FURTHER MUSING ON MAYA
So, we have understood also through theory of relativity that the world is MAYA. Then, is it all Maya only? When I kept thinking further, I find myself challenging the concept of Maya.
The whole concept of Maya understood through theory of Relativity is due to the presumption that an answer to the “tennis ball” question should be in static terms. If we are ready to shrug off this presumption, the puzzle itself vanishes. Take another example, “what is the exact shape of water?” When it is put in a pitcher it becomes spherical, when it is put into glass it take a shape of cone and when we throw it on floor it takes any unknown shape. We may say that the shape of water is FLUID. We take it for granted and don’t take it as Maya, because it is too common for our understanding. Since this world has been created by God (or has sprouted itself – “swaimbhu”) in a way that it exist in fluid co-ordinates of time and space (as explained by theory of relativity), it becomes very ordinary thought that there is no fixed answer to the “tennis ball problem”. Like we very clearly understand that there is no fixed shape of water.
So, we can understand the puzzle like it – this world is real and Maya is its property.
No comments yet.