Jain Journal 2000 07

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 11

KUMAR SOUL AND ITS FUNCTIONAL MECHANISM IN JAINISM
treated the terms sahabhavi and kramabhāvi as two distinct existents (bhāvātarau).26 Another difference between guna and paryaya is that when one remains the same the other may vary. Acārya Kundakunda has expounded this in the ontological difference of the two distinct elements-guna and paryaya-consisting in their togetherness. Padmarajiah observes that this difference expounded by Acārya Kundakunda has been concurred substantially by later Jain saint scholars such as Umāsvāti, Pujyapada and Vidyananda.27
Knowledge must be employed, according to Acārya Kundakunda, to know dravya, its guna and paryaya (mode). He has explained further the special implication that guna has in Jainism. Thus, he speaks of guna as an essential differentia of a substance, and the relation between guna and dravya is that of difference-in-congruence. On the matter of guna and paryaya, he asserts that they are different. He illustrates how different they are. He tells of the two pots, one of gold and the other is of earthen, wherein the paryaya of the pot is the same while the guna of the two is different from one another. This he calls difference-in-congruence. Accordingly, he explains that guna is an essential difference of a substance and a substance without guna has no existence; the relation between guna and drvaya is that of differencein-congruency. Therefore, he holds the view that guna is different from paryaya as he illustrates that a golden pot and an earthen pot are both of the same paryāya but the gunas are different. The paryaya is an external appearances of many kinds. Therefore, the same paryāya is possible based on substance or the same substance is possible to have different paryaya. As the paryaya is not essentially inherent in the very nature of the substance, the relation between the two is that one cannot be without the other.28 Paryaya (mode) which indicates that "properties of a substance originate, perish and undergo changes" is a very ancient Jain term which is not found in any other thought.29 This notion of persistence does not entail the rejection of the idea of change is modes and qualities-a view of a distinction between continuity and permanence. It is a notion of continuity essentially dependent upon origin and decay. According to Dr. Matilal,30 Acārya Kundakunda makes it very clear in his Pravacanasara: "There is no
26. Padmarajiah, p. 261.
27. Ibid., p. 264.
28. Pravacanasāra, p. 64.
9
29. H.M. Bhattacarya, Jain Journal, January, 1999.
30. Cited by Dr. S. Gopalan in his Jainism as Metaphilosophy, India Books Center 1991, p. 33.