Are these traditions saying the world is deliberately fake?

That comparison seems to flatten several different ideas into one. In Hindu traditions, Maya has had different meanings across texts and schools, including power, appearance, and the way ordinary perception can obscure reality. It does not automatically mean that gods built a fake world to trick people.

The other examples also need care. Hebrew hevel suggests something fleeting or insubstantial, while ma'al concerns wrongdoing or breach of trust. Neither is simply a translation of Maya. A shared theme of questioning worldly attachments is not proof that the traditions teach the same mechanism.

I’d be cautious with the claim about the Rigveda and 33 gods creating Maya as a deception. The number of gods is discussed in Vedic material, but that alone does not establish that they jointly manufacture an illusion to mislead humanity. Meanings of Maya also shift across Hindu texts and philosophical traditions, so it helps to name the specific text and period.

There are later Hindu views that describe ordinary experience as mistaken or less than ultimate reality. That is not quite the same as saying the physical world is a malicious trick. Those distinctions change the whole argument.

In the Islamic example, describing worldly life as delusive is generally a warning about being distracted by temporary pleasures or false confidence. It need not mean the material world itself is unreal or that God set up a trap. In biblical writing, language about life being fleeting or empty also depends on the passage and its purpose.

These traditions can overlap in their caution about attachment, but they do not all make one identical claim about reality. I’d compare the surrounding arguments, not just words that sound similar in translation.