Chapter II 125 which presuppose that creation is real and duality exists? The answer is that the wise ( buddha) people realise that अजातिवाद is extremely difficult to be grasped by ordinary people who see nothing but आत्मनाश in the अजातिवाद. So, taking compassion on these weak-kneed but well-intentioned people, the wise have preached for them the उत्पत्तिवाद, in the belief that in course of time they would be in a position to understand the higher truth of अजातिवाद ( this is what is meant by उपायः सोऽवताराय in III. I5 Prof. Vidhusekhara understands by बुद्धा) here also, the Buddhists. But surely, the Buddha never preached the उत्पत्तिवाद or अजातिवाद either! (43) वियन्ति- विरुद्धं यन्ति, द्वैतं प्रतिपद्यन्त इत्यर्थः K. bháșya ), The objector says: The श्रुति (... उदरमन्तरं कुरुते । अथ तस्य भयं भवति । Taittiriyopanişad II. 7-1 ) warns the साधक against the danger of believing in द्वैत. Would not those people who follow the Gästric injunctions based upon जातिवाद, because they are terribly afraid of अजातिवाद, come to grief in the end? Have they ever no hope for salvation ? The answer is that these people are after all not bad, but just weak and certainly सम्यग्व्यवसित ( साधुरेव स मन्तव्यः सम्यग्व्यवसितो हि
- 1 Gita IX. 30 ). They are not नास्तिकs like the Cärvākas or
Buddhists, and with luck, they can ultimately see their way to believing in the अजातिवाद (न हि कल्याणकत्कश्विदुर्गति तात गच्छति । Gitā XI. 40 ). ( 44 ) Gauậapāda says howsoever he might synipathise with the अस्तिवस्तुत्ववादिन्s referred to in Karikās 42, 43, he has to point out that their argument viz. there is वस्तुभाव on account of उपलब्ध and समाचार is entirely wrong. Because an object is perceived and can be put to practical use, it does not mean that it is real. For instance, the magic elephant shown up by a juggler is actually perceived ; people see its movements and so on, but every one knows that the elephant is unreal. ( 45 ) The only real thing is thus विज्ञान(also called it, चित्त, मनस्) that is, ज्ञानरूप ब्रह्मन्, which is अज (but appears to be born ), अचल (but appears to have motion ), अवस्तु (but appears to be a वस्तु ) and is completely unruffled (having no विकार ) and not within the province of the द्वय (ग्राह्यग्राहकभाव ). This description of विज्ञान by Gaudapāda shows that he does not hold the विज्ञानवाद of the Buddhists. The विज्ञान of the Buddhists is neither अज, nor अचल,
