Sarvadarshanasangraha 12.36

12.36

tad asāram/ ṛcaḥ sāmāni jajñire/ chandāṃsi jajñire tasmād yajus tasmād ajāyata iti puruṣasūkte vedasya sakartṛkatāpratipādanāt/ kiṃ cānityaḥ śabdaḥ sāmānyavattve saty asmadādibāhyendriyagrāhyatvād ghaṭavat/

Further [proceed the Naiyāyikas] we hold that sound is non-eternal[18] because it has genus, and is also perceptible to the external organs of beings such as ourselves, just as a jar is.[19] "But," you may object, "is not this argument refuted by the proof arising from the fact that we recognise the letter g (for example) as the same we have heard before?" This objection, however, is extremely weak, for the recognition in question is powerless to refute our argument, since it has reference only to identity of species, as in the case of a man whose hair has been cut and has grown again, or of a jasmine which has blossomed afresh. "But [asks the Mīmāṃsaka] how can the Veda have been uttered by the incorporeal Parameśvara, who has no palate or other organs of speech, and therefore cannot have pronounced the letters?" "This objection [answers the Naiyāyika] is not happy, because, though Parameśvara is by nature incorporeal, he can yet assume a body in sport, in order to show kindness to his worshippers. Consequently the arguments in favour of the doctrine that the Veda had no personal author are inconclusive."