________________
Being can be inferred. Hence it is impossible to establish 'the Omniscient Being' by Inference, Agama or the Scripture also cannot prove 'the Omniscient Being. If it be said that there is Scriptural saying in support of Omniscience the question is, Is such Scriptural saying eternal or non-eternal ? If such saying be held to be eternal, we say it is not authoritative; for, only those portions of the Scripture which lay down rules Perform the Agnishtoma sacrifice' etc etc, are to be relied on as authoritative If on the other hand, the Scriptural saying in support of Omniscience be held to be non-eternal, we ask, who is the author of such a non-eternal Scriptural text? If you say that the Omniscient Being himself is the author, then you commit the fallacy of mutual dependence.' The Scripture is said to be authoritative because the Omniscient Being is its author , and the Omniscient Being is sought to be proped because he is mentioned in the Scripture,--this is the fallacy of 'mutual dependence' If, on the contrary, you contend that some in-omniscient Being is the author of such a Scriptural text, then we say that such a saying is unreliable Hence it is that Agama cannot prove an Omniscient Being. Upamāna or Analogy also cannot establish Omniscience.
