 Another Buddhist <unk> <unk> ridiculed anekāntavāda in <unk> : " With the differentiation removed , all things have dual nature . Then , if somebody is <unk> to eat curd , then why he does not eat camel ? " The <unk> is obvious ; if curd exists from the nature of curd and does not exist from the nature of a camel , then one is justified in eating camel , as by eating camel , he is merely eating the negation of curd . Ācārya <unk> , while agreeing that <unk> may be right from one viewpoint , took it upon himself to issue a <unk> : 
