________________
258
JAINA THEORIES OF REALITY AND KNOWLEDGE
involved in this controversy which aim at the determination of the principle of change or difference which is constituted by these elements of paryāya and guņa: First, that the two, viz., paryāya and guņa, refer to the same unitary principle of change under two different names; secondly, that the two are two distinctive elements or aspects, the one, viz., the paryāya, being an external mode and the other, viz., the guna, being an internal attribute, the two together constituting the principle of change; and, thirdly, that the two are mutually identical as well as different. The three views are described as the Abhedavāda, the Bhedavāda and the Bhedābhedavāda respectively, and the authors of each view will be referred to in the appropriate places.
1. Abhedavāda
Siddhasena Divākara is the champion of this view that paryāya and guņa are synonyms' (tullatthā or tulyārthau) signifying the principle of change. This change consists in the external and the internal transformations of all entities consistently, of course, with the continuance of the entities. In proving the identity of paryāya and guna, Divākara, bold as he is in often departing from tradition, appeals to revelation' (desaņā) as almost the sole argument on his
1. This topic has been discussed in STP, ch. III, gās. 9-14. Prefacing
the gā. 12 the Commentator, Abhayadeva, remarks: atha tatra guņa eva paryāyaśabdenoktah tulyarthavat / TBV, p. 635. Continuing the line (after tulyārthatvāt), cited in the above f.n., Abhayadeva adds "agamisca”, and quotes the following statement from the agama : ya eva paryāyaḥ sa eva guṇaḥ / Ibid.
