[Advaita-l] Body is the disease

[Bhaskar YR]

Because jiva has avidya, he is said to be the locus ( ashraya )  of 
avidya.
When a person says he has the money which is in a box, he is the ashraya
for the money only in a limited/secondary  sense, one born of Abhimana (
sense of belonging or ownership ). The real ashraya for the money is the
box. In the same way, when it is said jiva has avidya, the jiva becomes 
the
ashraya for the avidya  only in a secondary/limited  sense , through
abhimana only ( sense of belonging or ownership ). The real ashraya is
Brahman only. 

praNAms Sri ChandramouLi prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Not exactly.  Here in this sUtra bhAshya itself (4.1.3) pUrvapaxi 
continues to ask siddhAnti, how come jeeva is the Ashraya of avidyA when 
shruti declaring that jeeva is nothing but Ishwara (brahman)??  For this 
shankara (siddhAnti) replies, if you (jeeva)  realize that you are Ishwara 
(brahman) then there is no avidyA whatsoever to anybody.  Here shankara 
does not say avidyA is brahmAshraya in the absence of Jeeva.  And 
elsewhere ( for example in taitereeya up. bhAshya) too shankara attributes 
avidyA to karaNa (antaHkaraNa dOsha) by sighting the example of cataract.

But anyway, as you observed above, bhAmati kAra accepts that though locus 
of avidyA is jeeva, actually ownership belongs to Ishwara. And this 
Ishwara is vivartOpadAna kAraNa for the jeevashrita's avidyAkruta 
prapancha. 

I seek a clarification in this regard. I am told that Sri Vachaspati
Mishra's interpretation in Bhamati is more in favour of the advaita
advocated by Sri Mandana Mishra in his work < Brahmasidhi > which favours
the Bhedabheda concept than Sri Bhagavatpada's interpretation which holds
only Abheda as acceptable. Sri Vachaspati Mishra accepts an infinite 
number
of jivas and avidyas.Could this be the reason for the above interpretation
of jiva as the locus of avidya.

>  Yes, I think so, according to bhAmati prasthAna there are multiple 
jeeva-s and each and every jeeva has its own avidyA and after the dawn of 
jnAna in a particular jeeva, that particular jeeva's ajnAna gets 
eradicated.  But as I said earlier bhAmati upa-vyAkhyAnakAra,  amalAnanda 
in kalpataru ( which is sub-commentary on bhAmati prasthAna) accepts the 
brahmAshrita avidyA (like vivaraNakAra)  based on vAchaspati-s assertion 
that during pralaya everything would subside in kAraNAvidyA.  Which one 
can infer that  this kAraNAvidyA is nothing but vivaraNakAra's 
brahmAshrita mUlAvidyA or brahmAbhinna bhAva rUpa, shakti rUpAtmaka 
avidyA. 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar