Srigurubhyo namaH
Sridakshinamurtistotram
(Part IX –c)

namaH shrI-shankarAnanda-guru-pAdAmbujanmane |
savilAsa-mahA-moha-grAha-grAsaika-karmaNe ||
(Salutatios at the Lotus Feet of the Guru shri shankarAnanda whose
sole activity is to `swallow up' the crocodile that is the variegated
great delusion. – prayer by sri VidyAraNya Swamin at the commencement
of his work: Panchadashi.)

We saw in the earlier part, discussing the line: `svapne jAgrati vaa
eSha puruSho mAya-paribhrAmitaH' of the verse, that the states of
waking and dream involve vyavahara, parlance. It is in these two
states that we interact with the outside world of people and
objects through the senses and the mind. This interaction involves
relationships and differences between people, objects, etc. Now,
the question arises: What is the cause of this parlance into which we
seem to have been dragged forcibly without any `permission' from our
side? The hymn, in this verse, says that it is the Maya that is the
one that causes all this. Maya is shakti. It is the deluding power
of Maya that is responsible for the various actions that we perform.
In the dream, the power that makes the dream-vyavahara happen is the
nidraa-shakti. Unless a person is overtaken by sleep, dream does not
arise. It is the power of sleep that causes the dream-vyavahara to
happen. Likewise it is the power of Maya that has to be admitted to
be the cause of all this parlance in the waking. How does Vedanta
say that it is Maya shakti that is responsible for parlance? The
answer is: the dream vyavahara gives us the analogy for this. Says
the Panchadashi XIII:

86. Just as in the sleeping state a power inherent in the Jiva gives
rise to impossible dreams, so the power of Maya inherent in Brahman,
projects, maintains and destroys the universe.
89. When such is the glory of the power of sleep and dream, what is
there to wonder at the unimaginable glory of the power of Maya ?
90. In a sleeping man various dreams are created; similarly the power
of Maya creates diverse appearances in the immutable Brahman.

Although the power behind vyavahara is terrible, the enquiry into it
shows that this maayic vyavahara is said to be Maya alone in diverse
forms. The dream analogy that we saw much earlier showed that the
entire vyavahara that includes the doer, experiencer, the objects,
the `others', space, time, are all actually a projection of the One
Chit-shakti. When the projecting shakti is separated by negating, in
the manner of the Mandukya Upanishad seventh mantra, what we have is
a Pure Turiya Brahman that is `avyavahaaryam' = not subjectable to
vyavahara, as the Upanishad itself puts it. It is this declaration
of the Upanishad along with the other expression it uses:
prapanchopashamam = bereft of phenomenal expressions that gives proof
to the above contention of Vedanta.

Maya has mere empirical existence:

The Manasollasa makes clear, this Maya is to be regarded as having
only an empirical existence. This is because of the `fate' it
suffers when Self-knowledge dawns: sva-prabodhena bAdhyate. The
Vedantic position on the status of Maya is clarified by the Acharya
in the sutra bhashya: 1.4.1.3:

If we admitted some antecedent state of the world as the independent
cause of the actual world, we should indeed implicitly, admit the
pradhâna doctrine. What we admit is, however, only a previous state
dependent on the highest Lord, not an independent state. A previous
stage of the world such as the one assumed by us must necessarily be
admitted, since it is according to sense and reason. For without it
the highest Lord could not be conceived as creator, as he could not
become active if he were destitute of the potentiality of action. The
existence of such a causal potentiality renders it moreover possible
that the released souls should not enter on new courses of existence,
as it is destroyed by perfect knowledge. For that causal potentiality
is of the nature of Nescience; it is rightly denoted by the
term 'undeveloped;' it has the highest Lord for its substratum; it is
of the nature of an illusion; it is a universal sleep in which are
lying the transmigrating souls destitute for the time of the
consciousness of their individual character. 1 This undeveloped
principle is sometimes denoted by the term âkâsa, ether; so, for
instance, in the passage, 'In that Imperishable then, O Gârgî, the
ether is woven like warp and woof' (Bri. Up. III, 8, 11). Sometimes,
again, it is denoted by the term akshara, the Imperishable; so, for
instance (Mu. Up. II, 1, 2), 'Higher, than the high Imperishable.'
Sometimes it is spoken of as Mâyâ, illusion; so, for instance (Sve.
Up. IV, 10), 'Know then Prakriti is Mâyâ, and the great Lord he who
is affected with Mâyâ.' For Mâyâ is properly called undeveloped or
non-manifested since it cannot be defined either as that which is
Brahman or otherwise. (unquote)

That such is the case is also brought out by the Sutra bhashya
(2.1.6.14) meaning that name and form which constitute the seed of
the entire expanse of phenomenal existence, and which are conjured up
by nescience, are, as it were, non-different from the Omniscient
Lord; and they cannot be characterized either as Brahman or otherwise
and are referred to, in Sruti and smriti as the power called Maya
of the Omniscient Lord or as Prakriti.
Thus, Maya has neither an independent existence nor shine apart from
the substratum, Brahman. The Panchadashi VI says:

132. Maya is dependent, for in the absence of the cognising faculty
the effects of Maya cannot be experienced. Again in one sense it is
independent too, for it can make the non-attached Atman appear to be
attached.

133. Maya transforms the immutable Kutastha, the ever association-
less Atman, phenomenally into the form of the universe. Casting the
reflection of Atman on itself, Maya Creates Jiva and Ishvara.

134. Without in any way affecting the real nature of Atman, Maya
creates the world. It makes the impossible look possible. How
astonishingly powerful Maya is !

The Manasollasa (VIII 13,14,15) says further:

It is not non-existent because it appears; neither is it existent
because it is nullified. It is not distinct from the Light unlike
the dark shadow which is distinct from the Sun, neither is it
identical with the Light because it is insentient, nor can it be both
distinct from, and identical with the Light, because it is a
contradiction in terms. It can not be said to be made up of parts,
because such parts are not in evidence in its cause. Neither is it
devoid of parts, since, in its effects, it is made up of parts.

The spectacular display of Maya, the material cause, is spoken of by
the BrihadvArtika:

asya dvaitendra-jAlasya yad-upAdAna-kAraNam
ajnAnam tad-upAshritya brahma kAraNam uchyate (I.4.371)
(Having recourse to that ignorance which is the material cause of
this magic that is duality, Brahman is said to be the cause (of the
universe).

What is this power, shakti, that brings forth this variegated
universe? It is the ignorance pertaining to Atman that is regarded
as the power in the production of all the effects. In no other
manner would it be possible to accommodate appropriately the doctrine
of Shakti. This shakti itself is Maya as per the Bhashya. Thus says
the BrihadvArtika:

AtmA-avidyaiva naH shaktiH sarvakAryasya sarjane
Na atao anyathA shaktivAdaH pramANena-avasIyate (IV.3.1784)

The SvaarAjyasiddhi (I.48) says that this Avidya or Maya is thus to
be regarded as the sustainer of itself as also its products:
Just as Consciousness shines by itself and also illuminates other
objects, and difference is able to differentiate itself and others,
so is Maya able to establish itself and produce the superimposition
by itself. It is expert in achieving even impossible tasks; it
creates infatuation for the jivas by deluding them.

Maya is thus not established by reasoning: The Manasollasa (VII
13,16) characterizes Maya thus:

Maya is the name given to an appearance which cannot be accounted
for. The harlot of a Maya appearing only so long as not scrutinized,
deceives the Purusha by her false affectations of coquetry.
The Panchadashi (VI.134) also says: What is there to wonder about
Maya whose nature itself is the bringing about of what is
incompatible?

We have the sweet words of our Acharyapaada in the Mayapanchaka (1):

Even in Me who is Pure Consciousness, has no equal, is eternal and
partless, is full, and does not admit of any doubt, misconception
etc., she brings about the differences as the world, Ishwara and
Jiva. Such is Maya who is very clever in bringing about what cannot
be brought about: aghaTita-ghaTanA-paTIyasI mAyA.

Avidya is sAkshivedya, bhAvarUpa:

Avidya cannot be established by any pramaana, as every pramana,
instrument of knowledge, reveals only an existent vastu. For
example, the eye sees a pot in front. Avidya is not an existent. On
the contrary, Avidya pertaining to an existent is removed by
pramana. This is the special feature of Avidya that it cannot stand
the onslaught of pramana. For example, when I know that the colour
of a flower is red, my ignorance as to its colour is dispelled by the
operation of my eye instrument. Yet, Avidya should be deemed to have
empirical existence, being experienced by the Saakshi, Witness Self.
Experiences like `aham ajnaH' (I am ignorant), `na kinchid-avediSham'
(I knew nothing), etc. which are to be traced to the Saakshi when
analyzed carefully, point to the empirical existence of ajnana.
Avidya is saakshi-vedya (revealed by the Witness Self) though not
established by means of valid knowledge. When reference is made to
ajnana by the Shruti, for example, it is only anuvAda (recalling of
an experience, alluding). However, pramanas are cited to remove the
erroneous notion that ajnana would mean jnAna-abhAva, i.e., absence
of knowledge.

Further, the declared illusory nature of the world would not be
intelligible without ajnana which constitutes the substance of
illusion as pointed out by Srutis like: anRtApidhAnAH….anRtena hi
pratyUDhAH (Chandogya Up. 8.3.2) (veiled by ajnana…and, indeed
carried away by it), nIHAreNa prAvRtAH (Taittiriya Samhita 4.6.2.2)
(veiled by the mist of ajnana) as also the nAsadIya-sUkta and
expressions `ajAmeKAm' and `mAyAntu' of the Shvetaashvataropanishad.
The Gita V.15, VII.25, VII.15 also teach that ignorance is to be
deemed to be an empirically existent entity. (knowledge is veiled by
ignorance, thereby mortals are deluded. I am not manifest to all,
veiled as I am, by YogamAyaa. Deprived of wisdom by Maya…)
Thus ajnana is to be accepted as bhAvarUpa. The illusion of the
world is to be traced to mUlAjnaana, primal ignorance, whose
cessation ensues on the dawn of the akhanDaakAra-jnAna (plenary
experience) vouchsafed to be the ShrutipramAna. This knowledge must
be secured by vichaara. Hence it is that ajnana as also its product,
the world-illusion, must be regarded as avichArita-siddha – taken for
granted without enquiry. The Brihad-vArtika (I.4.1329, III.4.131,
I.4.1341) of Sri SureshwarachArya emphasizes this again and again:
It is due to this ajnana of one's Self that Brahman is seen to be
otherwise, i.e., as the entire world, by the deluded. Therefore on
the cessation of this ajnana, the world is seen to be Brahman
Itself. This Avidya in the Self, taken for granted without enquiry,
is (also inferred as) the singular cause of all misery and is
revealed by the Witness-Self alone.)

The bAdhaka, destroyer, for this ajnana is the plenary experience as
said earlier. The saakshi, the Witness-Self, however, is the
sAdhaka, revealer, and therefore cannot be the baadhaka, destroyer.

Says the Advaita-makaranda:

In spite of it, there appears in the sky that is All-Shine, a misty
veil, which subsists as long as enquiry is not undertaken, and
disappears on the rising of the Sun, that is the realization, as a
result of enquiry.

We shall see some more aspects of Maya in the forthcoming part.

(end of part IX – c)
(to be continued)
Om Tat Sat