I really hope someone can help me out. I am having serious trouble here..

The word 'Mayavada' does not appear in any of the authorized Vedic literatures. This makes it clear that Mayavada did not appear before or even during the Vedic age. It is a man-made concoction, that manifested in a post Vedic era...http://vtweb.com/gosai/krishna-talk/70-sel...g-mayavada.html

This is what really churns my stomach..

Those of demoniac mindsets had taken to the Vaisnava philosophy and were causing trouble for the true and faithful Vaisnavas of the Lord. Being all-merciful the Supreme Lord ordered Siva in this way:

svagamaih kalpitais tvam ca janan mad-vimukhan kuru
mam ca gopaya yena syat srstir esottarottara

Make the general public averse to Me by some imaginary hypothesis from you. Also camouflage me, so that the public will be deluded gradually by desire for material advancement. (Padma Purana)

Also, in the Varaha Purana Lord Visnu instructs Siva saying:

esa moham srjamy asu yo janan mohayisyati
tvam ca rudra maha-baho moha-sastrani karaya

O mighty-armed Siva, please write books filled with lies, and thus bewilder the people.

atathyani vitathyani darsayasva maha-bhuja
prakasam kuru catmanam aprakasam ca mam kuru

O mighty-armed one, please preach a collection of lies. Place yourself in the forefront, and conceal Me.

Why on God's earth or above would **any person** say such a thing? "Please make everyone hate my guts, and while you're at it, be sure to keep me hidden." How else (figuring God is a **person**, right?) can this be interpreted as anything other than twisted, sad and totally defeating to Sanjaya's statements in the Gita like;

Wherever there is Krsna, the master of all mystics, and wherever there is Arjuna, the supreme archer, there will also certainly be opulence, victory, extraordinary power and morality. That is my opinion.

Thus I doubt the authenticity of the "scripture" it came from. But OK sure, the "Mayavada idea that we are all ultimately God Himself" I accept is a serious form of blasphemy in many (if not all) the world's genuine religions. But now I'm wondering if that was really the original concept behind all this.

For example, they say "so ham, asmi" (I am That), or "I am He". How do I know this is not either flattery (imitation the sincerest form), or simply to be taken in the same manner as someone having so much passion for a certain trade that they have "become it" (hello there, Mr. Faux).

Can't it also be possible that one may feel a sense of bhakti to the "impersonal feature" of the Absolute, just as one may have to any aspect of Vishnu; His consorts, paraphanelia, etc.?

It might be good to bear in mind that the framers of the Constitution also seemed to assume a certain level of intelligence in people when saying they had "The Right to Bear Arms". Like anything, Mayavadism here would seem to be able to be taken to any level of stupidity you wish.

AND - how about the idea that one is "as good as God". Are you going to tell me someone couldn't have a field day with that idea? How about this - I send you to Vegas with "something that is as good as cash" - my debit card.

But hey, we ALL know this was said with REALLY good intentions.

I think you are right, these are late sectarian Purana's or interpolations written after Gaudapada and Shankara. Nothing to worry about.

all desires must be fulfilled somehow

Yes I did not think of that one. I guess it's obvious I am looking to find the essence
of different schools of thought, those that preserve the spirit of text, without the beginningless tradition of needling away at each other, disputing every point tit-for-tat (while getting caught up in it of course).

I don't believe in frettin' and grievin';
Why mess around with strife'
I never was cut out to step and strut out.
Give me the simple life.

Some find it pleasant dining on pheasant.
Those things roll off my knife;
Just serve me tomatoes; and mashed potatoes;
Give me the simple life.

A cottage small is all I'm after,
Not one that's spacious and wide.
A house that rings with joy and laughter
and the ones you love inside.

Some like the high road, I like the low road,
Free from the care and strife.
Sounds corny and seedy, but yes, indeed-y;
Give me the simple life.

Puranik literature is a wish fulfilling gem; one can find some verses somewhere to support about anything

...The term may not appear but the concept, and interpretation of it, is there. Mayavada is an advanced spiritual consciousness compared with salvation or karma, but it is a heart block to restoring dormant rasa with He to whom Brahman is an external, less attractive feature, according to those who can see Him uncovered.



So these verses appear in order to substantiate Sankara as a manifestation of Siva. Sankara's appearence and doings were a necessary lead up, development, to the appearence of Sri Krishna Chaitanya. At that time, 800AD and prior, Buddism was at it's greatest expansion within India. Buddist philosophy does not admit either the eternal individuality of the soul or any eternal relationship with a personal God which is the basis of Vaishnavism, or any value to Vedic scripture. So since an immediate jump to Vaishnava concepts was too difficult to enact, Sankara, most cleverly interpreted the Vedas in a way that was parallel to Buddist thought. His apparent Mayavada line of interpretation of Vedanta is sometimes called 'covered Buddism' except that the Vedic literatures were now usable, re-established in India by Sankara, and their more natural interpretation was shortly after established by souls like Madhva and Ramanuja. This is too detailed to go into in depth.
It is the consideration of the advancement (towards prema-bhakti) a soul makes over many lifetimes as to why Krishna would conceal a false conception of Himself and engage one in a more legitimate concept suitable to their present mentality. One cannot jump from animal to rasika in a single bound! Usually that is!



...the 'scripture' is to reveal not just historical or empirical information but living concepts that are beyond the grasp of ordinary concepts of history and logic. Only those progressing toward the goal of a life of full devotion, of purified heart, by recieving great mercy, can know the purpose of concealing a thing at a certain time, and the ultimate value of what is behind that. As an example of this, a mundane teacher would conceal Algebra or Physics to his student untill the student had a real grasp of basic arithmetic and science. Otherwise imagine if the elementary students were immediately put to Algebra or higher abstract thought without being prepared by the basics. They would lose heart to go on at best and at worst make a bizarre attempt with irrational results, which is worst than giving up temporarily.
Bhakti, love dormant within the soul cannot be focused at the undifferentiated mass of consciousness called Brahman, or it's particles, the living beings. Bhakti is a recriprocation with the source of that non-differentiated mass of consciousness, Bhagavan. The love one feels from Brahman realization is not directed toward Bhagavan but is misdirected (in the sense that service to Bhagavan is not defined) to a vague 'self-interested' cause. That is according to the realization of the Vaishnavas.
And to 'hear' the Mayavada concept means to take it into the heart, thus denying God and His personality, opulences, loving mercies...all the ingredients of rasa.


...words themselves are not-definitive. Any word has synonyms and translations. The essence of the truth behind the descriptions the Vedic words indicate is originally impressed through sound into the heart by the Lord to His disciple and that same is re-impressed by the Lord to His disciples' disciples in their time. The ways of words and scriptures is mysterious and both conceals Him to the casual or superficial observer and reveals Him to those who have become awake, by His mercy (His devotees' mercy) to His presence, and all that He implies...(He is like the Sun)...

So, Ras, let me put this to you. The combination of transcendental sweetness and spiritually philosophically applied perfection are found at their zenith within Caitanya Caritamrita, within Sri Chaitanya, as Kaviraja Goswami, the disciple of Sri Chaitanya's intimate associates, who knew Him best, describes, in total, the essence of the combined Lila. Where does he put the emphasis? Why there, when others had described Him from there perspective realizations? This is the line of perspective, suppossedly we, those to whom Sri Chaitanya came to make Himself known to us through Bhaktivedanta Swami (directly or indirectly), that within which our true fortune resides. How to read all things through this essence, ujjvala rasa, madhurya, sweet, energetic, essential. spiritually organic within all souls (even athiests are instinctively attracted to love), that Krishna, in reality, is all-attractive, embodyment of (giver of), ecstatic love, and every other quality that anyone tries to possess, He is in embodiment, completely and permanently. No such all-attractive loving rasa is mentioned to exist in Siva, or with any other of the Lord's manifested infinite Personalities. No such concept.

That said, tell me how such an event as the Vrajavasis meeting with Krishna at Kuruksetra, after a separation for more than 90 earth years, contains within it a concealed, opposite, confidential substrata of conversation. Only a devotee, a lover, could appreciate or see how the proof, the gold standard, is given to us in that. Others won't recognize it and thus it remains concealed to them, and that is natural in the light that nothing can disturb His Lila. Yes some would try to disturb, not considering Who and what we are hearing of here. In other words forgetting His Godhood and entering into examination of His confidences, apart from Him. Tell me, Ras, about the greatness of the concepts revealed at a supposed place called Kuruksetra!

Thanks for this response, I had not quite heard it explained that way before.



I really don't know. I read just one verse from the Gita today, was overwhelmed by it and had to put the book down. Basically, I prefer it when Krishna tells it like it is..

"Yes, I will tell you of My splendorous manifestations, but only of those which are prominent, O Arjuna, for My opulence is limitless." -Bhagavad-gita 10:19

..and that was my whole sadhana for this morning.