advaitins.

Samartha Ramadas guru of Chatrapathi Shivaji,Shri Vidyaranya swami guru of Hari Hara and Bukka who established the

Vijayanagar Empire, Madhusudana Saraswathi who reorganised the Sanyasis right under the nose of Akbar and other Mughal Emperors were

all Advaitins.

Moreover in Outstanding Personalities produced by our belover Motherland in modern times like

Bal Gangadhar Tilak,Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi were all believers in Advaita.

 

If you want to blame Advaita for the prevailing ills, better blame the sun for helping life to grow on earth, for without life

no evil shall occur.

 

Regards,S.KarthikVandemataram

[Guest guest]

Jay, I would like to know if Sankaracharya was the person who coined Maya or do we have it mentioned in our scriptures. Was Maya meant to be a notion that nothing other than Moksha is real? If thats true that why Karma and Dharma are two important aspects in a life of a Hindu? I would really appreciate if you could please explain the concept of Maya as defined by Shankarachary. Best regards Monalisa Vivekananda <vivekananda wrote: On the issue of theory of Maya and the possible harm it has done. I had an interesting chat with Rev Swami Bhajanandaji when I visited Belur. He was of the same opinion as this Vedic Scholar. He said that It is only after the Maya theory became firmly established in India (post Shankara) that we stopped bothering to defend ourselves and India was successfully invaded by the Muslims. We seem to have paid a heavy price for subscribing to the Maya theory. And yet, we are told that this theory was powerful enough to re-establish Hinduism in India. The

resolution lies in re-examining what is meant by Maya and how easy it is to misinterpret this term which can result in disaster for the whole nation. Sw Vivekananda was very specific when he talked about 'Maya.' He explained that Maya should not be interpreted as a mirage or an illusion. Maya is just a statement of fact about the nature of the world we live in. It is certainly not an illusion, else why should we bother with anything. The famous example used by Shankara of the rope appearing as a snake gave rise to this misinterpretation. The best example of maya is now available in modern Physics. Compare these comments about the nature of reality from the fathers of Q.Mechanics. The world is not made of sticks and stones or smaller versions of sticks and stones. The only thing we can say with absolute certainty is that the world is not made of 'matter' - it is made by quantum and the only thing we can say about the quantum is that it is not matter. Matter that we experience is in fact nothing like the quantum but we have to learn to live with this paradox and deal with it teaches modern Physics. This is Maya. jay

We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love(and love to hate): TV's Guilty Pleasures list.

[Guest guest]

Thank you so much, Karthik. I felt the same way, but did not have the supporting evidence that you have presented so well. Thanks again for the emphatic factual conclusion.

-----

[Guest guest]

Shankaracharya was definitely not the first to use the word " Maya " .

As Swami Vivekananda says;

 

" ....Coming to our philosophers, we find that this word Maya has

been manipulated in various fashions, until we come to the great

Shankarâchârya. The theory of Maya was manipulated a little by the

Buddhists too, but in the hands of the Buddhists it became very much

like what is called Idealism, and that is the meaning that is now

generally given to the word Maya. When the Hindu says the world is

Maya, at once people get the idea that the world is an illusion.

This interpretation has some basis, as coming through the Buddhistic

philosophers, because there was one section of philosophers who did

not believe in the external world at all. But the Maya of the

Vedanta, in its last developed form, is neither Idealism nor

Realism, nor is it a theory. It is a simple statement of facts —

what we are and what we see around us. "

 

The full lecture is named Maya and Illusion and is avaialble at

www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info then Complete Works of Swami

Vivekananda then Volume 2 then Jnana Yoga then Maya and Illusion

 

 

Ramakrishna , monalisa chandra

<mastpis2001 wrote:

>

> Jay,

>

> I would like to know if Sankaracharya was the person who coined

Maya...