World of Philosophy

Author(s): Christopher Key Chapple, Intaj Malek, Dilip Charan, Sunanda Shastri, Prashant Dave
Publisher: Shanti Prakashan

Page 809

collective (Samasti) and individual (Vyasti). The collective Ajñāna with pure sattva predominates in it is the adjunct of īśvara and it is Māyā. The individual Ajñāna with impure Sattva predominates in it is the adjunct of Jiva and it is Avidyā. Māyā is cosmic nescience and Avidyā is individual nescience. Praksātman states that Māyā and Avidyā are identical but, on practical level they are to be treated as different. Viksepaśakti is predominent in Māyā which projects the world appearance, while Avaranasakti is predominent in Avidyā which conceals the nature of Brahman.54
LOCUS OF MĀYA :
Locus of Māyā or Avidyā is a matter of great controversy and even Sankara's followers have divided themselves into two main. groups. There are some who hold that the same pure Brahman is both the object and locus of Avidyā or Māyā; whereas there are others according to whom the Ajñāna or Avidyā has not pure consciousness or Brahman, but Jiva or individual soul, for its locus or support. There are difficulties involved in holding either of these views. As far as first view is concerned, Māyā or Avidyā, cannot be attributed to Brahman. Brahman is selfluminous and pure, while Māvā 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 together. 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 Māyā. there are Jīvas. Jīvas are products of Māyā. How can Avidyā or Māyā have for its locus a Jīva which itself is a product of Avidyā ? 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 (Jīvas) 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 magician is not affected by his own magical power, 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 Māyā is the Brahman. Vācaspati Misra56 and his followers disagree with this first view and uphold that the Jīva is the locus of Māyā or Avidyā. They have tried to overcome 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
760