abhivyakti technical_term

²¹ TRANSLATION The distinction of svara and śruti (exists) because they are prasādhya (lit. accomplished, here perceived) by different buddhis (apprehensions, perceptions). And also on account of the distinction of aśraya (seat or substratum, here śruti) and āśrayin (that which is seated, here svara) the identification (of the two) does not stand. (36) The state of svaras being reflections, that has been spoken of, does not stand reason (because) if the state of svaras being reflection (is accepted), then (37) perception having the nature of delusion becomes applicable. The relationship of cause and effect between śruti and svara is not possible; there is no pramana (means of valid knowledge or evidence) of the existence of (38) śrulis. (Objection) If by arthāpatti 55 (negative inference) or by the pramāņa presuming vyāpti-grahaņa, (the comprehension of concomitance, i.e. anumāna,56 inference) svara is proved to be the bheda (modification or result) of the gagana- gunas⁵⁷ (qualities of space or ether i.e. sounds) that are the progenitors of svara (then the kārya-kāraṇa relationship between the two would be established). (39) (Answer) It is true. Although the kārya-kāraņa difference (between svara and śruti) is evident, (40) yet the kāraņatva (causality) of śrutis is impossible. (This is so) because (here) the cause (śruti) is available (perceptible) (even) when the kāryas (svaras) are present, (but) when the jar and the like are (41) existent, the lump of clay is not available (perceptible). Pariņāma 58 (transformation) (and, or) abhivyakti (manifestation) is understood to be the justified proposition by the wise; thus the alternatives (42) starting with tādātmya have been spoken of by me.