Verse 2.7 - Three kinds of pāriṇāmika-bhāva

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Tattvartha sūtra 2.7:

जीवभव्याभव्यत्वानि च ॥ २.७ ॥

jīvabhavyābhavyatvāni ca || 2.7 ||

The soul-principle–jīvatva, the capacity for liberation–bhavyatva, and the incapacity for liberation–abhavyatva are the three dispositions (bhāva) due to the inherent nature of the soul–pāriṇāmika. (7)

Hindi Anvayarth:

अन्वयार्थ: [जीवभव्याभव्यत्वानि च] जीवत्व, भव्यत्व और अभव्यत्व-इस प्रकार पारिणामिक भाव के तीन भेद हैं।

Anvayartha: [jivabhavyabhavyatvani ca] jivatva, bhavyatva aura abhavyatva-isa prakara parinamika bhava ke tina bheda haim |

Explanation in English from Ācārya Pūjyapāda’s Sarvārthasiddhi:

The three kinds of disposition (bhāva) due to inherent nature of the soul–pāriṇāmika–are mentioned next.

The three characteristics mentioned in the sūtra are inherent in and unique to the soul (jīva), not found in other substances. Why are these considered inherent in the soul? These do not depend on rise (udaya), subsidence (upaśama), destruction (kṣaya) or destruction-cum-subsidence (kṣayopaśama) of karmas. The soul-principle (jīvatva) is soul-consciousness (caitanya). The soul that will attain right faith (samyagdarśana), etc., is called ‘bhavya’–endowed with the capacity for liberation. Or, it is endowed with bhavyatva. And the soul that will not attain right faith, and so on, is called ‘abhavya’–not endowed with the capacity for liberation. Or, it is endowed with abhavyatva. These three–jīvatva, bhavyatva and abhavyatva–are the inherent qualities of the soul.

Should not the other qualities like existence–astitva, permanence–nityatva, and having space-points–pradeśavattva, be mentioned along with these three qualities? No. These have been included by the particle ‘ca’ in the sūtra. If so, the number three is contradicted. No. The distinctive (asādhāraṇa) characteristics which are inherent in the soul are three only. Qualities like existence (astitva) are common (sādhāraṇa) characteristics as these apply to the souls (jīva) as well as the non-souls (ajīva). So these are included separately by the particle ‘ca’.

Since the soul is incorporeal or non-material (amūrta), how do the dispositions of subsidence–aupaśamika–etc., apply to it? These dispositions have reference to the bondage of karmas. How can there be bondage of karmic matter with the incorporeal soul? It is possible because the soul is incorporeal or non-material (amūrta) only from a certain point of view; it is not true that the soul is non-material (amūrta) from all points of view. From the point of view of its modes (paryāya) in bondage, owing to the influence of karmas, it is corporeal (mūrta) in the embodied state. From the point of view of its pure nature, the soul is incorporeal (amūrta). It is further contended that if the soul becomes one with the body because of the influence of karmas then it cannot be considered separate from the body. It is not so. Though the soul is one with the body in the embodied state, it is different from the body because of its distinctive mark (lakṣaṇa). The Scripture says, “From the point of view of bondage, the soul is one with the body, still it is different from the body because of its distinctive mark (lakṣaṇa). Hence the incorporeal nature of the soul is predicated in a non-absolutistic (anekāntātmaka) sense only. From one point of view it is incorporeal and from another point of view it is not incorporeal.”

If so, let the distinctive mark (lakṣaṇa) of the soul be mentioned.