Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
## Karika 46:
**Devaagam**
If we say that the origin of a thing is completely non-existent, then the fault attributed to the "nothingness" side arises. If we say that it is completely both (existent and non-existent), then both faults arise. If we say that it is completely experienced, then the thing becomes objectless, formless, without nature, or without any characteristics, and then the origin of any alternative does not arise. Therefore, the essence (unity-non-duality) and the otherness (diversity-duality) of those offspring and progenitors also become inexpressible (because they are dharma). Accordingly, the duality-experience dharma also becomes inexpressible (because they are dharma); because if we say that the dharma of a thing is completely non-different (inseparable) from the thing, then only the thing arises. If we say that it is completely different (separate) from the thing, then the designation does not succeed, i.e., it cannot be said that this is the dharma of that thing. If we say that it is completely both (different and non-different), then both faults arise. If we say that it is completely non-experienced (neither different nor non-different), then the thing becomes without characteristics and without nature. From this, nothing can be said about the dharma of offspring and progenitors. (Therefore, this statement is not correct; because)
"In the said acceptance of inexpressibility, the fourfold alternative of inexpressibility should not be said either. Because everything would be non-existent, without any specific characteristic or qualifier." || 46 ||
Then (to the Buddhists) "the fourfold alternative is inexpressible" should not be said either; because if we take the side of completely inexpressible (unspeakable) by showing the unsuitability of expression in all dharmas, then saying "the fourfold alternative is inexpressible" does not become possible. Saying it would lead to the possibility of expressibility, and not saying it would not make others understand it. In such a situation, its transcendence of all alternatives results. That which transcends all alternatives is devoid of all dharmas, and that which is devoid of all dharmas is non-existent (like a sky-flower); because its specific characteristic...