Sarvadarshanasangraha 12.56

12.56

By this is rejected that which was stated by Vāgīśvara in the Mānamanohara: 'Sound is non-eternal, because it is a specific quality perceptible by a sense-organ, like the visual form of the eye'; for it is unestablished with respect to one who holds that sound is a substance, and because it entails proving what is already established with regard to the aspect of phonetic sound, and because it is sublated by the extrinsic condition of non-audibility. Udayana, however, demonstrating through an extensive treatise the perceptibility of absence even when its locus is not perceptible, proved perception to be a means of valid cognition for the non-eternality of sound, as the cause for engaging in the linguistic usage 'the uproar has ceased, the sound has arisen.' He too resembles a ghost to whom a blood offering has been given, by the reasoning that explains the relation of contradictory properties as conditioned by an extrinsic adjunct. That consequence of constant perception or non-perception in the case of eternality stated by the author of the Nyāyabhūṣaṇa is also refuted, because it is accepted that its apprehension is conditioned by phonetic sound. As for the inference of the absence of being an object to be manifested by specific manifesting agents due to being connected with the sense-organ simultaneously, that is inconclusive with respect to the self. So enough of excessive dispute. And therefore, because the Veda is authorless, having the sprout of every stain of doubt discarded, its epistemic validity regarding dharma is self-established; this is well-settled.