________________
(D) DOCTRINE OF SOUL' AccORDING TO THE DIGAMBARA JAINAS. 207
TEXT (316).
ONE-N RSS' (SAMENESS, IDENTITY) CONSISTS IN non-difference of nature WERE THERE IF THIS ONE-NESS' (BETWEEN TWO THINGS), TEEN DIFFERENCE' (BETWEEN THEM) WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE IN ANY WAY; AS IN THE CASE OF THE FORMS OF
THE SUCCESSIVE FACTORS THEMSELVES.-(316)
COMMENTARY. Even admitting that there is non difference between the Substance and the Successive Factors'-such being the case, the 'non difference should be absolute; how then could there be difference between them, which is the contradictory of non-difference '? It cannot be right to affirm and deny a thing,- affirmation and denial being mutually contradictory. For instance, when two things are spoken of as 'one', what is meant is that there is nondifference in their nature (character)', -this' non difference being inseparable from negation of difference; and when there is such non-difference of character' (between the substance and the successive factors'), how could there be, at the same time, difference', which is the negation of nondifference'! This argument may be formulated as follows :-In a case where there is non-difference between two things, there can be no room for difference, which is the contradictory of non-difference'; e.g. as is found in the case of the same successive factors and the substance', in regard to the specific individuality of each, where there is non-difference of character: and betweon substance and successive factors , non-difference is clearly present (hence there is perception of what is contrary to the Probandum, i.e. difference).-(316)
Thus in reality, there being non-difference between Substance and the Successive Factors', there cannot be any difference between them as regards their characteristics also ; this is what is shown in the following
TEXTS (317-318). THE ONE-NESS THUS BETWEEN SUBSTANCE AND THE SUCCESSIVE FACTORS' BEING NOT-FIGURATIVE (IE, REAL), THE 'SUBSTANCE ALSO SHOULD BE distributive (ExorUSIVE), LIKE THE FORMS OF THE SUCCESSIVE FACTORS'; OR TEOSID SUCCESSIVE FACTORS' THEMSELVES SHOULD BE comprehensive IN THEIR CHARACTER, LIKE THE SUBSTANCE '; BECAUSE THE ONE-NESS OF THESE WITH SUBSTANODIS DULY ESTABLISHED.
-(317-318)
COMMENTARY. When a thing is non-different from another thing which is exclusive in its nature, the former also must be exclusive; as for example, the forms
