In the first chapter we have elaborated the state of self-realization as a state in which one recognizes the identity of his true self, Aatman, with Brahman. In order that a seeker can move towards in realizing this state, he should remove the state of ignorance that prevents the seeker to know his true nature. Therefore, removal of ignorance is the first condition for the actualization of Brahmaanubhava. In this chapter, we could make an attempt to study the nature, cause, consequences and characteristics of the state of ignorance. This knowledge would help the aspirant to strive for self-realization.

Sadaananda in his Vedaantasaara describes ignorance as "something positive though intangible, which cannot be described either as being or non-being . . . and is antagonistic to knowledge. Its existence is established from such experiences as `I am ignorant'."<sup>1</sup> This statement must be understood in the context of Nyaaya School and its views regarding ignorance. Nyayikaas defined ignorance as a mere absence of knowledge, and so, for them ignorance is a mere negation. The content of the above description of ignorance refutes the Nyaaya view of ignorance and states the Vedaanta view on the topic of ignorance. For a Vedaantist, ignorance is not a mere negation of knowledge. If ignorance is only a negation of knowledge, one might wonder as to the type of knowledge of which it is a negation. Knowledge can be understood in three ways. Firstly, knowledge can be used as synonymous with the witness or the perceiver of knowledge.<sup>2</sup> Its absence cannot be considered as ignorance, because it is eternal and so can never be associated with the state of negation. Secondly, a particular function of the mind can be understood as knowledge.<sup>3</sup> Here, the term `knowledge' is used in the indirect sense, because mental function can never illumine an object, if the self that underlies them does not illumine these mental functions.⁴ Since self is a permanent presence behind all mental functions, under no circumstances can this knowledge exist in a negative state. Thirdly, ignorance can mean negation of particular knowledge or universal knowledge. Particular knowledge cannot be negated, because even if a person says that he does not know anything, yet he does not loose the sense of perception. Therefore, even though he many not perceive a particular object, he may perceive another. There cannot be any negation of universal knowledge, as particular knowledge is based on universal knowledge, and without the latter the former is not possible. Besides, the knowledge that is eternal and ever existent can never be associated with negation. Thus, the claim of the Vedaantin that ignorance is not a mere negation is true.⁵ 

Since ignorance is not a mere negation, it is something positive. When we say that ignorance is positive it does not mean that it is an absolute substance like Brahman. If it were true, there would be no liberation, as the eternal ignorance would not allow the dawn of knowledge. The term `positive' is used to distinguish ignorance from mere negation. Ignorance is different from reality and unreality. It is neither masculine nor feminine, but neuter. It can never be truly explained by reason, as human reason is always tainted by ignorance. It cannot be proved by knowledge, as when knowledge dawns, ignorance vanishes like darkness before light. Ignorance is unintelligible and so it cannot bear any proof. It is like the imagination of a blind man about the sun. As unintelligible, it is indescribable. It is neither unreal, nor real; it is neither with parts, nor without parts; it is neither separable from knowledge, nor inseparable from it. Advaita Vedaanta sees in ignorance a way to explain the phenomenal world of names and forms, that is superimposed on Brahman, the absolute reality behind the universe and Aatman the substratum that underlies the empirical ego.⁶ In the state of ignorance the unreal is superimposed on the real. Thus, superimposition is the nature of the state of ignorance. In this section we could briefly study about superimposition, the nature of ignorance and its cause, viz., maayaa in its twofold aspects.

In this section, we clarify the nature of ignorance by analyzing the meaning of superimposition. We would also take up the question about the possibility of the superimposition of Brahman, the all-pervading reality.

Super imposition (adhyaaropa or adhyaasa) literally means the mistaken ascription or imputation of one thing for another. By superimposing, one attributes to a thing, qualities of essential nature, which do not belong to it. In his introduction to the Vedaanta-suutras, Shankara defines superimposition as "an awareness similar in nature to memory that arises on a different (foreign) basis a result of some past experience."⁷ Thus, it is the apparent presentation to the consciousness, by way of remembrance, of something previously observed, in some other thing. In other words, superimposition takes place, when the qualities of one thing which are not immediately present, through memory given to or projected upon another thing that is present to the consciousness and identified with it.⁸ "Superimposition, therefore, is erroneous cognition (mithyaa-jnaana), illusory appearance (avabhaasa): it is the cognition of `that' in what is not `that'."⁹ In the example of the snake being superimposed on the rope, or a man being superimposed on a tree stump in semi-darkness, the rope and the tree stump presented to the consciousness are, in fact, taken as a snake or as a man respectively. It is due to the mistaken attribution of what is known and remembered in the previous perception. Thus, the judgments `this is a snake' and `this is a man' are the result of a positive identification between what is experienced from the previous experience (the snake and the man) and what is perceived right now (the rope and the tree stump).¹⁰ 

Superimposition is different from experiencing similar things in different situations. For example as person sees a cow and there is an appearance of `cowness'. He then sees another cow, which also brings him an appearance of `cowness'. This cognition is valid, but not illusory. Superimposition is also distinct from an experience in which a person is seen at a particular place earlier and having seen again now, is recognized as a person who was seen before. It is also a valid cognition. Superimposition is not same as recollection, because in recollection one recalls something experienced earlier and presents to one's mind. Thus, the non-presence of an object is the essence of recollection. In the two experiences mentioned above, viz., the appearance of cowness in the second cow and the recognition of a person earlier and now, the objects are directly present at the time of cognition. But in recollection the object is directly not present, but only present in the image of the past experience. Superimposition is also different from some other illusory experiences such as a dream experience, the appearance of a white shell as yellow because of bile, and sugar tasting bitter because of fever. In these cases, there is an appearance of something, which one has already experienced earlier, viz., the content of the dreams, such as elephants or tiger, the yellowness of white shell, and the bitterness of the sugar. But, these appearances have more like the nature of recollection, and the content of the dream, yellowness of the white shell and the bitterness of the sugar are illusory recollections. So they are different from superimposition. The appearance involved in superimposition is based on an illusory cognition, rather than an illusory recollection. In the example of the rope-snake, the snake that is cognized is illusory. It is superimposed on the rope that is real. Thus, in superimposition there is a mixing up of the real and the unreal, the true and the untrue. In the rope-snake example, the real snake was seen earlier and this experience remains in the form of memory. Therefore, the perceiver of the snake does not experience the real snake. Nor does he recognize the snake as a mere recollection. But in perceiving the rope, he cognizes in it a snake, by way of superimposing the qualities of the snake on rope. Thus, the locus of superimposition is the rope, while the superimposed is the snake and its qualities.¹¹

Different schools interpret the notion of superimposition differently. The fundamental question raised by these schools relates to the status of the object that superimposed. In other words, they ask the question as to the reality or unreality of the superimposed object. The Anyathaakyaativaadins and Aatmakhyaativaadins say that superimposition consists in attribution of qualities of one thing to another, even though they explain this differently. Anyathaakyaativaadins say that in the experience of rope-snake, we have an initial vague awareness of `this' regarding the rope in front. The mind, unhappy with this vague awareness, looks for a distinct perception. But this craving for distinct perception is debarred due to some defect in the cognizer, his instrument of perception or the circumstances of perception. At the same time the similarity between the rope and the snake is brought to light in memory. This memory effects visual perception of the snake. Thus, the original vague awareness of the `this' is apprehended as `This is a snake'. The Nyaaya-Vaisesika schools subscribe to this view. The Aatmakhyaativaadins explain superimposition as follows. They say that the `this' of the externally perceivable rope is superimposed on the mentally present snake to for the erroneous judgment `This is a snake'. They explain this phenomenon psychologically. Due to some past impression inhering in the consciousness, there happens a simultaneous perception in the consciousness of the external `this' and the internal snake. As a result the qualities of the externally perceived rope and the internally recollected snake get mixed up. Thus the form of the snake appears externally even though it is not, in fact, perceived. The Buddhist Vijnaanavaadins expound this theory.¹²

The Akhyaavaadins define superimposition as the error founded on the non-apprehension of the difference between the superimposed (unreal) and on which something is superimposed (real). Thus, for the exponents of this school, superimposition is due to the confusion arising from the absence of discrimination between the unreal and the real. This school does not accept the notion of erroneous knowledge, because, for them, the acceptance of this philosophical standpoint cast doubt on the validity of all cognition. In other words, the very fact one accepts the possibility of erroneous knowledge there arises the need to prove that a particular cognition is a valid one. Therefore, they do not accept superimposition as an erroneous knowledge. According to them, in superimposition we really have not one, but two perceptions. The real problem is that we fail to recognize the differences between the two perceptions. They illustrate it with the seashell -- silver example. On the one hand, we have the absolute knowledge of the `this' in the judgment `This is a sea-shell'. But the seashell fails to come to the range of cognition due to some defect in the factors involved in the process of perception or due to the similarity between the seashell and the silver. The perception of similarity between the two awakens in the memory the silver seen in the shop, even though the silver is not remembered in association with any of its earlier time or locality, but simply as silver. So the cognition of `this' and `silver' come together, without their differences being apprehended. Thus, for Akhyaativaadhins, the non-perception, of difference between the two judgments involved, is the cause of superimposition. The followers of the Prabhaakara School held this view. The Asatkhyaativaadins said that superimposition is the fictitious assumption of attributes contrary to the nature of that thing on which something else is superimposed. In other words, superimposition occurs when some opposite attributes are given to a substratum arbitrarily. Thus, for them, superimposition consists in the unreal appearing as if real. In the illustration seashell -- silver, the non-existing silver appearing as the as-if real silver. Again the non-existent water in a mirage appears as-if real water. The Buddhist Suunya-Vaadins (Nihilists) subscribed to this view.¹³

Having clarified the perception of superimposition according to each of these different schools, Shankara concludes that in spite of their differences in perception they all converge in the central idea that superimposition consists in mistakenly considering one thing as having the attributes of another.¹⁴ From what we have said it is clear that superimposition is an illusory perception. In it, there are twofold illusions are at play, viz., the intrinsic and extrinsic. An intrinsic illusion is one, in which, the superimposed (reality) and that which superimposes (unreality) do not subsist together. When the real object appears, the illusion disappears and when the illusion manifests the reality is no more there. Only one of them is present at a time. We could take the example of the perception of a post as a ghost in semi-darkness, to illustrate intrinsic perception. When a person perceives a post as a ghost, the reality of the post is not manifested in his perception. When he sees the reality of the post, the unreality of the ghost ceases to exist. Both the post and the ghost are never simultaneously experienced in the intrinsic illusion. In an extrinsic illusion both the illusory and the real object subsist together. Besides these two there is also the medium through which the illusion takes place. Thus, in extrinsic illusion, the real object, the illusory object and the medium are present. The classical example of extrinsic illusion is the reflection of an object in a mirror. Here, we see the object (reality), the reflected image (unreality) and the mirror (medium) between the two.¹⁵

It is possible that both, the intrinsic and the extrinsic illusions appear at the same time in a given situation. We have such an example in the rope-snake illustration. A boy seeing a rope mistakes it for a snake and creates a lot of furor, as he was convinced that it was a snake. Here, we have an intrinsic illusion, as a rope is taken for a snake. In the same situation, there also involves an extrinsic illusion. If we approach the boy and ask him to describe the snake he saw, he may describe it saying that it was three feet long, about two inches thickness, brown in color and lying coiled near the door of his house. If we go to the place where the rope is lying, we could find that all the descriptions of the boy said about the snake exactly fit the rope. Thus, we find that the properties the rope has are exactly the same as that of the illusory snake the boy saw. The medium through which the properties of the rope are reflected on the snake is the illusory snake itself. As long as this illusion lasts the same properties coexist both in the rope and in the illusory snake. This is a clear case of extrinsic illusion.¹⁶ Thus, we find that both of these illusions take place simultaneously.

According to Advaita Vedaanta, the entire universe is as a result of both of these illusions. As a man is caught up in both, the intrinsic and extrinsic illusions he experiences the world of multiplicity. The universe is one, infinite and all-pervading reality, Brahman. Just as a rope is seen as a snake, so also the one infinite Brahman is seen as the world of names and forms. This is due to the intrinsic illusion in the cosmic level. Now the world itself serves as the medium for the creation of extrinsic illusion, just as the illusory snake is the medium for the illusion of rope-snake. The properties of eternity, infinity and reality, which belong to Brahman, have mirrored themselves in the world, in and through the medium of the world itself. Since we have here properties of Brahman, that of the world and the medium appearing together. Thus, we have an extrinsic illusion in the cosmic level. Because of these two types of illusions in the cosmic level, we do not see Brahman, the reality; but instead, we see the world as permanent and real, by projecting the attributes of reality on the world.¹⁷ The world has an illusory existence like that of the snake in the rope-snake illustration. As this illusory world is considered as real, its attributes are superimposed on the absolute Brahman. According to Shankara the attributes of non-self (anaatman), i.e., the world of thought and matter, which has only phenomenal and relative existence, are falsely superimposed on Brahman. Thus, the ultimate reality, the absolute and changeless Brahman, appears as the multiplicity of the world, due to false superimposition of the unreal on the real. "The obstruction that prevents the recognition of the self (Brahman) . . . is the superimposition of what does not really exist and is not self-evident in the self (Brahman).¹⁸ Thus, as long as one remains in the spell of adhyaropa or superimposition, he is going to consider the world of multiplicity and the names and forms (nama-rupa) as the ultimate and absolute reality.

After describing the nature of superimposition, Shankara raises the question, which could possibly be raised by a critic, whether this theory of superimposition is applicable to absolute and changeless Brahman? We can superimpose something or an attribute of something on another object only when we perceive the object on which we superimpose the quality in question. For instance, one can superimpose the idea of the snake on a rope only if the rope is presented to his perception. Therefore, for superimposition, understood in the sense of mistakenly attributing one thing to another, to take place the presence of the object on which something is superimposed, is necessary. This being so, how can one superimpose the phenomenal world on Brahman who is absolute, infinite and not apparent to our senses?¹⁹ In other words, the knowledge of Brahman belongs to the level of transcendental knowledge (Paara Vidhyaa), and how can one who has not known the reality of Brahman, still being in the level of phenomenal knowledge (apaaraa vidhyaa), superimpose the phenomenal world on Brahman?

In his attempt to reply the question of the possibility of Brahman being superimposed by the multiplicity of the world, Shankara holds a positive view. In other words, he does not see any contradiction in the phenomenal world being superimposed on Brahman, the absolute reality. Clarifying this point he says that there is no rule that, in every case of superimposition, that which is superimposed must be directly perceptible to the senses. It is possible to think of superimposing a quality on an object that is not directly presented to our sense experience. We can illustrate it with the example of the sky. The sky is not the object of our senses. Yet we superimpose on the sky qualities such as the concavity of its surface and the blueness of its appearance. Thus, just as we superimpose the sky, which we do not directly perceive, with these qualities, we can also superimpose the qualities of the phenomenal world on Brahman, which is not the object of our direct perception. Hence, there is no impossibility of superimposing the non-self on the self, though the latter is opposed to the former.²⁰

Again, although the absolute self is above subject-object distinction, it is not absolutely beyond apprehension, as it is apprehended as the content of the concept `I'. In other words, Brahman is objective in the sense that it is the object of the ego-idea. Besides, the self is opposed to the non-self and its existence is known to all, whether they are learned or ignorant through the ego-idea, which is a presentation of the self in the light of ignorance. Thus, the inner self is known to all as the `I' (ego-idea). No one doubts the existence of the self, as it is intuitively and immediately perceived, because of its self-evident nature.²¹

Having established the knowledge of the self as self-evident and that it is known to all as the `I', Shankara bases his argument for the superimposition of the phenomenal world on Brahman, in the ego-idea, which is the object of everyone's experience. Shankara points to two stages in the process of superimposition. In the first stage the ego-idea is superimposed on the inner self, which is existence and reality. Aatman is never an object of sense experience. Yet due to our ignorance we superimpose the idea of the private individuality, i.e., being someone, upon our awareness of our existence. In doing so, we fail to understand the absolute and universal character of Aatman, and consider it as the private property that belongs to an individual. This superimposition of the ego-idea on Aatman is the most significant act of a human being, which makes the inner self being presented in our normal consciousness as `the object of the ego-idea'. As soon as this first level of superimposition is done, one begins to experience oneself, in terms of `I', `my', `mine', `separate existence', `private individual' and many other similar modes. In other words, as the result of the first level of superimposition, one loses the universal idea of Aatman, being absolute existence and considers oneself as an individual.²² 

The experience of the individual existence at the first level of superimposition sets in motion the second level of superimposition. Here, the ego-idea reaches outward, identifying itself with the body, physical and mental attributes and action, without ever being aware of the true nature of the `I'. Thus, for instance, one says about himself: `I am ill', `I am going home' and similar statement fully forgetting the absolute nature of Aatman. Then the superimposition still goes external, in that one attempts of superimpose individuality on purely external objects and conditions and own it for oneself. Thus, a person says statements like `This house of mine', `I am member of the parliament' and similar statements about himself. This process continues endlessly, because making oneself an individual, one tries to externalize his individuality everywhere and on every reality. Thus, one's ego is identified with every object in the universe. It, in turn, automatically superimposes a multiple world of objects and entities upon Brahman, which is one existence and reality. Thus, by attributing individuality and other qualities to oneself, one sees multiplicity everywhere and superimposes on Brahman, the world of names and forms, which is constituted of individuals like himself and different from himself. One identifies everything in the world with oneself. The inner self, which is the absolute principle looks on as if it is the witness to all these multiplicity. It is completely unaffected by these false attributes, yet makes them all possible, for without it the world of multiplicity cannot exist. Thus, the world of appearance basically depends on the ego-idea and once the ego-idea is removed from the consciousness, the world of appearance also disappears.²³  Shankara sums up these two levels of superimposition by which the phenomenal world is superimposed on Brahman as follows:

Now that we have clarified the nature of ignorance, by looking into the meaning of superimposition, and the superimposition of the phenomenal world on Brahman, we could move on to consider the cause of ignorance, viz., the maayaa.

In this section we make an attempt to clarify the nature of maayaa, the cause of ignorance. We do this by spelling out its meaning, constituents and types.

Maayaa is the cause of superimposition.²⁵ It is maayaa that causes different modes of thinking, projections of worldly appearance and various conflicting ideas. It is antagonistic to knowledge, and is the source of all contradictions, relativities, dichotomies and polarities of human existence. There is a touch of mystery to the reality of maayaa and human intellect cannot attempt to exhaust its manifold forms, modes and possibilities. It not for maayaa, human existence would not have any novelty and a sense of wonder. Maayaa is not an empty concept that attempts to explain the passing nature of reality; but it has a scriptural foundation. Starting from the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Giita give an account of maayaa, as affecting human world and existence. We could elaborate the meaning of maayaa as understood in the scriptures.

We find the beginnings of the doctrine of maayaa in the Rig-Veda. The word `maayaa' and its derivatives are used in the Rig Vedic hymns over one hundred times.<sup>26</sup> Here, the term `maayaa' is used to mean supernatural powers that belong to gods. The god Indra is said to assume many forms through maayaa. Itis a power to transform oneself and assume various forms. Thus, in Rig-Veda the term `maayaa' is used in a general sense to mean the divine act or power by which the divinity makes a likeness of the eternal ideas inherent in its nature. <sup>27</sup> The appearance of the sun with bright light and splendor is attributed to the great power and maayaa of gods Varuna and Mitra.<sup>28</sup> In this text, unlike the former one, where Indra is said to assume many forms, maayaa refers to the power of creating and constructing objects characterized by forms and dimensions. Thus, maayaa here refers to the ability of Varuna and Mitra to create forms rather than assume forms. The phenomenal world is seen, therefore, as stemming from the creative activity of the maayaa of gods.<sup>29</sup> In the texts of Rig Veda that deal with Indra assuming forms, the term `maayaa' denotes the power and ability of gods to produce marvelous phenomena which lack certain degree of reality. But, in the texts that deal with creative power of Varuna and Mitra the term `maayaa' means the power of creating and constructing objects. Thus, we have two meanings assigned to the term `maayaa' in the Rig-Veda, viz., power (prajnaa) and deception or illusion (kapata). The idea of power goes with the idea of mystery; and thus maayaa means `the mysterious power of the will' (sankalpa-sakti).³⁰ Thus, in Rig-Vedic texts maayaa meant both the wisdom of the mysterious power of the will that make the gods create the splendor of the phenomenal world, and the deceptive or illusory bringing about realities that lack certain degree of reality.

In the Upanishads, we find an indirect reference to maayaa as that which `covers' or `veils the truth.³¹ Chaandogya Upanishad speaks of the covering of untruth that hides one from the ultimate truth, just as the surface of the earth hides the golden treasure hidden under it.³² Brihdaaranyaka Upanishad and Iisha Upanishad tell of the golden disc covers the face of truth and suggest that the invocation of the grace of God would help one remove the veil and letting one see the truth. Svetaasvatra Upanishad also says that this unveiling of truth or the cessation of the world illusion (vishva-maayaa-nivirttih) can be brought about by the worship of God.³³ Upanishads also give direct statements about maayaa. In Svetaasvatara Upanishad we find a direct reference to the term `maayaa' and the Lord who possesses it is called Maayin, a wonder working powerful being who creates the universe by his power. The Lord Maayin, thus, is said to be the maker of the world, who creates the world with the help of maayaa.<sup>34</sup> Brihdaaranyaka Upanishad associates maayaa with god Indra, who takes many forms because of it.<sup>35</sup> Thus, in these two direct uses of maayaa, viz., as the creative power of the Lord, and as forms assumed by the Lord, it refers to what is within a person or to a quality peculiar to him rather than something exists out side. Thus, we find in the Upanishads the indirect and direct references to maayaa. In the indirect references, maayaa is seen as something independently existing and covering the truth, and the invocation of the grace of god is needed to remove it. The idea of maaya as veiling the truth brings in the meaning of `illusion' in the word `maayaa'. The direct references of maayaa as the power of the Lord to create, brings to light a more positive meaning of the word `maayaa'. Thus, we find in the Upanishads, as in Rig-Veda, twofold characterizations of the word `maayaa', viz., a positive one meaning creative power and a negative one meaning `illusion'.

In Bagavad Giita, maayaa is associated with Iishvara. It is the power that enables Iishvara to produce multiple nature. It is energy (shakti) of Iishvara, i.e., the power of self-becoming (aatmavibhuuti). This power is called maayin.³⁶ It is the power of Iishvara from which the world arises. The world is creation of Iishvara and maayaa is his power of manifestation. It is with the help of maayaa, that Iishvara measures out and molds forms. Iishvara is in full control of maayaa, for he would not be infinite and supreme existence if he were subject to maayaa. Yet it is Iishvara's power of manifestation (kartum) and non-manifestation (a-kartum) and other-manifestation (anyathaa-kartum).³⁷ Iishvara and maayaa are dependent and beginningless. At a later stage of Giita thought maayaa gradually comes to have a delusive character, as it is seen as hiding the real from our experience.³⁸ 

Our consideration of the meaning of the term `maayaa' in the Rig-Veda, Upanishads and in the Giita, clearly points to its twofold meanings, viz., a positive and negative attribution of this term. Positively it means a creative power of Iishvara, while negatively it means a delusion or illusion. The former is a creative power of God with which he fashions the universe, while the latter is a veil that covers the real nature of truth and reality. These twofold uses of the term `maayaa' can also be understood in relation to the twofold derivations of this word. If the word `maayaa' is taken as having derived from the root `ma' which means `to measure', `to form' or `to build', and from the suffix `ya' which means `that by which objects are given specific shape',<sup>39</sup> maayaa might refer to the positive meaning of the creative power of God. If the word `maayaa' is said to have derived from two words `ma' which means `not' and `ya' which means `that', then the term `maayaa' would literally mean `not that'.⁴⁰ In other words, in the light of the second derivation maayaa would mean the veiling of truth or an illusion. In the light of the above analysis one could say that maayaa points to both something real and unreal, something positive and negative. But its real nature cannot be truly analyzed or grasped. Heinrich Zimmer describes the popular perception of maayaa as follows:

Having analyzed the doctrine of maayaa and its meaning in the light of the scriptures, we could now move on to see how Shankara takes up this doctrine and interprets it from the perspective of Advaita Vedaanta. For him the question -- when and how superimposition occurred or the ego-idea brought about the phenomenal world -- is not something we can intellectually grasp. The relationship between the finite and the infinite had been one of the major philosophical problems that baffled the mind of sages and thinkers. The Greco-Christian tradition attempted to face this issue by accepting that the finite has a reality of its own, and this reality was caused by the infinite, transcendental first cause. In other words, they held that the infinite first cause is the cause of the phenomenal world. Such a philosophical position would leave us with a situation in which the absolute God is submitting Himself to transformation and change. Besides, the question `why, at all, should God create?' would remain unanswered. In his attempt to solve this issue Shankara maintained that the world is not absolute, but relative. The world is maayaa, i.e., it is the world of appearance. The concept of maayaa applies to the phenomenal existence, which consists of the world of names and forms. The ultimate substratum in relation to which the appearance of names and forms take place is Brahman, the one without a second. The world of maayaa is not non-existent, yet it differs from Brahman, the reality. Maayaa is not real, because it ceases to exist at the dawn of knowledge. Thus, for Shankara, the world-appearance is maayaa and Brahman identical with Aatman is the only reality. He says further that the fundamental unreality of the world caused by maayaa can never be understood as long as one is viewing him from the phenomenal (vyavahaarika) perspective. But the unreality of the maayaa can be understood only in relation to the state of Brahmaanubhava. For a realized man the multiplicity of maayaa ceases to exist, just a dream has no reality when a dreamer wakes up from his sleep. Thus, the attempt to know what caused maayaa involves transcending maayaa. When we do that maayaa vanishes. Thus, Shankara concludes that the relationship between Brahman and maayaa, by its very nature, unknowable and indefinable by any process of human intellect. That is why Shankara maintains an enlightened agnosticism with regard to the origin of maayaa and its relationship to Brahman.⁴² 

Speaking of the nature of maayaa in his Dakshinamurti Stotra (An Ode to the Divine Self) Shankara defines maayaa as follows:

Commenting on this stotra, Sri Suresvaraachaarya in his exposition named Maanasollasa (Brilliant Play of Thought) describes maayaa as follows:

Having clarified the meaning of maayaa, we could proceed with our discussion as did Shankara himself, noting that maayaa is both a statement of fact and a principle.⁴⁵ As a statement of fact it is the present, the past and all the possible worlds. "It is a domain of antithetical situations, subject-object distinctions, paradoxes and animosities"⁴⁶ that characterize the world of our everyday perception. As a principle, like Brahman, maayaa is eternal and beginningless. "Maayaa is beginningless (anaadhi), for time arises only with it; it is unthinkable (achintya), for all thought is subject to it; it is indescribable (anirvachaniya) for all language results from it."⁴⁷ In this sense maayaa has been described by Vedaantins as the inexplicable power of the supreme Lord, by which all the changes in the world is brought about.⁴⁸ As the phenomenal world, it cannot be considered either a being (sat) or a non-being (asat). Though the world of appearance is unreal in the sense, that it does not exist to the one who has attained the true and the highest knowledge, it is real in the sense that it appears to exist as long as ignorance persists. To quote Shankara:

The maayaa is known to the consciousness, the witnessing agent. Therefore, it is taken as real. But, at the same time it cannot be regarded as real as the absolute reality (Brahman). Nor can it be viewed as being coexistent with Brahman, as it loses its existence as soon as knowledge is attained. It can be compared to a fog that covers the sun from view; but when the sun is in full view, the fog vanishes. Maayaa is real in the sense that it presents objects to our perception; but unreal in that it is not transcendentally existing as Brahman. Thus, maayaa is something mysterious. It seems to have no definite beginning in the sense of having a definite cause. At the same time it produces something that has the appearance of reality; and this appearance loses itself, when the truth of knowledge is dawned. So, we could say that maayaa is a principle, that cannot be explained, and which is the source of the fact that there are plurality and diversities in the universe.⁵⁰ Now that we have clarified the meaning of maayaa we could move on to analyze the constitution of maayaa.

To the question -- how maayaa causes these dichotomies, contradictions, plurality and subject-object distinctions -- Shankara replies that it is due to the three qualities (gunaas), viz., sattva, rajas and tamas, that constitute the being of maayaa. We could briefly mention the nature and functions of each of these three gunaas. Sattvagunaa is the highest quality. In its purest form, sattva implies tranquillity, equanimity, direct perception of Aatman, absolute peace and serenity, contentment, joy and steady devotion to Aatman. Since sattva is purity, even when it mixes with rajasgunaa and tamasgunaa, it does not block the way to liberation, but rather it lights up the path to self-realization, as sattva reveals Aatman as the sun brightens up everything in the phenomenal world. When sattva is mixed with other gunnaas, the seeker experiences absence of pride, purity, contentment, austerity, a desire to study the scriptures, self-surrender to God, harmlessness, truthfulness, continence and freedom from worldly passions. Beside, he possesses absence of greed, faith, devotion, longing for liberation, aversion to the things of this world and all other virtues that lead to God.⁵¹ 

The nature of rajasgunaa is activity. It is desire-ridden and agitated. It is the power of dynamism in the phenomenal world. Attachment, desire and similar qualities, and grief and similar moods of the mind are caused by rajasgunaa. Some other qualities associated with rajasgunaa are lust, anger, jealousy, egoism and envy. When rajas dominates a person, he would be passionately attached to worldly action. Thus, rajasgunaa is the cause of bondage and samsaara.⁵² Tamasgunaa veils the real nature of an object, and makes it appear as something different from what it is. Some of the characteristics of tamasgunaa are failure to perceive the object as it really is, presenting a thing as other than what it is, wavering of the mind, taking illusions as real, ignorance, dullness, sleep, delusion and stupidity. Even if a person is intelligent, clever, learned and possesses a keen faculty of analysis, if overtaken by tamasgunaa he would never be able to reach the true nature of Aatman, in spite of repeated explanation. He takes appearance for reality because of the obscuring power of tamasgunaa. A man under the grip of tamas is compared by the Vedaantins as a sleep-waker or an unconscious log of wood. Tamas is responsible for the person's continued subjection to the cycle of birth and rebirth. Besides, it also helps the activity of rajasgunaa.⁵³ 

The presence, the absence or the combinations of these three gunaas in varying degrees is that which effects different stages of in the cosmic cycle.⁵⁴ When sattvagunaa is predominant, there is produced the jnaanashakti, which is responsible for the working of the whole cognitive process. The preponderance of rajas and tamas produces the kriyashakt. The kriyashakti has two powers, viz., the concealing power (avaranashakti) and the power of projection (vikshepashakti).⁵⁵ It is by the power of concealment that maayaa veils the true nature of Brahman and Aatman. A small particle of cloud by obstructing the vision of the observer, conceals as it were, the solar disc which extents over many miles. Similarly maayaa enshrouds man's spiritual intelligence and conceals the self, which is unlimited and not subject to transmigration, thereby preventing to realize its identity with Brahman. Avernashakti, therefore, is the negative aspect of concealment. It is that force which enables maayaa, so to enshroud Aatman that he becomes the subject of pleasure, pain and misery.⁵⁶ "The self covered by this (concealing power of ignorance) [maayaa], may become subject to samsaara (relative existence) characterized by one's feeling as an agent, the experiencing subject, happy, miserable, etc., just as a rope may become a snake due to the concealing power of one's ignorance."⁵⁷ The projecting power of maayaa is always present with the concealing power. It is the positive aspect of maayaa that brings manifold realities in the world. It constitutes the world of names and forms. Vikshepashakti is identical with the power of creating. With this power, maayaa creates the appearance (vivartha), superimposes (adhyaasa) the unreal on the real and leads one to error (bhranti), like that of a rope-snake or a shell-silver. Therefore, the power of maayaa, which creates illusion or mistaken impression on the self (Aatman) and creates all -- from the subtle bodies to the cosmos -- is called vikshepashakti.⁵⁸ 

Brahman, the absolute consciousness, associated with maayaa and its twofold powers of concealment and projection, is said to be ultimate cause of this phenomenal world. Any creation involves three causes, viz., the material cause, the efficient cause and the instrumental cause. To illustrate this we take the example of the creation of a pot. Here, the mud is the material cause, the potter is the efficient cause and the potter's wheel is the instrumental cause. In the creation of the finite world Brahman is said to be all these three causes.⁵⁹ Advaitins explaining this point say that Brahman associated with maayaa, when looked upon form the standpoint of its limitation (upaadhi) is said to be the material cause of the universe.⁶⁰ This point can be illustrated with the help of the example of bubble in water. A bubble in water consists of water. The wall of a bubble and the substratum upon which it exists are made of water. The bubble is created out of water and ends up in water. Just as water is the material cause of the bubble and in which it comes and goes, similarly Brahman is the material cause, ultimate substratum, in which the apparent plurality of the phenomenal world manifests and ceases to manifest.⁶¹ Another classical example given to illustrate Brahman as the material cause of the universe is that of the spider and its web. It is a known fact that a spider makes the web, by using a secretion from its own glands. In the weaving of the web, the material cause is the spider, when seen from the point of view of its body. In the same way Brahman is said to be the material cause of the universe when viewed from its upaadhi aspect.⁶² 

Brahman is spoken as the efficient and instrumental cause, when its association with maayaa is considered from the stand of its conscious aspect.⁶³ Brahman's efficient causality over the world can be illustrated with the example of the spider and the web. The spider is considered as the efficient cause of the web when seen from the point of view of its own self. The spider is the efficient cause of the web because without the life principle inherent in the spider, i.e., the material present in the spider, its body cannot weave the web. Thus, it is the life principle in the spider, i.e., its self is that provides efficient causality for netting the web. Similarly, Brahman, the supreme self, one without a second, through its own power of maayaa creates the universe, from gross matter to the highest cosmic manifestations. In this manner Brahman is the efficient cause of the universe.⁶⁴ Brahman's instrumental causality over the world can be explained with the help of the illustration, the magnet and the iron filings. Inactive iron filings when placed near the magnet show sign of movement, though they are inactive, because the magnet by way of attraction brings movement in them. In the same way ignorance which is inactive and lifeless shows activity because of its affinity to Brahman. Since it is the presence of Brahman that activates the maayaa and starts the process of the emergence of the phenomenal world, Brahman can be seen as instrumental to the activity and manifestation of maayaa.⁶⁵ Thus, Brahman is also the instrumental cause of the world process, besides being the efficient and material causes.

One could oppose the proposed Advaitic position of Brahman being the material, efficient and instrumental causes of the universe, by saying if Brahman is the cause of the universe, it would be as conscious and real as Brahman, as the cause and the effect are one and the same. To this objection, the Advaitin would propose vivarhavaada (the law of causation), which says that creation is the transformation of the cause into effect, without the cause losing its own character. From this it is concluded that creation is more an apparent transformation than a real one. Vivartavaada is fundamentally different from parinaamavaada (the law of evolution), which says that creation involves an evolution of the effect from the cause, and so admits a real change in the cause. For Advaita Vedaantin, the world is a vivarta, the unreal and appearance of Brahman. Just as the snake is the vivarta, of the rope in the rope-snake example, so also the world is the vivarta of Brahman. Thus, the positing of Brahman, as the total cause of the universe would in no way lead one to the conclusion that the material world caused by Brahman must be of the nature of Brahman. Brahman is real; maayaa is unreal and so the phenomenal world is also unreal.⁶⁶ 

Thus, maayaa, possessing the powers of concealment and projection, is that which transforms as it were, the pure self -- immutable, unattached and indivisible -- into the individual ego (jiiva) and the world. In this manner, by simultaneous interplay of the concealing and the projecting powers, maayaa veils the true and the real nature of the absolute reality. In doing so it `forms' or `creates' the world of appearance, just as ignorance conceals the nature of the rope and creates the illusion of the snake.⁶⁷ Having clarified the constitution of maayaa, we could, in the next section, consider the types of maayaa.

2.1.2.3. Types of Maayaa:

Maayaa is said to be one or many depending on the mode of observing it either collectively or individually.⁶⁸ Advaita Vedaantins, while recognizing the absolute existence of Brahman alone, do admit the distinction of the finite beings, from the relative standpoint of ignorance, in order to explain meaningfully the states of bondage and liberation. Scriptures speak of these two states as a matter of fact. These two states are not possible for one and the same being simultaneously. Again, scriptures point to attaining liberation by two means, viz., the immediate process and the gradual process. All these indicate the diversity of finite beings. The recognition of diversity of finite beings naturally leads to the consideration of the distinction between the collective and individual states of ignorance. If this distinction in maayaa were not accepted, the liberation from ignorance of one man would imply the liberation of all. Again it would be impossible for one to attain liberation by way of knowledge (jnaana) on account of others remaining in the state of ignorance. For these reasons Advaitins accept different types of ignorance, and they limited to the relative point of the phenomenal (vyavakaarika) level and is not applicable to the absolute perspective of Brahmaanubhava.⁶⁹ Thus, for Advaitins, maayaa appears in two different modes, namely the collective or the cosmic (samashti) and the individual (vyasti). From the collective point of view it is seen as one, whereas from the individual point of view it is many. They explain the two modes using the illustration of the trees and the lake. From the collective point of view a group of trees is considered as a forest or a grove, while at the same time a grove can be seen as many individual trees. Again, water in a lake can be considered as one from the collective mode, yet from the individual aspect it can be sees as different quantities of water. Similarly, maayaa can be considered as aggregate and individual. To quote Vedaantasaara on this point: "As trees . . . considered as an aggregate are denoted as one, viz., the forest, or water collectively named as the reservoir, so also ignorance existing in jiivas being diversely manifested, [i.e., individual maayaa], is collectively represented as one. . . ."⁷⁰ The individual maayaa is called avidhyaa.⁷¹ 

Maayaa, in its cosmic aspect is the principle of individuation. It is Brahman's power of becoming or appearing as many. Therefore, the origin of the world-process and the changes that take place in the world are attributed to the cosmic maayaa. It is the capacity to bring the entire existence appearing as objective to the finite consciousness. Thus, in cosmic maayaa, the idea of origination, which implies power and will, is more apparent. But it denies objectively real and manifests objectively false. Collective maayaa is the mysterious primeval ignorance that exists eternally in relation to consciousness and which is free from all forms of differentiation. In it sattvagunaa predominates the rajasgunnaa and the tamasgunaa.⁷² The collective maayaa is superior to the individual maayaa, because the former indicates Iishvara, the Sagunaa Brahman, while the latter refers to jiiva, the individual ego. While Iishvara cannot be deluded by the power of ignorance, the jiiva is totally under the sway of ignorance.⁷³ The individual maayaa (avidhyaa) is the principle of ignorance that intercepts things from view. Thus, in it, the idea of obscuration is more prominent. Avidhyaa brings about such obscurations by misinterpretation of one thing for another, like a rope for a snake. It denies knowledge of identity and projects subjectively false ideas. In it rajasgunaa and tamasgunaa dominate.⁷⁴ Finite beings are influenced by maayaa in its individual aspect. "As a forest, from the standpoint of the units that compose it, may be designated as a number of trees, and as a reservoir from the same point of view may be spoken of as quantities of water, so also ignorance when denoting separate units is spoken of as many."⁷⁵ Thus, individual mayaa refers to individual finite beings. Even though, we designate maayaa as collective and individual because they refer to Iishvara and jiivas respectively, they are identical like a forest and trees or a reservoir and the water. In other words, there is no essential difference between the collective and individual maayaa. Just as a tree is essentially of the nature of the forest and a jar of water is of the nature of the reservoir, so also both collective and individual maayaa are essentially illusory and has for their substratum, Brahman, one without a second.⁷⁶ 

Now that we have clarified the meaning, the constitution and the types of maayaa, we could move on to dwell on the consequences of maayaa, both in its cosmic and individual aspects in the next section.

2.2. CONSEQUENCES OF IGNORANCE:

According to Shankara whether it be in it cosmic or individual aspect, maayaa veils the true nature of Brahman, the absolute reality. It serves as the limiting adjunct (upaadhi) for Brahman, just as clouds veil the rays of the sun. Now, we could elaborate the effects of maayaa in both of these aspects.

Maayaa, in its cosmic aspect, in collaboration with its constituents, viz., the sattvagunaa, the rajasgunaa and the tamasgunaa, brings about the illusion of the multiple phenomenal world, by superimposing the whole of creation on Brahman (Aatman). This superimposition takes threefold aspects depending on the preponderance of the constituent gunaas of maayaa, viz., the causal body, the subtle body and the gross body. As a result, "the indivisible Brahman appears threefold through illusion and not in reality. These forms are -- `the sphere of gods' [causal body], `the sphere pertaining to the body' [gross body] and `the sphere of the elements' [subtle body]."⁷⁷ In this section, we could elaborate the consequences of cosmic maayaa in the levels of the causal body, the subtle body and the gross body.

The cosmic maayaa leads to the evolution of the world of names and forms. In the cosmic absorption of everything in Brahman, there comes about a sudden change, when Brahman wills to evolve from within and express itself. This, in turn, disturbs the indeterminate maayaa and its constituents, viz., the sattva, rajas and tamas, which in turn sets in motion the creation of the phenomenal world. "The supreme Brahman, eternally free and immutable existed alone. That owing to the superimposed identity with its own maayaa, became as it were the seed of the universe as the unformed and the unnamed."⁷⁸ When Brahman accepts maayaa in its sattvic element, it becomes Iishvara. Brahman, in association with sattva is the all-knower, because everything is reflected in its intelligence. As veiled by the cosmic ignorance Brahman is called Iishvara or Sagunaa Brahman. Iishvara is the supreme Lord, who is worshipped by the ordinary people as their personal God, in the forms of different deities. According to Shankara, Brahman with qualities is a step lower than the Brahman without any qualities (Nirgunaa Brahman). Iishvara is the highest manifestation of the absolute Brahman in the phenomenal world. Besides, he is the highest reality the human mind can grasp and the human heart can love. Shankara also holds that the Iishvara is omniscient, omnipotent and has power over inferior limiting adjuncts. "Consciousness [Pure Brahman] associated with this [cosmic maayaa] is endowed with qualities as omniscience, universal Lordship, all-controlling powers, etc. and is designated as undifferentiated, the inner guide, the cause of the world and Iishvara on account of its being the illuminator of the aggregate of ignorance [cosmic maayaa]."⁷⁹ Thus, Iishvara is all-knower, as he is the witness of all animate and inanimate objects in the universe. He has universal Lordship, as he gives rewards and punishments to finite beings according to the merits of their action (karma). Iishvara has total control over all, because he directs all mental propensities of finite beings. Cosmic maayaa is said to be associated with only with Iishvara and is manifest only to him, though he is never influenced by it. Though Iishvara is the highest manifestation of Brahman in the universe, he is not absolute existence as Brahman, because he is as unreal as the phenomenal world. In other words, Brahman looked upon from the standpoint of the world, as associated with cosmic maayaa is Iishvara.⁸⁰ 

Cosmic maayaa associated with Brahman in relation to the three gunaas brings to light the different aspects of Iishvara's Godhead. Thus, cosmic maayaa also gives rise to the conception of Iishvara, as the creator (Brahmaa), the preserver (Vishnu) and the destroyer (Siva). These three gods are nothing other than Iishvara with reference to three gunaas. When Iishvara is limited by maayaa in its sattvic aspect, i.e., sattva as the predominating upaadhi, it is called Vishnu. He sustains and preserves the cosmic order. When Iishvara has maayaa with rajas as the dominant upaadhi, it is called Brahmaa. He is the creator of the cosmic order. When maayaa dominates Iishvara with tamas, it is called the Siva or Rudhra. He is the destroyer of the universe. Thus, Iishvara with the help of the sattva preserves, with the help of rajas creates and using tamas destroys.⁸¹ 

Thus, Iishvara, in these three aspects of his Godhead, exercises total control over the phenomenal existence, and plays an essential role in the creation of the world. The limiting adjuncts that are characteristic of Iishvara with sattvic element is superior limiting adjuncts (niratisayoopaadhi). Iishvara, in association with the tamisic element, acquires lower limiting adjuncts (nihinoopaadhi). Iishvara's superior limiting adjuncts direct the inferior limiting adjuncts, by rajasic elements of maayaa, thereby originates the elements of nature. To quote Shankara: "The Lord (Iishvara) endowed with superior limiting adjuncts",⁸² "rule the souls with inferior adjuncts."⁸³ Thus, Iishvara in association with maayaa and the constituent gunaas form the material and efficient cause of the cosmic order. The cosmic maayaa, associated with Iishvara is known as the causal body, because Iishvara is the cause of all. In other words, Iishvara is the causal seed that form the foundation of the world of names and forms. Therefore, the body associated with Iishvara is known as the causal body.⁸⁴ Now that we have looked into the activity of the cosmic maayaa in relation to the causal body, we could move on to see its activity in relation to the subtle bodies of the cosmos.

Cosmic maayaa in association with rajasgunaa and tamasgunaa produces lower limiting adjuncts in Iishvara. These lower limiting adjuncts of Iishvara lies at the root of evolution of the five subtle elements (suukshmabhuutas), viz., the ether (akaasha), the air (vaayu), the fire (teejas), the water (aap) and the earth (mahii). These elements do not intermix, as they are pure and simple. They have distinctive qualities: akaasha -- sound, vaayu -- energy, teejas -- heat and light, aap -- taste and mahii -- potency affecting smell.⁸⁵ "From that [the supreme Brahman conditioned by cosmic maayaa, i.e., Iishvara] originated Ether, which is characterized by sound. From Ether, Air, having the characteristic of touch, comes into existence. Thence again Light, characterized by form was produced. From Light arose Water, of the nature of taste. From Water comes out Earth, with its distinctive quality of smell." ⁸⁶

These subtle elements that emerge from the lower limiting adjuncts of Iishvara, though contain particle of sattvagunaa and rajasgunaa, have a greater preponderance of tamasgunaa. In comparison with the other elements ether has the greatest amount of sattvagunaa and earth has the greatest amount of tamasgunaa. Thus, there is a decrease of sattva and increase of tamas from ether to earth.⁸⁷ "On account of the preponderance of inertia observed in them [the five subtle elements], their cause also must have an excess of the quality of darkness (tamas). At the time [of creation of the subtle elements], the qualities of sattva, rajas and tamas are reproduced in ether, etc., in accordance with the law that the qualities of the cause determine the qualities of the effect."⁸⁸ 

These five subtle elements (suukshmabhuutas) that have evolved through the lower limiting adjuncts of Iishvara is said to be subtle, because they have no gross forms and they are unable to participate in any action. These elements are rudimentary in nature (tanmaatras), as they possess only their own characteristic attribute. For instance, the rudimentary element ether has only the characteristic of sound. So also are the other tanmaatras. These rudimentary elements, when first evolved, were in an uncompounded state (apanchiikrita). They were totally unmixed and unseparated from each other. Thus, at their creation, the subtle elements were simple and unaloyed.⁸⁹ All these subtle elements constitute the subtle body in the cosmic level. These are the effects of the cosmic maayaa in the level of the subtle bodies.

Now that we have clarified the evolution of the cosmic subtle body, we could proceed to explain the emergence of the gross matter from the subtle elements, by the activity of the cosmic maayaa, in the next section.

As we have mentioned earlier, the subtle elements are rudimentary and uncompounded and so by themselves they are unable to have to produce gross objects of the universe. The have to go through a process of quintuplication (panchiikaranam). It is a process in which the rudimentary subtle elements (tanmaatras) split up, intermingle and give way to the gross elements (mahaabhuutas). This process takes place in four stages. In the first stage the five subtle elements remain in their pure and subtle forms. The second stage involves the division of each subtle element into two equal halves. In the third stage one half of each subtle element remains in tact, while the other half splits up into four equal parts. Thus, at this stage each subtle element divides itself into five parts, i.e., one half piece and four one-eighth bits. In the final stage one half of each subtle element combines with for different one-eighth bits, one each from the other four elements.⁹⁰ Sureshvaraachaarya in his Panchiikarana-Vaarttikam, comments on this process of quintuplication as follows:

By this way of fivefold combinations the five subtle elements give rise to five gross elements (mahaabhuutas), i.e., the gross ether, the gross air, the gross fire, the gross water and the gross earth. Even though, after panchiikaranam, each gross element has got some part of the other elements, still it retains its name owing to the preponderance of its own part.⁹² Since mahaabhuutas are combinations of all subtle elements, the former imbibes the qualities of the latter. As a result, the mahaabhuutas are not entirely different from suukshmabhuutas, as the latter is the cause of the former, just as a piece of cloth is not different from the threads that make the cloth.⁹³ Though similar to the subtle elements, the gross elements have greater portions of lower qualities of rajas and tamas. As a result of this factor in the composition of the gross elements, those that evolve earlier, which has more preponderance of sattvagunaa rather than the rajas and the tamas are simpler than later evolved ones. Therefore, the later evolved gross elements, besides possessing qualities exclusive to them, also possess qualities that belong to the preceding elements.⁹⁴ To quote on this point from Panchiikarana-Vaarttikam:

From the mahaabhuutas and their various compounds of integration and differentiation, there arises the cosmic system of fourteen worlds: three in the higher region, four in the middle region and seven in the lower region, viz., the satyaloka, the jnaanaloka and the tapaloka respectively. The satyaloka is formed out of the combinations of elements, in which sattvagunaa is dominant. In this loka, the souls enjoy an expansive life. In virtue of the rhythmic vibrations of life-current passing through, it is possible for the souls, in the satyaloka, to move progressively, enjoy better life and understand wider vision of truth. Those who live here are full of life; their knowledge is intuitive, delight serene and life easy. The three planes of the higher region of the satyaloka are satyam, tapas and jana. Jnaanaloka evolves when the various combinations of elements are dominated by the rajasgunaa. It is an intermediate state that is characterized by coarse matter, life and mind. Though there is coarse matter in this state, there is order and coherence that life can grow and mind can function progressively. The life, here, is freer. There is clarity of vision, freedom and delight. The four planes of the middle region of jnaanaloka are mahar, svar, bhuvar and bhur. The tapaloka evolves when the combinations of elements, in which, tamasgunaa predominates. Due to the activity of the tamas, this state is full of darkness, and it is not conducive to the development of higher life and mental activity. In this sphere darkness, ignorance, contradictions, perplexities and confusions prevail. Since it is far removed from the center of life, one cannot have life and bliss in this state. Besides, as tamas dominates, the life force cannot make itself felt. The seven planes of the lower region of tapaloka are atala, vitala, sutala, rasaatala, talaatala, mahaatala and paataala.⁹⁶ 

The last of these planes paataala is the world of phenomena, which contains four kinds of gross bodies and the food and drink appropriate to them. The four kinds of gross bodies are: those that are born of the womb like man and beasts; those that came out of egg like birds and reptiles; those that emerged from moisture like lice and mosquitoes; and those that grows from the soil like trees and creepers. All these gross bodies are perceived as one and the same result of the cosmic maayaa. But they can be perceived as separate entities like a tree in a forest.⁹⁷ In this manner cosmic maayaa brings about from the subtle elements, five gross elements by way of panchiikaranam, which, in turn, by various combinations manifests the multiplicity of the world in the realm of the gross body.

Having considered the activity of the cosmic maayaa in the macrocosm (aadhidevaka), we could focus out attention on the cosmic order set up by the activity of the cosmic maayaa.

The macrocosmic order set up by the cosmic maayaa consists of three cosmic orders of existence that belong to the three stages. The first cosmic stage of existence is waking consciousness (Viraat). The order that is presented to this stage of existence is the order of the cosmic gross body. It consists of all gross manifestations, which constitute the sensible world. It includes the five gross elements of ether, air, fire, water and earth. It also contains the threefold regions and the fourteen planes associated with the regions. Besides, this world of phenomena which contains four types of gross bodies and the food and drink appropriate to them, are part of this order. All these belong to the first state of cosmic waking consciousness. Thus, to this state belongs Brahman as limited by the cosmic gross body.⁹⁸ "The compounded elements [gross elements] go into the formation of the gross universe. . . . These gross elements . . . produce Viraat, i.e., the sum total of all bodies. This is the gross body of the embodied Aatman."⁹⁹ 

The second cosmic stage of existence is the cosmic dream consciousness, in which, Brahman has the totality of the cosmic subtle body as its limiting adjunct. The consciousness, which identifies with the aggregate of the totality of subtle bodies as an individual whole, is called Hirayanagarbha. Thus, the object of this state of consciousness is the five unconmponded elements (apanchiikrita), viz., ether, air, fire, water, and earth, which are endowed with the powers of knowledge, will and activity.¹⁰⁰ The ideal world of the subtle bodies is identified with Hirayanagarbha, which literally means `the golden embryo'. It is Brahman as effect (kaarya) envelopes itself in the `world egg' (brahmaanda) out of which develops according to the modes of realization, the whole manifestation of subtle existence. Hirayanagarbha is the primordial germ of the cosmic light, and is described as the `synthetic aggregate of life' (jiiva-jnaana)¹⁰¹ Hirayanagarbha is also called Suutraatmaa, because it is the total vital force before manifestation that pervades the universe as the thread runs through the garland.¹⁰² It is called the cosmic dream-state, because just as in a dream the physical phenomena of waking state are experienced in the form of mere ideas, so also in the cosmic level, the gross universe is transformed on the plane of Hirayanagarbha into a subtle universe. Thus, in the cosmic level the stage identified with Hirayanagarbha constitutes the intermediary state between the waking state and the state of deep sleep.¹⁰³ 

The third cosmic existence brought about by the cosmic maayaa is the state of cosmic deep-sleep consciousness, in which Brahman has for its upaadhi the causal or bliss body.¹⁰⁴ In the state of deep-sleep, everything that is characteristic of waking state and the dream-state ceases to exist, like a banian tree in its seeds. In the deep-sleep one merges into the causal condition, viz., the state of ignorance. Thus, the causal body, which constitutes the order of cosmic deep-sleep consciousness, is neither made up of parts, nor is it not composed, nor even both composed and not composed. It is the undifferentiated, i.e., the unnamed and the unformed. It is neither existent nor non-existent. Neither is it both existent and non-existent. It is neither different from nor same as Brahman.¹⁰⁵ The personality, which appropriates the cosmic causal body in the state of deep-sleep consciousness, is Iishvara or Akshara, the great cause of the universe.¹⁰⁶ In this state Iishvara, through a very subtle function of ignorance enjoys bliss and happiness.¹⁰⁷ 

Thus, the macrocosmic order set up by the cosmic maayaa involves three stages of existence and their respective order of existence, viz., the Viraat -- the gross body; Hirayanagarbha -- the subtle body and Iishvara -- the causal body. In superimposing this macrocosmic order the cosmic maayaa brings in the illusion of the plurality of the material world, the plurality of Gods and plurality of kingdoms of beings. In this manner, the cosmic maayaa is the source of our perception of multiplicity in the universe.

In this section, we have elaborated the cosmic maayaa and its effects. In the next section we could make an attempt to analyze the effects of individual maayaa, that brings about the microcosm (adyaatmika).

Individual maayaa (avidhyaa) makes one perceive his true self as jiiva, the empirical ego. The unit of existence conscious of its physical covering is called jiiva. It does not possess knowledge of its identity with Brahman. Thus, individual maayaa individuates Aatman as the empirical self (jiiva). Here, we spell out the consequences of the individual maayaa in the level of causal body, subtle body and gross body of jiiva. Besides, we would also bring to light the three stages of individual existence and the orders that belong to these stages.

The individual maayaa associated with Aatman constitutes the causal body or the bliss body of the jiiva, the empirical ego. The causal body comes about owing to the preponderance of sattvagunaa. Thus, the causal body of jiiva is composed of the sattvic aspect of the individual maayaa and it is the innermost aspect of avidhyaa.¹⁰⁸ The body at this state is said to be causal, as it is the see of the subtle and the gross bodies. Besides, this pure unattached potentiality of the body emerges from the sattvagunaa of the individual maayaa. Its nature is that the original ignorance from which springs the manifestation of the subtle and gross bodies. It is not the negation of the original consciousness of the Aatman, because without it, the causal body cannot exist. The veiling of Aatman by the causal body can be compared to the cloud covering the sun, though the cloud owes its being to the sun. The ignorance that constitutes the nature of the causal body cannot be strictly analyzed, defined or described. Often Vedaantins used contradictory statements in describing it. It is neither real nor unreal. Nor is it both real and unreal. It is neither one nor many. Not is it one and many. It is neither simple nor compounded. Nor is it both. The only positive description we can give of it is that the causal body ceases to be when true identity of Brahman and Aatman is achieved in true knowledge. This is because when one comes to be aware of the identity, the ignorance has disappeared. Thus, there is no need to explain the causal body, as there can be no coexistence of a clear awareness of Aatman and its ignorance. Thus, this ignorance is the causal body.¹⁰⁹ Thus, causal body involves the total absence of subtle and gross bodies. Therefore, causal body is "just ignorance and ignorance alone. . . . It is . . . total annihilation . . . emptiness . . . and nothingness."¹¹⁰ But out of this nothingness comes everything, viz., one's emotions and thoughts, perceptions and actions. The causal body, the nothingness, is the seed body, out of which emerges the world of subtle and gross experiences of the jiiva.¹¹¹ Thus, the causal body is the innermost level of jiiva, where it enjoys bliss and happiness.¹¹² So the causal body of the jiiva is that body produced by the individual maayaa, by veiling the Aatman, which forms the basis of the subtle and gross bodies of the jiiva.

Having looked into the analysis of the activity of the individual maayaa, in relation to the causal body, we could like into the evolution of the individual subtle body by the activity of individual maayaa.

The subtle elements that were in an uncompounded (apachiikrita) state at the level of the individual causal body, by the activity of individual maayaa, in the process of panchiikaranam, evolves into subtle bodies (linga-shariras) giving various attributes and functions to jiiva.¹¹³ The subtle bodies survive death and accompany jiiva beyond death. The component parts of the linga-shariras include a number of elements, viz., the five organs of perception (jnaana indriyaas), the five organs of actions (karma indriyaas), the vital forces (praanas) and the central organ (antahkarana). The central organ has four faculties, viz., the mind (manas), the intellect (buddhi), the memory (chitta) and the I-sense (ahankaara).¹¹⁴ We can briefly consider each of them in the following section.

The organs of perception (jnaana indriyaas) are out-lets through which the mind can know objects and the objects can give themselves to the mind. The five organs of perception are the ear, the skin, the eye, the tongue and the nose. Each of these senses has its corresponding perception, viz., sound, touch, sight, taste and smell respectively.¹¹⁵ The actual organs of perception are not the gross instruments of the physical body, like the ear, the skin, the eye, the tongue and the nose, but the sense organs referred to, here, are the `sense-centers' located in the subtle body. There are the powers of perception, which are subtle and imperceptible unlike the physical instruments that are gross and perceptible. The eye many looking at an object, but the perception is not registered until the sense-center of seeing is contacted. The sense-centers of perception are located in the mind. Therefore, if the mind is absorbed in some deep thought far away from the object, the sense-center is not available for perception of that object, even though the object is physically present in front of the sense organ. The faculties of perception are said to be residing in the respective sense organs.¹¹⁶ These sense organs are evolved separately in the consecutive order from the sattvic particles of the subtle elements (suukshmabhuutas), viz., ether, air, fire, water, and earth. In other words, ears are produced from the sattva particles of ether, skin is from those of air, eyes are from those of fire, the tongue is from those of water and nose is from those of earth.¹¹⁷ 

The five organs of action (karma indriyaas) are those with the help of which jiiva, a bodily and conscious organism can move about and perform activities. They include the organs of speech, the hands, the feet, the organs of evacuation and the organs of generation.¹¹⁸ Just like the organs of perception, the organs of action are not gross instruments of the physical body like the tongue, the hands, the feet, the genital and evacuative organs, but `action-centers' located in the subtle body. These are powers of action that are subtle and imperceptible, unlike the physical instruments which are gross and perceptible. These powers of action are said to be residing in their respective organs of action. The centers of action are related to the intellect. Unlike the organs of perception, where the stimulus is received by the mind and then interpreted by the intellect, in the case of organs of action the intellect directly receives the stimulus and action emerges from the intellect. For example, when we see a red object, the mind receives the stimulus through the eye, and the intellect interprets its color and shape. But in the case of organs of action the intellect receives the stimulus and orders response to the stimulus, which are in turn carried out through the medium of mind. The gunaa operative in the organs of action is the rajasgunaa, which is fundamentally a quality of action. They have been produced separately from the rajasic particles of ether, air, fire, water and earth respectively.¹¹⁹ 

Subtle bodies also include an inner organ called the central organ (antahkarana). It is sometimes called the eleventh sense, as antahkarana is different from organs of perception and organs of action. Its main function is to make jiiva experience manifold things one by one in succession. It is capable of experiencing all types of sensations. Antahkarana is the inner organ of knowledge and that of volition. It is passive in that it gives knowledge, while it is impulsive in that it excites action. Antahkarana, as the faculty of reflection and of desire, deliberation and will is called mind (manas). The mind has a number of modifications (vritti), relating to the intellectual and volitional states. The modifications of the intellectual state are doubt (vicikitsa), cognition (dhi), belief (sraddha) and retention (dhiriti). The modifications corresponding to the volitional state are desire (kaama), decision(samkalpa), deliberation (vikalpa), fear (vi), shame (hri), pleasure (sukha) and pain (dukha).¹²⁰ These vrittis are classified into three classes depending on the predominance of sattva, rajas and tamas.¹²¹ When antahkarana reflects the things truly, it is called intellect (buddhi). Buddhi is the faculty of right apperception or discriminative knowledge. While mind gives the jiiva knowledge, weighs reason for and against, and deliberates, the intellect helps jiiva to apprehend and perceive rightly.¹²² 

Other than the mind and the intellect antahkarana has two other faculties, viz., the faculty that remembers (chitta) and the faculty of retention that preserves the sense of individuality or the `I-sense' (ahamkaara), which are associated with the mind and the intellect. While chitta makes jiiva remember by way of recollection, ahamkaara makes jiiva experience itself as the `I' and say `I exist' (asmi).<sup>123</sup> All these four faculties of the central organ are in fact its different modifications (antahkarana-vritti). According to Vedaantins, when an organ perceives an object the mind transforms itself into the object. For example, when the eyes see a pot, the mind moves out through the eye and takes the form of the pot. In the same way the various modifications of antahkarana give way to these fourfold faculties. When antahkarana is absolutely certain as to the fact of the existence of this object as a pot, it is intellect (buddhi). In the same way when antahkarana remembers an object a pot, it is called chitta. When antahkarana establishes the relationship of `I' or `mine' with an object and makes the jiiva say `I know the object', `I am happy' or `Mine is happiness', it is known as ahamkaara.¹²⁴ Sri Srueshvarachaarya in his Panchiikarana-Vaarttikam sums up the threefold senses that belong to the realm of the subtle bodies, viz., the organs of perception, the organs of action and the central organ as follows:

Besides the threefold organs of perception, action and intellection, there is a fourth element in the subtle bodies called the vital force (praana). It is the individual vivifying principle in jiiva. It consists of all the vital currents that support and preserve the organic existence of jiiva. Praana "preserves the physical frames in existence, regulates the entire physiological process and make the performance of higher functions possible in the physical frame."¹²⁶ It is present in every part of the physical body and makes each part alive and working. There are five types of praana, each of which guides different life system and their functions. Praana or mukhya praana regulates respiratory system. It also controls the fivefold perceptions of seeing, hearing smelling, tasting and touching. Thus the mukhya praana is the faculty of perception. Apaana is the faculty of excretion. It controls the proper functioning of the excretionary system in the human body, such as, urine, perspiration and others. Samaana is the faculty of digestion, which digests food that is received by the body. Vyaana is the faculty of circulation, which distributes the digested food to different parts of the body. Udaana is the faculty of thought absorption that takes in fresh knowledge and guides the higher organs such as mind, intellect and others.¹²⁷ The combinations of the active rajasic particles of ether, air, fire, water and earth produce the five vital forces.¹²⁸  The praanas enumerated above are the subtle praanas that are imperceptible and intangible. They are different from the gross praanas that are tangible physiological activities associated with the physical body. Vital forces are connecting link between the subtle and the gross body. That is why, when a person is mentally upset (which is a condition of the subtle body), it brings about physiological illness, which belongs to the realm of the gross bodies. The subtle praanas belong to the realm of subtle bodies.¹²⁹ 

Now that we have looked into the whole range of the activities of the individual maayaa, in the level of the subtle bodies, we could move on to speak of the effects of the individual maayaa in the realm of the gross bodies, in the next section.

By the activity of the individual maayaa in the level of the gross bodies jiiva begins to be fully associated with what is external and peripheral. Jiiva totally oblivious to its true nature as the Aatman and identifies itself with the body. Thus, jiiva is boundto good or bad actions, which determine its existence in the higher or lower regions. It enjoys the physical and gross things, as it has a body, which with its appetites originates out of the mahaabhuutas and their various combinations. Because of the physical body and its appetites, jiiva experiences hunger, thirst, sleep, anger and all such states.¹³⁰ The physical body which jiiva possesses is the fleshy covering, which it casts off at its death.¹³¹ 

The individual maayaa makes the jiiva perceive gross objects, viz., sound, touch, color, taste and smell respectively, through the gross physical senses such as the ears, skin, eyes, tongue and nose. These physical instruments of perception belong to the level of the gross body, as they are tangible and perceptible. Jiiva guided by individual maayaa performs gross functions of speech, acceptance, waking, excretion and enjoyment respectively through the use of the gross instruments of the physical body, such as organs of speech, the hands, the feet, the organs of evacuation and generation. Besides, jiiva experiences in the gross level uncertainty, determination, its own individual and empirical personality and remembrance, respectively by the four inner organs, viz., themind, the intellect, the faculty of I-sense and the faculty of remembrance.¹³² The jiiva experiences the activity of the five gross praanas in his physiological activities of the physical body. It is because of the entanglement of the subtle bodies with the gross bodies, the mind craves for and infatuated by the gross sense objects of the world.¹³³ Thus, due to the activity of the individual maayaa in the gross level, jiiva gets totally grossified and becomes one among many in the phenomenal world.

Because of the activity of the individual maayaa on jiiva, it experiences itself as possessing five material layers or sheaths (koshas). By identifying itself with these layers of its personality, the jiiva forgets its true nature as Aatman as the sheaths form five layers that cover the reality of Aatman. The more the jiiva identifies itself with these sheaths, the more it distances itself from Aatman, thereby forgetting its true identity with the ultimate reality. Briefly we could clarify each these sheaths.

The sheath of the body (annamaayaakosha), the outermost sheath, is the covering of the coarse body that is purely flesh. It is a dense cover. The gross organs of perception, the gross organs of action, the gross vital forces and the activities of the inner organs conditioned by the gross physical experience fall within this sheath. It is also called the food sheath, as this sheath is caused and maintained by food. Besides, this sheath also ends up as food. The sheath of the vital air (praanamaayaakosha) is the sheath of vital force. It is that which supports the preservation of the organic existence of a body. It includes faculties of perception, excretion, digestion, circulation and thought absorption. All these functions performed by this sheath are basically physiological. It is the source of strength and vitality of an organism. As a person gets older the praanas lose their vitality and so he is not able to perform these biological functions normally. When praanas function properly the physical body is healthy. The sheath of vital air is subtler than the physical sheath and the former controls the latter. The mental sheath (manomaayaakosha) consists of functions that are associated with the mind, such as, passions, emotions, feelings, impulses and likes and dislikes. Mental sheath controls the vital air sheath and the body sheath. That is why any disturbance of the mind can affect body and its functions. The intelligent sheath (vijnaanamaayaakosha) takes care of intellectual functions, such as, thinking, reflecting, discriminating, judging and other similar functions. It directs the above three sheaths. The bliss sheath (aanandamaayaakosha) is the innermost sheath of jiiva in the state of avidhyaa, where it experiences total absence of activity belonging to the level of the subtle and the gross bodies. Thus, in this sheath all the tendencies (vaasanaas) of the gunaas are unmanifest.¹³⁴ The five sheaths enumerated above, in fact, refer to the three levels of the gross body, the subtle body and the causal body. The annamaayaakosha belongs to the level of the gross body. The praanamaayaakosha, the manomaayaakosha and the vijnaanamaayaakosha constitute the subtle body. Of these three the first is endowed with the power of knowledge and so is the agent; the second is endowed with the will power and so is the instrument and the third is endowed with activity and therefore, it is the product. In other words, intellect due to its closeness to Aatman, functions as the agency of knowledge, which uses the mind as an instrument of cognition, and which, in turn, is expressed in the activity of the different praanas that constitute the praanamaayaakosha.¹³⁵ Aanandamaayaakosha refers to the causal body, wherein the latent energy of the person dwells. When these hidden materials of the causal body express themselves in thoughts and feelings, we have the subtle body and when the same express in perceptions, we have the gross body. To the extent a person would open himself to the directions of the causal body, to that extent his life would richer, because the bliss sheath, though a state of ignorance, is closest to the absolute Aatman.¹³⁶ 

All these koshas serve as upaadhis that individuate jiiva, making it forget its true nature and condition. Shankara notes that the jiiva is to be considered as a mere appearance of the highest self, like the reflection of the sun on water. It is neither directly the highest self, nor a different thing. Just as, when one reflected image of the sun trembles another reflected image does not on that account tremble also; so when one soul is connected with actions and results of actions, another soul on that account is not connected likewise. Thus, jiiva appears to be numerous due to ignorance, yet one soul's actions do not affect the other.¹³⁷ In consequence the jiiva is not aware of its divine reality and becomes the worshipper of Iishvara, the Lord of maayaa. In fact, jiiva and Iishvara are the result of maayaa and disappears as true knowledge is attained.

Having looked into the activity of the individual maayaa in the level of causal, subtle and gross bodies and in the level of koshas, we could go on to speak of the microcosmic order established by the individual maayaa, in the next section.

By the activity of the individual maayaa there comes about the order of the individual, where jiiva experiences itself in different levels of existence. The individual order includes the jiiva's three stages of consciousness and the respective order of existence associated with each of these states. The first state of individual existence is the individual waking consciousness (Vishva). In this state jiiva is characterized by the individual gross body.¹³⁸ In this state, the individual soul experiences the world of external objects through the senses and the mind. Thus, jiiva as the waker experiences the waking world of things and objects. These are experienced as solid, rigid, real, set in their laws and rules. The perpetual world becomes jiiva's field of knowledge and enjoyment. The objects are perceived, known and enjoyed as real existing things outside the mind. The world is also perceived by jiiva as a series of states and it is understood in relation to jiiva itself as the subject, i.e., as the `knowing I'. As a result, one experiences oneself as the `I' of all his experiences. He says about himself as `I see', `I hear', `I am happy', `I am a child', `I am old' and many similar statements. Thus, the `I' pervades the entire realm of his waking state. The cognitive process, in the state of waking consciousness also involves the three aspects of the instrumental (pramaana), the objective (premeya) and the consequent (phala). Thus, knowledge in this state is conditioned by the subject-object modality.¹³⁹ Thus, in the state of Vishva the individual maayaa individuates jiiva in relation to the gross body and makes it an entity among the multiplicity of entities in the phenomenal world.

The second state brought about by the individual maayaa is the state of individual dream consciousness (Taijasa), which has subtle body as its object. "Dream is a state conditioned by the inactivity of the senses, the potency of impressions of waking state and the functioning of consciousness, in the role of both subject and object. The ego, which has the sense of ownership in relation to both the dream-state and the subtle body is called Taijasa."¹⁴⁰ In this state, jiiva is conscious of what is within and enjoys subtle objects. In Taijasa consciousness is fully withdrawn from external objects and rests on the impressions (vaasanaas) of the waking state that remains within the mind. Thus, the mind (manas) and memory (chitta) aspects of the central organ (antahkarana) play a great role in the dream-state. The external senses are fully at rest in Taijasa. Besides, in the dream-state there is no body consciousness and no time-space restrictions as in the waking state. Even though the contents of dreams emerge from the vaasanaas of the waking state, they are not mere literal reproductions of the waking state experiences. Though most of the dream contents originate from the experiences of waking state, they are modified by the mind's capacity for creativity and constructive imagination (kalpana). In explaining the origin of dreams the Advaitins hold that dreams are the result of the activity (karma) of the mind, which is conditioned by desire (kaama) based on ignorance. Shankara is of the opinion that jiiva after the cessation of the senses in sleep, creates a subtle body of desires that shapes the dreams according to its buddhi. The mind creates dreams for the purpose of causing joy or fear to the dreamer in accordance with his good or bad deeds. Thus, though the content of dreams is traces left from the waking state, it flows with freedom and proper sequence, by the activity of the mind. For the jiiva that dreams, the dream world is as real as it experiences the reality of waking state when it is awake.¹⁴¹ In this manner due to the activity of the individual maayaa the jiiva experiences and enjoys subtle objects in the state of Taijasa.

The third state of jiiva caused by the individual maayaa is the individual deep-sleep consciousness (praajna). Jiiva at this state is characteristic of the bliss or causal body. In this state jiiva enjoys bless. Behind this bliss body exists the innermost of all beings, Brahman. Thus, the state of deep-sleep in some way points to the ultimate experience of Brahman, as in it the duality that is characteristic of Vishva and Taijasa states is absent. In it neither there is a subject that knows, nor is there an object to be known. It is a state of undifferentiated or unified consciousness (prajnaanaghana) in which the contents of the waking and dream states come together. In it the limitations of avidhyaa and the constitutive elements of waking and dream states, such as, space, time, causality and karmic activity are in the latent or potential condition. But it is not an unconscious state, in which there comes about a loss of consciousness.¹⁴² Advaitins give two reasons to justify this truth. Firstly, in the state of deep-sleep the deep-sleeper experiences the greatest inner serenity (samprasaada) and bliss (aananda), that brings greater joy than one feels in the waking and dream states. Besides, deep-sleep is an experience beyond all sufferings and fear, free from grief and desire. It is an experience of unparalleled well being, of harmony and integration.¹⁴³ Secondly, when jiiva awakes from deep-sleep, it is fully aware of the fact that it had a good sleep and it exclaims that `I slept soundly and that I did not know anything'.¹⁴⁴ Thus, from the fact that jiiva experiences bliss and the highest serenity and that it has the self-consciousness of the fact of having a good and sound sleep, Vedaantins conclude that the state of deep-sleep is not an unconscious state, but a state of depth experience. But it is different from the state of self-realization, as the former is a state conditioned by ignorance, while the latter is an unconditioned state.¹⁴⁵ 

In this manner the individual maayaa sets the individual order, in which the jiiva experiences the states of Vishva, Taijasa and Praajna in relation to the gross, the subtle and the causal bodies.

We have analyzed the consequences of ignorance by looking into the effects of cosmic and individual maayaa in the macrocosm and the microcosm respectively, in the last two sections. In this section, we could move on to see the relationship between the cosmic and the individual orders of existence and how they veil Brahman, identical with Aatman, by superimposing the cosmic and individual orders on Brahman.

Though, our analysis of the consequences of ignorance in the last section, brought to light, that the phenomenal world is a fact of our experience, still it is a superimposition of the cosmic and individual maayaa on Brahman, the absolute reality that is identical with Aatman. Our experience of this superimposed world flows as three streams of consciousness, each having its own object of experience. The states are the waking state, the dream-state and the state of deep-sleep, and the objects are the gross body, the subtle body and the causal body respectively. The manifestations of the absolute Brahman in and through the three states and by way of three bodies is not a real transformation of Brahman, but only an imaginary attribution (adhyaasa) or an apparent transformation (vivartha). Just as the snake is the vivartha of the rope in the rope-snake illustration, so also the experience of the world in these threefold states and threefold bodies is a vivartha of Brahman.¹⁴⁶ 

In the microcosmic level, by the activity of individual maayaa, the absolute Aatman is firstly manifested as embodied in the gross body and experiencing the state of waking consciousness. The self, seen as embodied and living the life of the waker is called Vishva. The self is viewed as possessing subtle body and enjoying the subtle experiences of the dream world, it is known as the state of Taijasa. When the self is perceived as resting in the bliss of the causal body, in the state of deep-sleep, it is the Praajna. Thus, avidhyaa superimposes on Aatman, the empirical ego, jiiva, in its threefold personalities as the waker, the dreamer and the deep sleeper. Advaitins make use of two theories to do the de-superimposition. The first is the theory of reflection by which they try to show jiiva as a reflection of the Aatman, while the second theory is the theory of apparent limitation, by which they show that jiiva separated from Aatman by limiting adjuncts (upaadhis) superimposed by the individual maayaa.¹⁴⁷ 

In the macrocosmic level the cosmic maayaa superimposes the totality of the phenomenal world on Brahman in the waking consciousness, the cosmic dream consciousness and the cosmic deep-sleep consciousness, having the objects of the total gross body, the total subtle body and the total causal body respectively. In relation to the totality of the gross universe as manifested in the cosmic waking consciousness, Brahman, the cosmic spirit is called Viraat. Manifested as embodied in the totality of the subtle bodies in the cosmic dream consciousness, Brahman is Hirayanagarbha or Suutraatmaa. In the primordial realm of cosmic deep-sleep consciousness, having for its object the totality of the causal bodies, when Brahman's self-concealment takes place, there emerges Iishvara. This state is also called Akshara. Thus, Brahman is superimposed in the cosmic level as Viraat, Hirayanagarpha and Iishvara.¹⁴⁸ 

Thus, the totality of the gross, the subtle and causal worlds, both in the microcosmic and the macrocosmic levels make up the appearance of this vast universe. But, in essence, the collective manifestations of Brahman, i.e., Viraat, Hirayanagarbha and Iishvara, and the individual manifestations of Brahman, viz., Vishva, Taijasa and Praanja are one and the same in their respective stages of consciousness. Advaitins explain this point, "Just as different forests each containing a particular species of trees taken together constitute a vast forest; or a number of lakes of various dimensions make the vast expanse of water, viz., the sea or the ocean; so also the totality of gross, subtle and causal worlds make up a vast universe."¹⁴⁹ This statement clearly indicates that the microcosmic and the macrocosmic manifestations in the level of the gross bodies, viz., Vishva and Viraat, in the level of subtle bodies, viz., Taijasa and Hirayanagarbha, in the level of the causal bodies, viz., Praajna and Iishvara are one and the same. The coming together of the individuals of the gross, subtle, and causal nature would make the aggregates of their respective nature. Panchiikarana-Vaarttikam affirms this point as follows:

Thus, we do find an essential unity between the microcosmic and macrocosmic pairs, viz., Vishva--Viraat, Taijasa--Hirayanagarbha and Praajna--Iishvara.

But all these six states are appearances superimposed by maayaa on Brahman and in no way represent the ultimate reality, which is pure consciousness. "The ultimate Reality", affirms Sureshvaraachaarya, "which is of the nature of pure consciousness, though one, appears through illusion as the multitude of Vishva, Taijasa, Praajna, Viraat, Suura [Hirayanagarbha] and Akshara [Iishvara] forms."¹⁵¹ Thus, these six states are microcosmic and macrocosmic superimposition on Brahman by the activity of cosmic and individual maayaa. These appearances in no way mar the non-duality of the absolute self,¹⁵² which is eternal and immutable. "In reality Truth is only One and That through illusion appears as many."¹⁵³ Since the cosmic and individual orders of existence are basically appearances, they cannot give one the true experience of Brahman. In fact the final state of self-realization, which is also referred to in the Upanishads the Tuuriiya,¹⁵⁴ is beyond these three cosmic and three individual states of ignorance. To attain this final state of Brahmaanubhava the seeker must transcend all these states of ignorance superimposed by Maayaa.

The cosmic maayaa and avidhyaa individualize Brahman as Iishvara and jiiva, besides giving the illusion of the plurality of existence. To the question "why must there be an emergence of the infinite process of becoming from Brahman through maayaa?" often the answer given is that it is the lila of Brahman. The term `liila' means a sport or a playful activity. Liila lies in ignorance and it can never reveal the true nature of reality. We cannot ascribe any specific reason why the liila of Brahman takes place, except saying that it is an appearance suitable to the capacity and understanding of the one to whom it does appear. Liila, therefore, is real to the one whom it appears, but it does not do anything to Brahman, who sportily assumes the appearances.¹⁵⁵ In other words, liila is a self-imposed limitation on the part of Brahman, which does not impair the integrity of the absolute, but satisfies our volitional and emotional nature, which makes us conceive the absolute as a personal existence that can fill our pragmatic need for love and devotion.¹⁵⁶ 

In the preceding sections of this chapter, we looked into the nature, cause and consequences of ignorance. Now, in order to clarify this notion further, we could briefly, take up the issue of its characteristics. According to Shankara, the state of ignorance has four significant characteristics, viz., it involves subject-object distinction, it is mediate and indirect, it is knowable by pramaanas (means of knowledge) and it is a caused knowledge. In the following section, we could analyze these characteristics in detail.

The state of ignorance is marked by the empirical experience of jiiva, the empirical ego. Empirical experience, as we well know, is the everyday human experience, which involves the subject-object duality. For example, in perceiving an object such as a table or a book the perceptual knowledge comes about as a result of someone seeing or touching the table or the book in question. Thus, empirical experience always involves the distinction between `the experiencer' and `the experienced', `the knower' and `the known'. In his introduction to Shankara's Aatmabhooda, Swami Nihilananda writes about empirical experience as follows:

Both the subject and the object are essential to and inseparable from empirical experience. Without one of them, an empirical experience is not possible. Though an object might exist outside, there is no actual empirical experience unless there is a knower of the particular object. "An object may exist independently of a knower; and the knower become self-conscious while revealing something which may be an external object or an internal idea."¹⁵⁸ Thus, the basic element that characterizes every empirical experience is the presence of duality of the subject and the object.

All means of empirical knowledge (pramaanas) presuppose the subject-object distinction and operate in the realm of duality. Even scriptural knowledge is empirical in the sense that it is intended for an agent who is able to know. For Shankara says: "The meditation taught in the Vedaanta texts, whose aim is the realization of the self, represented by the Upanishads, is possible only if the self is the agent."¹⁵⁹ Thus without a subject or a knower, the purpose of the scripture cannot be realized. In other words, if there is no one to know what is revealed in the scriptures, scriptural knowledge is not possible. But, though scriptural testimony is empirical, confined to the realm of phenomena and involves duality, it is superior to other means of knowledge since scripture reveals the highest reality and helps one to remove ignorance.¹⁶⁰ 

All these distinctions and differences including subject-object distinction of our experience in the world fall under three categories, viz., sajatiiya, vijatiiya and swagatha. Sajatiiya is the difference existing in the same species of a genus. Two men of different nations or two men of different castes would be examples of this type of distinction. In vijatiiya the difference is between two species of the same genus. The difference between a horse and a cow would be an illustration of the second category of differences. Swagatha refers to the difference in the various aspects of a single entity. The differences between the head, feet, eyes and other limps in a man, would be an example of swagatha. In the state of ignorance, in man's perception of the world, he as a subject is related to all these objects that are distinct from him and which he experiences as the object of his perception.¹⁶¹

Empirical knowledge, which is characteristic of jiiva in the state of ignorance, is obtained by the activity of the senses, the mind and the intellect, in the actual presence of the object sensed and understood. In other word, when one comes into contact with an object, with the help of the external senses and understood with the help of the internal faculties of knowing, the knowledge of that object is obtained. But, if it happens that one lacks the senses and other faculties of knowing, the empirical knowledge of objects is not possible. Therefore, the media like senses, mind and intellect are equally essential to empirical experience, as are the subject and the object. Thus, an individual becomes a knower, just because the physical, mental and intellectual faculties mediate knowledge.¹⁶² 

Since empirical knowledge is attained by means of eternal and internal media, such as, senses, mind and intellect, it is mediate and indirect knowledge. In other words, it is a representative knowledge. One comes to know the objects not directly and immediately, but the object is known as the senses, mind and intellect represent it. Thus, it is with the help of the representative idea of the object that the object is known. Empirical knowledge, therefore, is different from direct and immediate knowledge. Here one experiences knowledge about a reality intuitively and directly, without the help of any medium of knowledge. In such knowledge the activities of the senses, the mind and the intellect are suspended, and one is open to the knowledge without any mediation of these external and internal faculties of knowing. On the other hand, as empirical knowledge fundamentally and essentially is dependent on physical and mental faculties of knowledge, it is basically mediate and indirect knowledge.¹⁶³ 

Since, in the state of ignorance, knowledge is arrived at with the help of physical and mental faculties of knowledge, it can be described in human language. The ability of human media of knowledge and communication to describe and express what things are, comes from the fact that the world of objects has quality (gunaa), function(kriya), name (nama), qualification (vishesha) and relationship (sambandha). Since the objects of the world has these qualities and that these qualities can be observed, grasped and expressed through the media of knowledge, positive linguistic description of this world is possible. In an immediate knowledge, where Brahman is intuitively grasped, a positive linguistic expression would be impossible, as this knowledge is beyond the level of human knowledge. Besides, Brahman-knowledge is without qualities, the language of negation is used to talk about it. But, since empirical knowledge is about the characteristics of terrestrial objects, a positive linguistic expression of it is possible.¹⁶⁴ 

Empirical knowledge, which belongs to jiiva in the state of ignorance, is known by various means of knowledge (pramaanas). Vedaanta speaks of six means of knowledge, which can be categorized into two groups, based on the subject matter each group is dealing with. The first group attempts to give knowledge of the empirical realities, while the second group is the means of knowledge of transcendental reality. The former includes the first five pramaanas, viz., perception (pratyaksha), inference (anumaana), comparison(upamaana), supposition (arthaapatti) and non-perception (anupalabdhi). The latter group consists of the last pramaana, viz., verbal testimony (sabda).¹⁶⁵ We could give a brief consideration of each of these means