________________
CHAPTER VII
229
anişpanna, or non-existent, as its effect or modification. In other words, the yarn, as the dravya, is the element of identity and the linen, as its pariņāma, is the element of difference, both together constituting the relational situation. Here, as everywhere else, identity as the substantial element is the
continuant' (or the continuing principle, anvayā or dravya) existing in the yarn as well as in the linen, but difference, as the modified form of the substance, is yet distinguishable-in the sense that linen is not quite the same as the yarn-from identity. Therefore, generically, the Jaina view of relation is that it is an identity of differents or different terms.
As regards Dharmakīrti's contention that the rūpaśleşa-sambandha, or the relation of interpenetration, the second possible relation, could have only two modes, viz., total (sarvātmanā) interfusion or partial (ekadesena) interfusion, and that both are untenable for the reasons already adduced”, Prabhācandra maintains that Dharmakīrti's analysis is both wrong and inexhaustive. It is wrong to say that we encounter any paradoxical situation here, for relation could often be one of totalmerging, and at other times, of partial contact depending upon the nature of the relata involved. There is, for instance, a wholesale merging, or mutual permeation between the
Jioni
4.
tantudrayam api svarūpeṇa nişpannar pațaparināmarūpatayā
nişpannam / PKM, p. 515. 2. See infra, p. 217 ff.
Ibid. Prabhācandra describes this process as follows: kvaccit tu nikhilapradeśānām anyonyapradeśānupraveśataḥ-yathā saktutoyādīnām...PKM, p. 515. It is, however, necessary to note here that in spite of such wholesale' permeation the relata retain their distinctness, and never become a single relatum. It is
