DIVINE HYPNOSIS

 A

If you're looking for a Sanskrit equivalent of Balsekar's phrase “divine hypnosis,” there isn't a single classical Sanskrit expression that exactly matches it. But several Sanskrit concepts capture different aspects of what he means.

Closest philosophical terms

1. माया — Māyā
“Illusion / appearance / that which makes the unreal appear real.”

This is probably the closest single Sanskrit concept to Balsekar's “divine hypnosis.”

In an Advaita context, māyā refers to the power through which the undivided reality appears as a world of separate names, forms and individuals.

---

2. अविद्या — Avidyā
“Ignorance / non-knowing.”

This is more specifically the misapprehension of reality—particularly mistaking the body-mind for the true Self.

You could therefore distinguish:

Māyā = the cosmic appearance
Avidyā = individual ignorance of that reality

---

3. मोह — Moha
“Delusion / bewilderment / attachment.”

This captures the psychological side of the “hypnosis”: consciousness becomes identified with the transient and mistakes it for the Self.

---

A more literal Sanskrit rendering

If you simply wanted to translate “divine hypnosis” poetically:

दैवी सम्मोहनम्
Daivī Sammohanam

दैवी (daivī) = divine
सम्मोहनम् (sammohanam) = enchantment, delusion, fascination, hypnotic bewilderment

So:

दैवी सम्मोहनम् — Daivī Sammohanam

“Divine enchantment / divine hypnosis.”

This is a modern descriptive rendering, rather than a standard classical Advaita technical term.

---

But there is an even deeper Sanskrit connection

For Balsekar's particular meaning, I would put the concepts together as:

माया → अविद्या → अहंकार

Māyā → Avidyā → Ahaṃkāra

Appearance → misidentification → “I”-maker

Where अहंकार (ahaṃkāra) literally means the “I-maker”—the mechanism by which experience becomes appropriated as:

“I am this person.”
“I am doing this.”
“This is happening to me.”

That makes ahaṃkāra particularly important for understanding Balsekar's “divine hypnosis.”

The “hypnosis” isn't simply that we fail to see reality.

It is that the limitless is apparently experienced as a limited individual who believes itself to be the doer.

So if you wanted a compact Sanskrit formulation of Balsekar's idea, I'd use:

दैवी सम्मोहनम् — Māyā as divine enchantment, producing ahaṃkāra, the apparent “I-maker.”

And the Advaitic question that breaks the hypnosis is:

कोऽहम्? — Ko'ham?
“Who am I?”