-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Origin of Maya
- Thread starter Sirona
- Start date
In my version of Hinduism, it was emanated, as one of the triple bondages. (The other two being anava and karma)
Māyā has several meanings, including, illusion, magic, power but generally it means illusion. It's the illusory power of Brahman. So I'd say māyā has always existed because Brahman has always existed. Yogmaya is a name for Durga. She took birth at the same time as Krishna in order to foil Kamsa's plot to kill Krishna. Puranically Durga is Vishnu's sister, then. One of her names is Nārāyanī because she is the sister of Nārāyana.
ManSinha
Well-Known Member
As per @Jainarayan - Maya is the illusion that makes living creatures chase after worldly gains such as riches and power. Yogmaya on the other hand, is the internal power of Lord Vishnu utilized as part of His leela to fulfill his purpose of getting rid of evil.
I would say that since Brahman is beyond time, it would stand to reason that the origin of maya is beyond one’s ability to measure.
Viraja
Jaya Jagannatha!
When I read the above comment, I'm given to exclaim, that consciousness cannot be devoid of desire... ever. And that this desire is the one that manifests as the world. "I" and "Not I" is the root for consciousness. Therefore there is always duality. As long as there is duality, there is a corresponding need to enjoy one's own 'prabhava' (don't know how to put this in English). Just my thoughts, not from any scripture!
In my understanding, duality is an illusion resulting from maya. When one realizes one’s true nature as Atman, the dichotomy of I/other is transcended.
ManSinha
Well-Known Member
What would make you believe that our perception is reduced?
I think it's just a natural thing. Just as we're only seeing and reacting what is in our immediate vicinity, so too with maya. We can see a car accident right in front of us while driving down a road, and that would really upset us, if we're half normal at all. There could be another even more horrific accident half a block away, but since we don't see it, it has no effect on us at all.
So maya is just so limiting.
What percentage of the EM spectrum can we perceive? -- and sight is our major sense. Hearing? Taste? Smell? --same same.
Can we perceive the past or future? Can we perceive any but our own time bound, blinkered little fragment of consciousness?
ManSinha
Well-Known Member
Thanks - it was more a clarification question - but it is not the same - for examples dogs, I believe, can hear at frequencies that humans cannot but have poorer vision and far superior sense of smell than humans. So it is a matter of being able to perceive with our senses whether evolved or not. Now if you are referring to the metaphysical planes beyond our normal sensory ability or as @Vinayaka stated ' degradation of sensory experience due to mere proximity or lack thereof - there is another angle to explore as well
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I would translate it to existence - Bhava - to be. 'Pra' is to emphasize it.
It is good that we do not perceive the reality in our daily lives. Otherwise, our lives would have been much less interesting. Samsara makes it interesting. (Don't know if I have been able to put it right)
No, not even the most enlightened. It is Heidelberg's uncertainty, Fermat's, Pascal's, Huygen's probability, Aristotle's Chance and Boltzmann's Chaos (Ginnungagap, Hundun, Tiamat, and Tohu wa-Bohu) out there.
Yeah Jai, Salix is right. Maya begins and ends with the existence of Brahman (a little Quantum Mechanics involved here).
Last edited:
shivsomashekhar
Well-Known Member
Maya is interpreted very differently - depending on the school.
Per the Gita, Maya is the potency of Krishna and is therefore, simple to understand.
Since this divine Maya of Mine which is constituted by the gunas is difficult to cross over, (therefore) those who take refuge in Me alone cross over this Maya - Gita 7.14
O Arjuna, the Lord resides in the region of the heart of all creatures, revolving through Maya all the creatures (as though) mounted on a machine - Gita 18.61
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
Aupmanyav guruji, you truly have been a blessing to me with insights like this.
Last edited:
ajay0
Well-Known Member
Our true nature is that of pure consciousness.
However at present, this state of pure consciousness is rendered impure by desires in the form of cravings and aversions.
These desires in turn stems from vasanas or psychological impressions in the unconscious mind imprinted by egocentric thoughts, words and actions in the past.
The practice of present moment awareness or meditation or total love destroys these vasanas, leading to the purification of the mind.
As per the Yoga Vasistha, "The impure mind sees a ghost where there is just a post and pollutes all relationship, creating suspicion among friends and making enemies of them, even as a drunken man sees that the world is revolving around him. A distressed mind turns food into poison and causes disease and death."
Hence it is the impure mind that is maya, as it distorts the perception of reality as per our subjective likes and dislikes.
'If you like or dislike something, you cannot see it the way it is. Either you exaggerate it in a positive way or in a negative way. ' – Jaggi Vasudev
'Awareness means grasping life just the way it is, without contamination by mental projections.'
- Jaggi Vasudev
Last edited:
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
Maya is self generated from jivatman and is dependent on genetics creating delusions of reality. Maya is not a 'fault in' or property of Brahman. Brahman is satchitananda (Reality/Existence/Truth-Consciousness/Awareness-Bliss) and so cannot generate illusions.
Thank you for validating my point.