Proof — Verse 1.48

नादस्य क्रमजन्मत्वान्न पूर्वो न परश्च सः ।
अक्रमः क्रमरूपेण भेदवानिव जायते ॥ ४८ ॥

Since audible sound is born in sequence, the word is neither prior nor posterior; the sequenceless, taking on the form of sequence, is born as though divided.

Endorsed axioms (each cite is verbatim commentary)

• {"kind": "predication", "name": "akrama", "of": "sabda"}“the word itself is na purvo na parah — it has no earlier and later parts, because the meaning-bearer must be present whole wherever it is present at all”
• {"kind": "predication", "name": "krama-janman", "of": "nada"}“Nada, realized sound, is krama-janman, sequence-born; that is simply what acoustic events are”
• {"kind": "relation", "name": "vivartate", "from": "sabda", "to": "nada"}“akramah kramarupena bhedavan iva jayate, the sequenceless is born *as if* divided, in the form of sequence”
• {"kind": "relation", "name": "vivartate", "from": "brahman", "to": "jagat"}“as Brahman, undivided, appears as a world unfolding in time”

Denials

• {"kind": "relation", "name": "parinamate", "from": "sabda", "to": "nada"}“the sequenceless is born *as if* divided, in the form of sequence”

Rejected readings (refuted by compiled theorems)

• “The word transforms into audible sound in sequence.” — Asserts parinamate (real transformation) where the verse uses vivarta (apparent division). The iva (as if) marks this as appearing divided without actual transformation.
• “The word is made up of sequential phonemes that together form meaning.” — Denies akrama by treating sabda as having temporal parts (earlier and later). The commentary insists the meaning-bearer must be present whole, not composed of sequential parts.

Lean module

/- Verse 1.48 — generated from data/contracts/1.48.json. DO NOT EDIT.
   Axiom cites are verbatim commentary quotations, validated by
   tests/test_contracts.py. -/
import VakyaVallari.Adequacy

namespace VakyaVallari.Verses.V1_48

open VakyaVallari

def sabda : Entity := ⟨"śabda", Sorta.linguisticItem⟩
def nada : Entity := ⟨"nāda", Sorta.manifestation⟩
def krama : Entity := ⟨"krama", Sorta.property⟩
def brahman : Entity := ⟨"brahman", Sorta.absolute⟩
def jagat : Entity := ⟨"jagat", Sorta.manifestation⟩

def contract : Contract :=
  { axioms := [ Claim.predication "akrama" sabda
    , Claim.predication "krama-janman" nada
    , Claim.relation "vivartate" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent nada)
    , Claim.relation "vivartate" (Node.ent brahman) (Node.ent jagat) ]
  , denials := [ Claim.relation "parinamate" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent nada) ]
  , reported := [] }

def accepted : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.predication "krama-janman" nada
    , Claim.predication "akrama" sabda
    , Claim.relation "vivartate" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent nada) ] }

theorem accepted_adequate : contract.Adequate accepted := by decide

namespace Counterexamples

/- 'The word transforms into audible sound in sequence.'
   Why rejected: Asserts parinamate (real transformation) where the verse uses vivarta (apparent division). The iva (as if) marks this as appearing divided without actual transformation. -/
def real_transformation : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.relation "parinamate" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent nada) ] }
theorem real_transformation_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate real_transformation := by decide
#guard contract.contradicts real_transformation = true

/- 'The word is made up of sequential phonemes that together form meaning.'
   Why rejected: Denies akrama by treating sabda as having temporal parts (earlier and later). The commentary insists the meaning-bearer must be present whole, not composed of sequential parts. -/
def sabda_parts : Entity := ⟨"śabda", Sorta.linguisticItem⟩
def sequential_word : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.predication "krama-janman" sabda_parts ] }
theorem sequential_word_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate sequential_word := by decide
#guard contract.licenses sequential_word = false

end Counterexamples

end VakyaVallari.Verses.V1_48