________________
20
INDIAN LOGIC
joint mention takes place only in connection with a hybrid ritual, and it is not necessary that a scripture must recommend a hybrid ritual.41 Certainly, a scripture might speak of a ritual exclusive to it just as there are Vedic rituals exclusive to this or that varņa, to this or that asrama.42 It too is no objection that the followers of Vedas are hostile towards other scriptures, for such hostility is not proper and, moreover, the followers of Vedas are hostile even towards a practice like cow-slaughter which is a very clear Vedic practice. Then there are actually found Vedic statements which lend support to certain typical views of the Sānkhya, Buddhists, Jainas etc.44 Lastly, as somebody says, “Whatever religious duty is enjoined by Manu is enjoined by Veda, because Veda contains all knowledge'; in this statement the word “Manu’ stands not only for the Dharmaśāstra-authors like Gautama, Yama, Āpastamba etc. but also for the non-Vedic sect-leaders like Arhat, Kapila, Sugata, etc.45 Of course, this does not mean that even the Lokāyata scripture is based on Vedas, for the so-calld Lokāyata scripture is no scripture but a nihilist clap-trap."46 But then somebody asks these liberals of various hues : "If all scriptures are authentic then suppose 1 compose a scripture to-day; will that too become authentic within a short while ?»:47 The liberals answer : "Only those scriptures are authentic which have gained currency with a considerable section of cultured populace, which do not appear to be a novelty of today, which have not originated from vices like greed etc., which people do not find abominable.”48 Noble sentiments indeed ! But in fact these liberal Brahmins must have realised that it was no use dubbing as anti-Vedic the non-Brahmanical theological sects like Buddhism etc. when the so many Brahmanical sects and sub-sects of the day were themselves as distant as anything could be from what Vedas originally stood for. (4) Objections Against Vedas Refuted
As was earlier noted in passing, the subject matter of the present section was no burning concern of a Purāņist like Jayanta though it was certainly a burning concern of the Mimärsaka. For to defend the efficacy of the cult of Vedic ritual and to defend the validity of each single word uttered in Vedas was the be-all and end-all of the Mimāṁsaka, and it is these two tasks that Jayanta seeks to undertake in his present section. [On his part, a Purāņist
