Maya And Leela: Utility in Life’s Futility by Santosh Jha - HTML preview

The modern liberal notions of gender equality and gender role interchangeability are of course good and healthy for social and personal growths but the way this idea has been hijacked, ingeniously interpreted and practiced by a section of population, it is bound to destroy the very basic structure of human society.

Not only man-woman relationship, rather all relationships of humanity are in for big trouble. People say, majority of humanity’s troubles and pains in modern times stem out of relationships, which are becoming more troubled. Religion appeals against the trend but fails. Science can help as it offers objective logic and reasoning for the troubles

Globally, most societies are struggling with an unprecedented and hugely dysfunctional culture, infested with drug addiction, promiscuous sex, divorce and alienation, alcohol, thrill seeking, suicides, rebellion, corruption, gangs, mafia, crime, drive-by-shootings, teenage pregnancy, racial hate, terrorism and a horde of psychotic troubles.

Science is value neutral, unlike the prescriptive religion, but more effective as it objectively and logically explains the underlying troubles and problems that modern man-woman relationship face. It also explains the ‘hows’ and ‘whys’ of the prevailing sense of unbridled self-gratification zeal and selfish as well as psychotic interpretation of gender roles and utterly chaotic gender role interchangeability.

We have a scenario at hand. Not only religion and philosophy is scared, science also warns against this calamitous trend. Any amount of religious appeals has not stopped this degenerating trend in global society but science can help in checking this trend by explaining the working of instincts and emphasizing the need for self-discipline for a better society. Science is not value-neutral or against values and morality. It only approaches morality differently.

We just need to have the courage, determination and resilience to accept this new mindset to accommodate more and more science in our thinking and value summation. It is not necessary that one should accept these facts and make drastic changes in all aspects of one’s life. It shall be very tough.

One can simply do one thing. Accept this new paradigm to define, “who I am”. This shall greatly enhance one’s satisfaction and joys as he or she shall find himself in singularity of body and mind mechanism. That is good to start with.

It would be even better if one uses the energy of skepticism and doubts all. One should use his or her own resources to re-check their authenticity. Nevertheless, one must not ‘reject’ them out rightly or show them a close door. Doubt them, re-check them, correct them if you find them wrong but not ‘reject’ them. It is just a humble suggestion that mind’s value-summation shall definitely be more inclined towards this desirable ‘singularity’ if science is also accepted as a supportive approach, in cooperation with religion and philosophy.

In the post world war era, researches and surveys admit that the world has become a better place to live and humanity over all have evolved to better and higher cultural traits. We have now entered an era of consciousness where our collective and integrated wisdom, led by modern and scientific knowledge but assimilating the old wisdoms, is making us move towards excellence and larger wellness. This is the new spiritualism.

Unfortunately, this is still in small pockets and scattered unevenly throughout the globe. The majority of humanity still has to evolve. There is also a reverse tendency among a large segment of people who are degenerating to worse mindsets as the environment is becoming far more competitive and an average human finds it tough to survive.

This new spiritualism is a beautiful mix of ancient and modern wisdoms. This new spiritualism breathes in new thinking, this new mindset, this new culture of an integrative and assimilative consciousness of modern humanity.

This new spiritualism, which objectively accepts all lofty ideals of ancient wisdom but approaches them with a scientific consciousness can lead to a new world order where we all accept larger goodness of humanity with a far more open and non-dualistic mind. Every individual can contribute to hasten up the process of engendering of this new world order.

**

Maya’s Viraat Swaroop: Cosmic Viewpoint

In the most respected and accepted Hindu religious discourse between Krishna and his favorite disciple Arjuna, there is a beautiful metaphoric description of ‘maya’ of the world we live in and the ideal consciousness position of ‘leela’. In the most revered epic text called Geeta, there is a detailed description of Krishna unraveling the ‘viraat swaroop’ (cosmic mechanism) of ‘maya’ structures to Arjuna, who was in utter conflict and confusion about his role, in the midst of an imminent war of righteousness.

Understanding this from holistic, assimilative and integrative perspective of spiritualism, philosophy as well as science helps in understanding the practical utility of the notions of ‘maya’ and ‘leela’ in winning over our personal conflicts and confusion of life. We talk about it now.

From a bacteria to humans, this world has billions of living beings and this is a bio-diversity which makes the planet earth a truly mesmerizing and probably the most unique one in the entire universe.

This diversity is something we humans do not often see, realize and count for in our daily thinking and rational actions. Let alone the diversity of all creatures on earth, we do not think of and admit the diversity within our human species. Actually, we never usually think of ourselves as a species evolved out of billions of years of evolution.

Almost unconsciously, we generally think of the entire world population as one common pool of almost equal beings, divided by geographies and culture. Actually, most humans only see and think about the small pool of people in their ambient social environment and local geographical limits.

The bitter reality is, like the biodiversities of other creatures, we humans also have the similar diversity among us and this diversity is not only in geographical segregation and in cultural exclusivity but originally and essentially in consciousness. It is the consciousness that is as diverse among humans on this planet as is the biodiversity.

From a tiny bacterium to a mighty elephant or whale, living beings on this planet have different physical make up and commensurate physical and mental capacities. Their respective consciousness is also a function of their body mechanism and the environment in which they live.

The millions of species on this planet have actually, different levels of consciousness, depending upon the physical and biological make up of their existence on the earth. However, it seems, within a species, consciousness of different living beings are not as varied as it is in humans. Humans are therefore hugely different from other species as we have ourselves created so diverse cultural and physical environments that consciousness within humans are much varied.

Animals have been living in natural and similar environment since ages and they cannot themselves change their living environment like humans. That is why, it seems they have a consciousness across population, not as variegated as we. This is a huge facility as well as the greatest challenge and threat for us.

The humans have diverse consciousness levels even as their physical and biological make up are more than similar. Almost 99 percent of genes of all humans are same. However, the consciousness varies because different humans have different brain and mind evolution. This is because; brain development is 85 percent environment led and only 15 percent gene. This environment for humans vary so much and that is why sizeable difference in consciousnesses.

World-renowned scientific minds have done a cross-cultural mapping of all possible and diverse states, structures, memes, types, levels, stages, and waves of human consciousness. As human development has been an evolutionary process, different human consciousness are on diverse and often overlapping stages of conscious development and evolution.

The idea is to understand the broad patterns of human’s individual as well as collective behavior and actions through their respective shades of consciousness. It is believed that such consciousness mapping has been very helpful for governments and authorities in planning order and peace in communities. 

It is very interesting to understand that within so-called homogenous ethnic and geographical communities, consciousness of different members of the same society can vary so much. Some can be of higher integrative and assimilative consciousness and still, their neighbors may have age-old animalistic cave man consciousness. Some may be of belligerent consciousness and still others of the same ethnic group can be sensitive and amicable consciousness.

If one believes in evolutionary process of human development, then only one can accept and understand all this. The fact remains that all these diverse stages of human consciousness are in conflict and competition with each other. Every color and shade of consciousness dislikes and distrusts the other shade and types, as the subjective truths for all sets of colors of consciousness are so diverse, in contrasts and competitive to each other that there shall always be huge amount of conflict and chaos on this planet.

We need to understand and accept with innocence that biodiversity is the rule and this shall prevail always. The consciousness-diversity and a competing and conflicting state of diverse consciousness is what makes this planet earth so very mesmerizing and unique in this universe.

This rainbow of human consciousness ensures that every consciousness sees and accepts the realism colored in a diverse shades resulting in diversity of worldviews and pluralistically subjective realisms. Ancient wisdom knew about all this and called it ‘maya’.

Krishna, while encouraging his disciple Arjuna to perform his worldly duties in pure objectivity – the consciousness of ‘leela’, he unravels to him this rainbowish diversity of consciousnesses of billions of living beings, from a unicellular organism to a miracle called human. This event is portrayed in Geeta as an event when Krishna lent his special eyes (read perspectives) to Arjuna, so that he could see his viraat swaroop (myriad cosmic mechanism).

Like Arjuna, who understood the cosmic viewpoint of life and living and finally landed in a state of consciousness of pure objective role-performances; those who understand and accept the cosmic diversity of maya-mechanism and lead themselves towards an assimilative and integrative approach and attitude towards all shades of this myriad realism hit the road to ‘leela’ positioning in the maya-mechanism.

**

Ultimate Ingenuity To Unravel Maya

Humanity had very early understood that ‘virtue’ is not singular. It is specific to utility for humanity in general. Some things are good and useful when ‘fresh’ and upgraded whereas, some other things had virtues in their antiquities. Preservation and antiquitization was not new to humanity, even before philosophy and spiritualism could define and prescribe their own ideas over ‘ultimate utilities’ for humanity.

Humanity’s values, its choice for virtuosity and relevance has always been subjective, like culture. Humanity fixes its value and utility in different entities in different ways. Divinity, traditions, rituals, faith, mysticism etc are like wines and paintings. They have larger values and utility in their antiquity perception. Bread and milk must be fresh but cheese tastes good even when old and having gone through dated process.

The notions of ‘value’ and ‘utility’, which fixes virtues and relevance to an idea or action, are also very subjective, often, colored by the cultural mind and its archetypal instinctive preferences.

At the end of the day, wisdom is never singular; it probably cannot be ever. It is highly subjective to individual or group choices and value summation. Some love them and wish to stay as ‘dated’, some would want them ‘outdated’, and others may ascribe it being ‘undated’ as priority. We may think, we all love latest versions of mobile phone but many would love to stick with their old phones. It is a choice of mind.

No need to set up a jury, no judgment should ever be instituted. Every singular choice out of the human inventory of plurality has its pleasure and pain, good and bad, benefits and losses. What one chooses, sets up his life and living journey of pain and pleasure. The worldview one opts, decides his journey, sojourns, path-mates and destination.

Human ingenuity has almost always helped humanity evolve and grow but, where and when one applies his or her ingenuity is however individual’s subjective choice. Every human has his or her own different destinies as choices make them this way.

Every single choice has its set of pains and pleasures, therefore, at the end of life, we can say, nobody is better off and nobody is worse off as the average attainments of all choices look similar, if not same.

It also seems a clear fact that most of us shall always have this regret about the choice or choices we made or did not make as we all have this innate urge to count pains and not count pleasures. It is tough to know when and where human ingenuity would work and where not as, it is a choice that is more on subconscious being than in conscious one. Probably, this is why they call it ‘maya’ (asymmetrical juxtaposition of subconscious value summation).

Repeated surveys have suggested that, most people, when they are on deathbed, regret that they could not spend as much quality and leisurely time with near and dear ones. One would be bound to accept that probably, the virtue is in being with our own people and not in personal struggles for individual glory.

This is not right ad true. The fact remains that ‘regret’ has its own mechanism. The mind consciousness would always primarily count those ‘missing’ aspects, which should have been there to make a ‘perfect’ picture. If someone has worked day and night all life and build a fortune for himself and his family; at the end of life, he shall regret about not spending enough time with family and friends. The core idea is – can he possibly regret something, which he has already in plenty? Some may, but most would not.

On the other hand, someone, who always spent quality time with family and loved them well, shall probably regret at the end of life that he could not work enough to give more money and facilities to his family and friend. It is natural. He too cannot probably regret, what he already has or had in plenty.

We regret what we do not have or what we could not do. Once we understand the mechanism of the emotion of ‘regret’, we shall have the holistic and assimilative idea of life and living realisms. Our mechanism is designed for ‘whole’. However, in our lives, what we attain is the success, utility and fruition of the ‘part’. Naturally, the subconscious mind shall generate the emotion of this ‘imbalance’ and this shall be expressed in the feeling of ‘regret’.

Understanding the mechanism of all such vital issues of life, which makes life a ‘maya’ and mystical realism, we can land in a state of mind-consciousness, which is referred to as ‘leela’ positioning.

The ultimate ingenuity is making it a conscious process to see and accept all such cardinal issues of life like, conflict, regret, joy, pain, love, fear, anger, etc, as it reveals the duality of the choices and value summations. Then it becomes easy to master them. This is one single thing where both religion and modern objective wisdom are one in opinion and virtuosity of choice.

**

Welcome, Don’t Reject Maya

It is very crucial here to state one fact, which has been a major current in human thinking and perspective about the world and its utility. This is the reactionary urge of rejecting the vagaries of the world, along this world too and become a loner and recluse. We need to talk about this issue too for holistic discourse on ‘maya’ and ‘leela’.

In the infinity, perpetuity and immensity of transcendental possibilities of multiversal realisms, one may stand in absolute and finite objectivity, the level and degree to which a subjective being can afford to be.

Religion seems to put a restrictive limit to this positioning. It says, “Objectivity is not denying subjectivity but remaining detached to it. Be, but still not be positioned like being. The non-being cannot attain the objectivity of being; therefore, being dead to strings of life is no road to experience objectivity. Being lively to the strings of death may not be ideal, but preferable.”

Limping beyond this restriction is possible, of course, it is, but then, the purpose of experiencing objectivity is lost as, beyond this limit, purpose of any genre itself is a burden and cannot practically be carried through. The objectivity of death is near possible in life but then, at this stage of time-space linearity, life’s dimensionalities have no reason and utility. Even if it is just an infinitesimal and microscopic strand of connect, it is essential for the experience of objectivity.

The realism is one huge objectivity platform and subjectivity, though may seem to stand in absolute randomization; must remain in cyclic path positioning to the gravity of the objective core to be of any worth for experiencing.

One may toil, experience and learn the objective art of ‘acting’ but then it has no use and purpose if it is not performed in the ‘theatre’. One however is free to say, ‘art is for the artist, not for the audience!’

This is the fundamental issue about being. The centrality of the whole conflict about the objective and subjective ‘selves’ of the being within a singular ‘self’ in this realism of the cosmos. Even if we attempt to transcend the restrictive prescription of spirituality, we still do not think, we have the right answers. The conflict, emanating out of this dualism remains.

The conflict of realism is still unanswered for humanity. If we accept what religion says, then the realism has a purpose and there is a whole world of confusing and conflicting, yet popularly acceptable answers about the purpose, which can satisfy from a stupid to a genius.

The science has still not found its own answers and cannot accept any other as the right one. The popular philosophy of science about cosmic realism is a theory of ‘accidents’. However, even if the current realism is a product of accident, it afterwards created a purpose, which is writ large on the face of every single being and non-being in the cosmos. 

From any perspective of any philosophizing angle, despite absolute objectivity, the singular fact can never be missed and that is – ‘however or whichever way realism came to be, once it came to be, it created a subjectivity and prompt came the need for objectivity. The purpose automatically is born and it is the beautiful baby of both the parents of subjectivity and objectivity.

This beautiful baby called purpose is the generic name of what humanity popularly names as ‘maya’. This baby has the objectivity that cosmic realism in its macrocosm enthralls and enlightens the humanity and it also has the subjectivity that expresses itself in the myriad colors and aromas that realism accepts in its microcosmic incarnations. 

It seems like a great gift that a ‘self’ has the benefit and liberty of having dual-extremes of objectivity and subjectivity to sing and dance its way to absolute bliss? It seems so. If ‘maya’ is accepted and appreciated truly, in its entirety and magnanimity.

There are enough beautiful metaphors to understand the entirety and magnanimity of maya. For example, when we start to learn a language, we start with grammar, which is singular and objective for all. Even if one wishes, rules of grammar cannot change for individual. However, when we learn the grammar, we have the subjective liberty to use the language we have learnt for varied and individualized expressions. Someone may become a good orator, someone a poet and another a writer. It starts with objectivity and then blossoms in subjective cosmos.

Good grammar enriches and enhances brilliant communication and good communication suitably flavors the essence of grammar. Both are inseparable and what makes the entire experience a beautifully satisfying one is the poise and symbiotic interplay between grammar and expression – the objectivity and subjectivity.

Life has the similar rule. ‘Maya’ offers both objectivity as well as subjectivity to us. Of course, the platform and horizon of life and living is colossally huge compared to that of a language. This truly is the joy of ‘maya’. Moreover, the best part of interplay of objectivity and subjectivity in the domain of life’s ‘maya’ is the mystical element of randomization, which enhances and enriches the flavors of life experiences.

This randomization of ‘maya’ is also somehow a simple and innocent prescription for all humans. It tells us in perceptible wisdom that learning of live and living realisms needs to be objective and singular like grammar. However, everyone then shall have infinite subjective liberty to experiment with the realism one has in his or her life.

It also warns us that even while we take subjective liberty of ‘expressions’, the grammar of life’s basic and primary learning must never be compromised with and maligned. The subjective liberty shall always remain innately aligned to the justification and utility of grammar.

That is why we talked earlier, “The realism is one huge objectivity platform and subjectivity, though may seem to stand in absolute randomization; must remain in cyclic path positioning to the gravity of the objective core to be of any worth for experiencing.”

Do understand and accept this simple and innocent metaphor. The cosmic realism, still to be unraveled in its details, remains an objective grammar for all to follow. The mechanism, which was created (by God or accident) before we all came to be is objective. The mechanism that we have and that things around us have is objective reality. Within this framework, every individual has the subjective liberty to express and interpret the realisms but never shall the subjectivity stand in contravention and denial with the objectivity rules of the cosmos.

If one understands the mechanism of ‘maya’ and accepts its randomization as one objective platform, the subjective liberty of individual gets energized and then, the life becomes one infinite journey of song and dance. That is why, whichever way ‘maya’ comes, welcome. This is the preferred consciousness position, called ‘leela’.

It is however a sad reality that most humans do not care for learning the objective ‘grammar’ of life and still insist on presenting themselves as the master craftsperson of life’s ‘language and expressions’. They unconsciously malign ‘maya’.

**

Road To Song And Dance Of Maya

To be or not to be… to do or not to do… yes or no! There shall always be at least two ways to make a choice; this is the minimum. However, at times, there may be more options available, more roads to make a choice from.

Now comes the question. Why is there always a dualism and conflicting options for choices? Why there is not a single, decisive and prescribed option for all to follow? Almost every human being thinks on the same line as everyone is faced with the dualism of life and living choices.

Everyone also knows that this dualism is the core trouble of humanity as whichever option you choose, it is laced with regrets in the short or long run, even when initially it may sound as the best and the right choice!

Often, we do not find the right answers of what we ask from ourselves or from others just because, our very questions are either not right or, we do not basically understand the nature and scope of the question we form in our heads, or ‘heart’ and ‘soul’.

At the very outset, it must be mentioned here that we all have a mind training, which our popular cultures make ingrained in our deep conscious and unconscious minds. Anyone who asks too many questions is considered a bad boy or girl and parents, teachers, seniors and even peers call such question-happy persons as ‘nagging’, ‘derailed’, ‘unintelligent’ and even very undisciplined.

This mind training by the popular culture of our civil society has disastrous impact on all budding minds as, ‘questions’ are not considered an intelligent and disciplined action. As all those, who think and show confidence that they know the ‘answers’, are hailed as genius and successful, the impressionable minds of kids and adolescents develop a tendency and ingenuity to formulate smart and socially navigable ‘answers’ rather than good questions. In this zeal for ‘answers’ their minds start imagining and ‘inventing’ those answers which land them in larger conveniences in their ambient cultural milieu.

Science has now established the ingenuity of mind mechanism. It says, “When confronted with the unpredictable, illogical and undecided questions, the cortex area of human brain (which processes ideas and thoughts), the so called thinking and rational mind, refuses to admit defeat.

It does so because defeat is socially inconvenient. Mind is quick to convert inconvenience of questioning pattern into the convenience of ‘smart’ answering pattern. It draws on all your computational abilities to search for patterns in random data.

“As there is none or little data (as questions are not understood and no logical answer available), in the absence of real patterns, the mind starts detecting illusory ones and even those, which are available in shred and pieces in the cultural milieu. In addition, it starts prompting you to act on them with huge amount of conviction and confidence, as is apt for a winner”.

We have already talked about why it is not possible for humanity to have the right data to base our answers on them. Things happened billions of years back and we are formulating questions based on the feeble and fickle data of those archetypal events. The answers can only be ‘smart’ ones, never the ‘true’ ones.

It has to be understood from the modern and contemporary knowledge of mi