Nyāya Sūtras 255

NyS 3.1.58: There is no refutation of odors and the rest, because of the non-difference of odorness and the rest.

In the case of odors and the rest, which have their fixed distribution established by their respective universals, such as odorness, the apprehensions of odor and the rest do not require other apprehending [organs], because they are accomplished by a common instrument. An aggregate of objects was stated as the [basis of] inference, not a single part of an object.

And resorting to a single part of an object, you refute the mere fivefoldness of the objects; therefore this refutation is unfounded. How, then, is the fixed distribution of odors and the rest established by their respective universals, such as odorness? This touch is threefold: cold, hot, and neither-hot-nor-cold, subsumed under its own universal, touchness. And when cold touch is apprehended, the apprehension of hot or neither-hot-nor-cold touch does not require another apprehending [organ], because the varieties of touch are to be accomplished by a single instrument, since the other two are apprehended by that very same [organ] by which cold touch is apprehended. In the same way, odors [are subsumed] under odorness, visual forms under visual-formness, tastes under tasteness, and sounds under soundness. The apprehensions of odor and the rest, however, require different apprehending [organs], because they cannot be accomplished by a common instrument. Therefore it is well established that the sense organs are five because the objects of the sense organs are fivefold.