________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
999
Veda ; and consequently there can be no inadmissibility in the Reason adduced by the Mimānsaka-because the Voda is free from the contact of defects that bring about falsityNor can the Reason be regarded as
Contradictory'; bocause it is present wherever the Probandum is present; and being not present where the Probandum is not present, it cannot be regarded as 'Inconclusive. Thus it becomes established that the Veda is authoritative and reliable."
Now the Mimāmsala proceeds to point out in detail the defects in the two arguments put forward by his Opponent in support of the view that the Veda is not authoritative and reliable.
These two arguments are as follows - (A) What is perceptible by the senses, and (B) what is produced by effort, must be non-eternal-e.g. the Jar; and Sound is both (perceptible and produced by effort); these are Reasons based upon the nature of things, which prove the non-eternality of sound in general; and this being proved, the non-eternality of the Veda necessarily follows; and from this it also follows, by implication, that like the assertions of human beings, the words of the Veda also may be false.-- Such is the sense of what is argued by the Buddhists and others.
Against these arguments, the Mimämsaka sets forth in detail the argument that the proposition of the Opponents is annulled by the Verbal and other Means of Right Cognition.
First of all, the following Teat shows that the Proposition that the Vedic Words are false is annulled by Verbal Cognition itself :
TEXT (2106). "ONE WHO ASSERTS THE FALSITY OF THE VEDIC WORDS ON THE BASIS OF INFERENCE, HAS HIS PROPOSITION ANNULLED BY THE YORCE
OF THE COGNITION DERIVED FROM THE VEDA."—(2106)
COMMENTARY.
• Vaidika' is derived from the Vedla ; i.e. such cognitions or notions as • Heaven follows from the performance of the Agnihotra';-by the force of such notions, his Proposition becomes annulled, as it is set aside by it. This has been thus asserted " As a matter of fact, the notion derived from the Injunction is not of a doubtful character,-in any such form as this may or may not be so '; nor at any other time or place, or in any other circumstances, or in any other person, does there appear any notion to the contrary, that it is false'. As regards the idea that the notion derived from the Vedic Injunction must be false because we have found another statement made in the Veda to be false - this is only an Inference, and as such, becomes sublated by the aforesuid direct coguition to the contrary." (Shabara-bhäsya-Translation, page 18.-(2106)
Says the other party :-The two-Verbal Cognition and Inference-being of equal strength (validity), how can one be annulled by the other? If even
