Ask Osho!

Is Shankara compromising by calling maya 'indescribable' (anirvachaniya)?

Synthesized from Source definition

"To deny the relative is to compromise the absolute; true understanding embraces both, dissolving the paradox in the wholeness of existence."

Core Insight:
According to Osho, yes—Shankara is compelled to compromise: by insisting on the absolute and denying the relative, he must still concede maya some status (indescribable, conventional, renunciatory) because it undeniably appears. Speaking of it grants it reality. Krishna, by affirming both absolute and relative together, avoids compromise; integral acceptance dissolves the paradox from the start.
If you deny part of reality, you end up sneaking it back in with clever labels; accepting both the spiritual and the worldly from the start needs no tricks.
Why this matters practically
- Reduces inner conflict by honoring both silence and everyday life.
- Prevents dogmatism; keeps your view flexible and whole.
- Guides practical living: meditate deeply and engage fully in the world.
AI Confidence Score: 95% Read Original Discourse →

Related Questions on Maya

Is it a kind of compromise when Shankara says that Maya is inexpressible?
Why do enlightened beings labor with their disciples if the world is maya?
What is the difference between maya and the Divine, and how does maya veil knowing?
Could Shankara’s maya mean not falsehood but changeability?
How do I cut through the net of maya?
Why do so many people remain entangled in the world if it is an illusion?
What is this world and what is maya?
Explore all questions on Maya → Explore Osho quotes on Maya →