________________
LOCUS OF MÃYA :
Locus of Mäyū or Avidyā is a matter of great controversy and even Sankara's followers liave divided themselves into two main groups. There are some who hold that the sanie pure Brahman is both the object and locus of Aridyā or Māyā; whereas there are others according to whom the Ajnana or Avidyā has not purc consciousness or Brahman, but Jiva or individual soul, for its locus or support. There are difficult es involved in holding either of these views. As far as first view is concerned, Maya or Avidyā, cannot be attributed to Brahman. Braliman is selfluminous and pure, while Māyā is impure by nature i.e. ignorance. There is some sort of antinomy between them as there is between light and darkness. It is beyond our comprehension to see how they can exist togetlier. If we accept second view, that, Jiva is the locus of Māyā or Avidyā, then there is the question as to how, prior to the functioning of Māya, there are Jivas. Jivas are products of Maya. How can Avidyā or Māyā have for its locus a Jiva which itself is a product of Avidya ? There is the defect or reciprocal dependence i.e. for Māyā to function we require the existence of souls and for the existence of souls (Jiyas) there is the necessity of the functioning of Māyā. For the upholders of first view. though locus of Māyā is pure Brahman, it is not affected by its impurity like inagician is not affected by his own magical pwer, and mirage water cannot make the sandy desert muddy. So, there is no harm in accepting the view that locus as well as content of Maya is the Brahman. Vācaspati Miśra 56 and his followers disagree with this first view and uphold that the Jiva is the locus of Māyā or Avidya. They have tried to o "ercome objections raised against it by means of the analogy of a tree and its seed.57 Apparently a tree cannot come into being without its seed exactly as a seed cannot be conceived without there being a tree to produce it. All the same the seeds and the trees are both there, similarly it has been said, the individual soul and its Avidya or Ajñāna have been there from beginningless time, because no beginning can be assigned to both by the finite mind. As far as Sankara is concerned, at certain places he seems to say that, supreme Lord is locus and content of Maya (Parames yarisrayi) and at certain places, it is Jiva which is locus of Maya or A vidya. There is nothing wrong in accepting either of these views. If we take first view, then the Isvara-the locus of Māya, is unaffected, like a magician who is not affected by his own magical power.59 As far as latter view is concerned Sankara is very clear. Answering the question whose is this ignorance, Sankara says that "It is of you who puts this question". (E 4 gafa De a sfa),60
