Buddhist Philosophy in India and Ceylon c22.s5.2

c22.s5.2

The similarity of result, however, does not necessarily mean borrowing on either side, for parallel developments of different initial conceptions, one of absolute reality, one of absolute nothingness, might lead to results not dissimilar, and it is, of course, true that there is a vital difference between the two doctrines. The truth of convention or appearance (*vaiyavahārika*) of Śaṅkara is certainly false from the point of view of absolute truth, but it rests on a reality, for illusion (*māyā*) is, and the magician who causes it is a Lord, while Nāgārjuna’s truth of obscurity is utterly unreal, like the horn of a hare or the son of a barren woman.¹