Nyāya Sūtras 375

[It is] not [so], because origination and its cause are apprehended.

Origination of what has qualities similar to its cause, as well as the cause, is apprehended. And neither of these two has a permanent [entity] as its object, nor can the apprehension of origination and its cause be denied, and no apprehension is without an object. From the efficacy of apprehension, it is inferred that an effect having qualities similar to its cause is produced; that indeed is the object of apprehension. And thus the inclusion by their characteristic mark is established. Effort is observed on the part of a knower motivated by the causes of origination and destruction. And the whole possessing those properties is well established. And the whole having the properties of origination and destruction is established.

And there is non-pervasion of sound, action, cognition, and so forth. By the claim 'because the five elements are permanent and because [everything] is enclosed by their characteristic mark,' sound, action, cognition, pleasure, pain, desire, aversion, and effort are not pervaded; therefore, [the thesis] is not universally true. If it is claimed that it is an erroneous apprehension like the subjective notion of objects in a dream, it is the same with regard to the apprehension of the elements. As is the subjective notion of objects in a dream, so would be the subjective notion of the causes of origination. And in that way, this is the same with regard to the apprehension of the elements: the apprehension of earth and so on would also unacceptably follow to be like the subjective notion of objects in a dream.

If it is said that in the absence of earth and the like all conventional practice would collapse, that is the same in the other case—in the absence of the object of apprehension of the causes of origination and destruction too, all conventional practice would collapse. Thus, this [claim] that because permanent things are beyond the senses and because origination and destruction lack an object, it is like the subjective notion of objects in a dream, is not a valid reason.