86 Notes on Gandapada-Karika ( 30 ) Those who indulge in the various विकल्पs about Atman, regard Atman as different, these funds actually are not defferent from Atman. No wonder that they fail to know real truth about Ätman. On the other hand, those who have realised that Atman is the only reality, do not take these विकल्प at their face value and are not contaminated by the कर्मफल which might have other - wise accrued to them. न ह्यनध्यात्मविद्वेदाञ्ज्ञातुं शक्नोति तत्वतः ! न ह्यनध्यात्म- विन्कश्चित क्रियाफलमुपाश्नुत इति हि मानवं वचनम् 1! ( Anandagiri ). ( 31 ) स्वप्न, माया, गन्धर्वनगर etc. are known to be असद्रूप; the universe is likewise असद्रूप, वेदान्तेषु- नेह नानास्ति किंचन, इन्द्रो मायाभिः, आत्मैवेदमग्र आसीत, ... यत्र त्वस्य सर्वमात्मावाभूत्-इत्यादिषु ( Anandagiri ). (32) Having shown thus far how the views of other thinkers cannot stand, Gaudapada enunciates his view about परमार्थता, निरोध, उत्पत्ति, बद्ध, साधक, मुमुक्षु, मुक्त-these terms can have any meaning only if there is द्वैत. Only अद्वैत आत्मन् is the reality. An अद्वैत can not have any उत्पत्ति, प्रलय etc. it is futile also to talk of निरोध etc. in connection with imagined things Cf. ... वस्तुतस्तु न बन्धोऽस्ति न मोक्षोऽस्ति महामते ।। ( Yogavāsistha III. 101 ). नात्र कश्चिन्महामते बध्यते न च मुच्यते ! ( Lankavatarasātra 79). ( 33 ) The अद्वय आत्मन् is responsible for imagining himself to be all sorts of things that are really non-existent, and likewise for the imagined things themselves. Atman is always the same, un- changeable and serves as the अधिष्ठान for all कल्पनाs ( न हि निरास्पदः काचित्कल्पनोपलभ्यते Anandagiri ). All कल्पनाs are अशिव ; the अद्वय alone is शिव. ( 34 ) The objector says that he admits that the जगत् is just विकल्प foisted on the Atman; would not that mean that जगत् नाना from the point of view of आत्मभाव? The answer is no. Can one say that the imagined serpent is नाना from the point of view of रज्जु? The imagined serpent simply does not exist; no question of नानात्व can therefore arise, In the same way there cannot be any स्व-भाव, पृथक्व or अपृथक्त्व for an imagined or असत् thing. Prof. Vidhuśekhara wants to read नान्यभावेन for नात्मभावेन so as to have a contrast between अन्यभाव and स्व-भाव; he thinks that आत्मभाव and स्वभाव mean one and the same thing. We have shown above that आत्मभाव means' not the nature of जगत् ', but the nature of जगत् as conceived as a विकल्प on आत्मन्. Again,
