________________
82: Śramaņa, Vol 64, No. 2, April-June 2013 reminds one of the corresponding Sārkhya positions that all physical phenomena are the transformations of Praksti.
Concept of Mode:The technical meaning ascribed to the term paryāya in the Jain system of philosophy is to be found in no other systems. In Jainism, paryāya means that which undergoes change or transformation.47 Modification means forfeiture of the precedent (state) and appropriation of the succeeding state. 'Parisamantādayaḥ paryāyaḥ' means which undergo changes or transformation from all angles is paryāya.48 Umāsvāti also used the term paryāya for transformation (pariņāma) or change.49 In Jainism, definition of paryāya must be read in context with that of substance (dravya). While discussing the definition of dravya we have already discussed many of the characteristics of paryāya. To recapitulate its meaning for clarification it is to be explained that the derivative meaning of 'paryāya' (pari+ āya) is kramavartin (that which undergoes succession) or kramika-parivartana (change into another state in succession--spatial and temporal). In the series of substance, its newer modes rise up and fall down according to the changes in space and time. So the series or succession of conditions or states takes place due to paryāya of a substance by the spatial and temporal order. Paryāya inheres in both dravya and guna and it denotes states (bhāva), particularity (višeșa), change or mutation (pariņāma) etc., as they are not permanent in substance and qualities. Oneness, separateness, number, figure, conjunction and disjunction are the characteristics of paryāya. Umāsvāti while explaining aphorism 'utpādavyayadhrauvyayuktam sat'maintains that origination, cessation and persistence constitute existence. All substances are real as they have existence and existence is combination of appearance, disappearance and persistence. What appear and disappear are modes and what persists is substance. Existence is the combination of impermanence and permanence, modes and substances. By giving an example of soul, he explains the impossibility of the absolute permanence. If the soul were absolutely permanent, it could not undergo transformation from the
