Sāṃkhya view on Veda refuted

After refuting the Mīmāṃsā position, in the same verse, Udayana also briefly criticizes the Sāṃkhya position. According to Sāṃkhya, the Veda is not impersonal and it is not also the statement of God. Actually, the Veda is created by the sages like Kapila and others who through the practice of yoga have acquired supernormal powers. The Veda cannot be impersonal, because it represents only some sentences or statements. A statement can never be without a speaker. But it is also not necessary to admit God, because there is no proof for his existence. There is neither perception nor inference which can establish God. So there is no question of admitting God as the speaker. But it is also not possible for an ordinary person to be a speaker of the Veda. The Veda speaks about many things which are extraordinary and cannot be rightly known by such a person. But the sages have thoroughly practiced yoga and thereby acquired extraordinary powers through which they can understand the nature of even such things. So they can be accepted as speakers of the Veda. Thus admission of God is not necessary. As against this, Udayana says that there can be no other trustworthy person than God. Only if god is accepted as the speaker of the Veda people will have complete faith in the validity of the Veda. Moreover, if in the Sāṃkhya view there are many sages, all having supernormal powers, they may be the speakers of the Veda, but are they also capable of creating the world? According to Nyāya God is not only the speaker of the Veda, but is also the almighty creator of the world. If the Sāṃkhya view is admitted, so many persons with supernormal powers will have to be admitted. But if God is admitted only one such person will be admitted. So in the Nyāya view there is lāghava. If at all any speaker for the Veda or a creator for the world is to be admitted let there be only one God performing all the activities.^[1]