________________
292
THE ESSENCE OF JAINA SCRIPTURES
Thus, through the energies of the sameness of nature, which develop the gold and which in a successive procedure share in the nature of the particular divergences (read tad-tad-vyatireka-vyaktitvam apannabhir), the gold will become the very modifications, bracelet, etc.
Therefore the thesis origination from the existent takes place in accordance with the denotation under a substance-aspect, and origination from the non-existent in accordance with the denotation under a modification-aspect” is without fault.
Now he ascertains origination from the existent to be un-anyatva (not being another):
II.20. The soul which is will be a man or god (celestial being), becoming each time another. Does it then lose its substantiality (dravyatva) (the state-of-evolution]? Not losing this, how does it become another? (112)
In the first place, the substance is an existent reality, never forsaking its energy of sameness of nature, which makes up its substantiality (see Tattva-dipika on PS 111(A)].
And further, even in the manifestation (pradur-bhava) of a particular divergence, which is a modification of the substance, the energy of sameness of nature (anvaya) is not lost; and so the substance is not-another (un-anya). Therefore in virtue of negation-of-otherness, origination from an existent (sad-utpada) is proved for the substance.
Thus, the soul, being a substance, will necessarily, since the occurrence (vrtti) of a substance craves for a modification, exists in accordance with one of the modifications, hell-inhabitant, animal (tiryag), man, god or liberated soul. Does it, in becoming that, thereby forsake its energy of sameness of nature, which consists in the substance? It does not. If it does not, how could it be “another”; consequently it must be the same with its existence (satta) exhibiting a three-sided aspect (tri-koti) li.e. its existence in all three times) (The same expression occurs in commentary on PS 109).
Now he ascertains origination from the non-existent to be anyatva (being another):
II.21. A man is not a god, nor is a god a man or a liberated soul; being thus “not,” how does (the soul) admit of identity (un-anyabhava)? (113)
The modifications (This and the following paragraph correspond to commeniary on PS 111(B) and (C)], since they exist exclusively
