3.1. Māyā is Real

In the Svāminārāyaṇa Darśana, māyā and other four ontological eternal entities are real. This fact also reflects the rich tradition of Vedic debate and discussion entailed in the Indian philosophical system. It is noteworthy to recount the debate here in part. Svāminārāyaṇa starts his discourse with pointedly addressing the Advaitīn regarding the central doctrine of strict monism.

He says to him:

“You proclaim that in reality, only Brahman exists. Moreover, you say with the exception of that Brahman, jīvas, īśvaras, māyā, the world, Vedas, the śāstras, and the purāṇas are all illusory. I can neither understand this concept of yours nor can I accept it.” (Vacanāmṛta Gadhadā I/39, p.99)

The Advaitīn presented his defense using vivid arguments, but each time, the Vacanāmṛta notes that Svāminārāyaṇa raised doubts to the Advaitīn’ s response leaving the query unresolved.

Then Svāminārāyaṇa commenced to resolve the query himself.

“The words of those who have procured the savikalpa state noted in the Vedas, the śāstra, the Purāṇas, etc. mention all of those entities as being satya (real). However, the words of those who have attained the nirvikalpa state describe all of those entities as being asatya (non-real). In reality, however, they are not asatya (non-real). They are only described as being asatya (non-real) because they cannot be seen due to the influence of the nirvikalpa state.”(Vacanāmṛta Gadhadā I/39, p.100) 150

In this manner, for all alterations, change, and transience, the universe is real. But sometimes the scriptures state it ‘asatya’. What does that mean? How can it be interpreted? The discernment of ‘satya’ and ‘asatya’ is analyzed in the Vacanāmṛta.

It defines,

“All forms that are the result of the entities evolved from māyā are asatya. Why? Because all those forms will be ruined in time. Conversely, the form of Parabrahman in Akṣaradhāma and the form of the muktas -the (liberated) attendants of Parabrahman -are all satya.” (Gadh. 3/38, p.664).

The Bhāṣyakāra also affirms:

“yadidaṃ kiñca jaḍacetanātmakajagat pratyakṣato śabdato parijñāyate tat sarvamapi satyamiti vāstavaṃ pāramārthikameva na tu mithyā |” (Taittiriya-upaniṣad 2/6/3, p.380)

“The world (māyā), which consists of sentient and non-sentient entities and is known to us through the perception or verbal testimony, is not illusory; it is real therefore cannot be dismissed.”

Moreover, Bhadreśadāsa clarifies:

“jagajjanmādikartutvasya brahmalakṣaṇatvena upasthapanāt tasya pāramārthikatvasvābhāvikatvādisiddheḥ naitacchuktirajatavadadhyastaṃ na vā japākusumanyāyenaupādhikamiti |” (Brahmasūtra 1/1/2, p.16).

“When Parabrahman creates this world through māyā, that is also real. It is not superimposing a false appearance upon the reality or mixing up the real and the unreal as we see a snake instead of a rope. Moreover, it is not as the particular appearance which generates due to the other factor like japākusuma.”

Yet, being composed of māyā, it can (without a firm refuge in Parabrahman) befuddle the jīva away from Parabrahman. Nonetheless, the creation of māyā is useful in another way. The world, the creation of māyā has set a platform where the jīva can perform spiritual endeavors and transcend māyā and reach Parabrahman.