Here, having said ‘it perished’, and then saying that this yoga is ‘imperishable’, a sense of mutual contradiction cannot but arise. And there is reason for it: avyaya means free from destruction. To say that this yoga, which is free from destruction, perished: what else is that but a contradictory meaning? Because there are two fruits free from destruction in this yoga, it has also received the name ‘Avyaya Yoga’. If you ask what those fruits are: the basis of this yoga, its origin, is ‘the Veda’. This is imperishable! As for the second, the fruit it yields: the fruit of this yoga is ‘Mokṣa’. That too is free from destruction; there is no doubt about this. This yoga, which bestows such imperishable fruits, sank to the bottom through the karma of time and the forms of time, for lack of practice and propagation; that is, it became invisible. So it had to be said that it perished; but it is not something that perishes. To bring out again this yoga, which had sunk to the bottom and lay in a hidden place, means to hand it back into practice and propagation: that is its sense. It does not mean that He created again something that had perished. It did not perish. In ordinary speech people say ‘perishing’ for what becomes invisible and ‘creating’ for what becomes visible. Merely on that account one must not think that this yoga is perishable. The Paramātma never teaches what perishes.