Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
[237
-51388 600]
Chapter Five $ 599. The definition of dravya as "that which is endowed with production, destruction, and permanence" has been stated. Now, to explain the definition of dravya in another way, the following sutra is stated:
Dravya is that which has guna and paryaya. ||38|| 8600. Guna and paryaya are called guna-paryaya. Dravya is that which has these. Here, the use of the suffix 'matup' has been explained earlier. The meaning is that dravya is somehow different from its guna and paryaya, hence the use of the suffix 'matup'. Question: What are guna and paryaya? Answer: Guna are those that are inherent (anvayi), and paryaya are those that are non-inherent (vyatireki). Dravya is that which is endowed with both. It has been said:
"The characteristic that differentiates a dravya from other dravyas is called guna, and the modification of a dravya is called paryaya. Dravya is endowed with both of these. It is also eternal and self-evident." The meaning is that that by which one dravya is distinguished from another is guna. It is by this guna that the existence of that dravya is established. If there were no differentiating guna, there would be a mixture of dravyas. For example, the jiva dravya is distinguished from pudgala etc. by guna such as knowledge etc., and pudgala etc. are distinguished by guna such as form etc. If there were no distinction due to guna such as knowledge etc., there would be a mixture. Therefore, in relation to the general, knowledge etc. are the guna of the jiva, and form etc. are the guna of pudgala etc. Their modifications, which are different in a specific way, are called paryaya. For example, knowledge of a pot, knowledge of a cloth, anger, pride, smell, color, intense, and mild etc. That which is somehow different from these and is a collection is called dravya. If the collection were to be considered completely non-different, then there would be the consequence of the non-existence of everything. For example, if there is a collection of things that are mutually different, then due to the non-existence of one after another, there would be the non-existence of the collection.
8599. The definition of dravya as "that which is endowed with production, destruction, and permanence" has been stated. Now, to explain the definition of dravya in another way, the following sutra is stated:
Dravya is that which has guna and paryaya. ||38||
8600. That which has both guna and paryaya is called guna-paryaya, and that is dravya. Here, the use of the suffix 'matup' has been explained earlier. The meaning is that dravya is somehow different from its guna and paryaya, hence the use of the suffix 'matup'. Question: What are guna and paryaya? Answer: Guna are those that are inherent (anvayi), and paryaya are those that are non-inherent (vyatireki). Dravya is that which is endowed with both. It has been said:
"The characteristic that differentiates a dravya from other dravyas is called guna, and the modification of a dravya is called paryaya. Dravya is endowed with both of these. It is also eternal and self-evident." The meaning is that that by which one dravya is distinguished from another is guna. It is by this guna that the existence of that dravya is established. If there were no differentiating guna, there would be a mixture of dravyas. For example, the jiva dravya is distinguished from pudgala etc. by guna such as knowledge etc., and pudgala etc. are distinguished by guna such as form etc. If there were no distinction due to guna such as knowledge etc., there would be a mixture. Therefore, in relation to the general, knowledge etc. are the guna of the jiva, and form etc. are the guna of pudgala etc. Their modifications, which are different in a specific way, are called paryaya. For example, knowledge of a pot, knowledge of a cloth, anger, pride, smell, color, intense, and mild etc. That which is somehow different from these and is a collection is called dravya. If the collection were to be considered completely non-different, then there would be the consequence of the non-existence of everything. For example, if there is a collection of things that are mutually different, then due to the non-existence of one after another, there would be the non-existence of the collection.