________________
CHAPTER III
109
49. If all the qualities are indescribable, how can we even speak of the same? If (you say) that it is illusory, then it must be false, being opposed to reality.
COMMENTARY Before we call a thing ‘unknowable', we must have some knowledge about it. We cannot say all qualities or properties to be unknowable because it is for the above reason a self-contradictory position. The very affirmation of unknowability cannot take place. If anyone tries to avoid this by saying that this is not real but fictitious, the result would be that it is false. Without any real substance being in existence, there cannot be any illusion or fictitious appliance of the same. The Avaktavya-vādins are therefore inconsistent with themselves.
अशक्यत्वादवाच्यं किमभावात् किमबोधतः। आधन्तोक्तिद्वयं न स्यात् किं व्याजेनोच्यतां स्फुटम् ॥50॥ asakyatvādavāchyam kií abhāvāt kimabodhataḥ, ādyantokti-dvayam na syāt kim vyājenochyatām
sphuţam.
50. Is indescribability due to want of power, or for non-existence, or for want of knowledge? The first and the third (alternatives) cannot happen. What is the use of evasion? Speak clearly.
COMMENTARY The person holding the view that everything is indescribable is asked a question in this verse. There can be three possibilities in indescribability. The first is want of power. The Buddhists say that Buddha is possessed of the power of ten thousand elephants. It cannot therefore be said by the Buddhists that indescribability arises out of want of power. It cannot again be said that it is non-existent for the very proof
