[Advaita-l] Is the concept of maya essential to explain advaita?

[Bhaskar YR]

If Ishwara is sat, then His shakti (maya) should also be sat. If Ishwara 
is
mithya, how can His shakti be sat? Contrariwise, if maya is sad asad, how
can Ishwara be sat because that would imply a difference between shakti 
and
shaktiman?

praNAms Sri Rajaram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Not so prabhuji, it is just because 'shakti-shakta' ananyatva.  Yes, 
ofcourse, as per 'parama siddhAnta' Ishwara, his sarvajnatvaM, 
sarvashktitvaM' etc. holds good only in vyAvahArika satya.  Shankara 
himself clarifies this.  But when you talk of the Ishwara srushti, the 
jagat, jeeva etc. Then it should be understood that there is no difference 
between shakti and shakta.  The equation in kArya-kAraNa prakriya  is 
something like kArya (jagat) = shakti (mAya) & shakti (mAya) = shakta 
(Ishwara) (kAraNasya Atma bhUtA shaktiH, shakteshcha AtmabhUtaM kAryaM - 
shankara in sUtra bhAshya).  mama yOnirmahadbrahma, tasmin garbhaM 
dadhAmyahaM says lord in geeta and concludes that brahmaNOhi 
pratishtAhamamrutasyAvyayasya cha, shAshvatasya cha darmasya, 
sukhasyaikAntikasya cha. While commenting on this shankara clarifies sA 
shaktiH brahmaiva ahaM shaktiH shaktimatO ananyatvAt.  So, there is no 
problem in accepting that mAyA svarUpa is brahmAnanyA. 

But no need to mention, these statements would be self contradictory if we 
accept the vyAkhyAna theory i.e. mAya = avidyA :-))

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar