________________
EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF SELF-SUFFICIENT VALIDITY'. 1379
TEXTS (3103-3106).
IN CONNECTION WITH THE VEDA, IT HAS BEEN ALREADY POINTED OUT
THAT THERE IS A SUBLATING COGNITION IN THE FORM OF Inference ; HENCE BY THE REJECTION OF THE SOUL' AND OTHER THINGS MENTIONED IN THE VEDA, IT BECOMES ESTABLISHED THAT THE COGNITION DERIVED FROM THE VEDA CANNOT BE VALID.-As IT HAS BEEN PROVED THAT THE VEDA IS THE WORK OF A PERSONAL AUTHOR, THE FACT OF ITS HAVING A DEPECTIVE SOURCE IS ALWAYS OPEN TO SUS. PICION.-IF THE CAPACITY IN QUESTION (i.e. VALIDITY) WERE INHERENT IN COGNITIONS, JUST AS THE CAPACITY TO BURN IS INHERENT IN FIRE,THEN SUCH VALIDITY SHOULD BELONG TO WRONG COGNITIONS ALSO.-THUS IT IS OPEN TO SUSPICION THAT THE COGNITION PROVIDED BY THE VEDA PROCEEDS FROM A DEFECTIVE SOURCE, AND WHAT IS suspected TO BE DEFECTIVE DOES NOT DIFFER FROM WHAT IS ACTUALLY PERCEIVED TO BE DEFECTIVE.-(3103-3106)
COMMENTARY.
Mere similarity is not urged by the Buddhists as what annuls the Cognition provided by the Veda ; what is urged by them is that such things as the Soul, the Universal and the like, which are mentioned in the Veda, are rejected by all Means of Valid Cognition. This has been explained in the Chapters dealing with tho 'Soul', etc.
Further, under the chapter on the Revealed Word', it has been proved that the Vedas must be the work of an author or even if they were without an author,-it is possible that there may be sources of falsity, as there is in the case of the Forest-fire (which is regarded by some people as self-produced, which is not true); consequently it is possible that what is said in the Veda may be false ;-this is what has been urged by the Buddhists, not mere similarity.
The following might be urged-"Even though this may be possible, yet, how can mere possibility establish the invalidity (falsity) of what is said in the Veda ?”
The answer to this is What is suspected to be defective, etc. etc. The compound Shankyadopam' is to be expounded as that in which defects are suspected.
Does not differ, etc. -Because the validity of both is equally liable to being regarded as non-existent.-(3103-3106)
The following Text sums up the argument
