Svabhava (Buddhism): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*[[Svābhāvat]] | *[[Svābhāvat]] | ||
== | == Additional resources == | ||
===Articles=== | === Articles === | ||
*[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/the-svabhavakaya-or-svabhavikakaya-in-mahayana-teachings/ The Svâbhâvakâya or Svâbhâvikakâya in Mahayana Teachings] By Jacques Mahnich | *[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/the-svabhavakaya-or-svabhavikakaya-in-mahayana-teachings/ The Svâbhâvakâya or Svâbhâvikakâya in Mahayana Teachings] By Jacques Mahnich | ||
*[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/the-connection-to-a-svabhava-teaching-in-buddhism/ The Connection to a Svabhāva Teaching in Buddhism] by David Reigle | *[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/the-connection-to-a-svabhava-teaching-in-buddhism/ The Connection to a Svabhāva Teaching in Buddhism] by David Reigle | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
*[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/why-the-form-svabhavat-in-theosophical-writings/# Why the Form Svabhavat in Theosophical Writings] by David Reigle | *[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/why-the-form-svabhavat-in-theosophical-writings/# Why the Form Svabhavat in Theosophical Writings] by David Reigle | ||
*[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/the-doctrine-of-nature-origination-in-the-korean-chan-buddhism-of-chinul-and-li-tung-hsuans-hua-yen-by-ken-small/ The Doctrine of ‘Nature Origination’ in the Korean Ch’an Buddhism of Chinul and Li T’ung Hsuan’s ‘Hua-yen’] by Ken Small | *[http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/the-doctrine-of-nature-origination-in-the-korean-chan-buddhism-of-chinul-and-li-tung-hsuans-hua-yen-by-ken-small/ The Doctrine of ‘Nature Origination’ in the Korean Ch’an Buddhism of Chinul and Li T’ung Hsuan’s ‘Hua-yen’] by Ken Small | ||
* [https://www.theosophy.world/encyclopedia/adi-nidana-svabhavat Adi-Nidana Svabhavat] in Theosophy World | |||
== Notes == | == Notes == | ||
Latest revision as of 21:48, 26 November 2023
Svabhava (devanāgarī: स्वाभाव svābhāva) is usually translated as the "inherent nature" of something, and traditionally Buddhist schools denied the existence of such real essence, postulating that the ultimate truth is emptiness (Śūnyatā). However, some scholars such as David Reigle contend that some Buddhist texts such as Maitreya's Ratna-gotra-vihhaga did teach the existence of a permanent element in a way not too different from the Theosophical teachings.[1]
See also
Additional resources
Articles
- The Svâbhâvakâya or Svâbhâvikakâya in Mahayana Teachings By Jacques Mahnich
- The Connection to a Svabhāva Teaching in Buddhism by David Reigle
- From Svabhāva to Dharmatā to Dhātu Part 1 and Part 2 by David Reigle
- The Meaning of Svabhāva by David Reigle
- Notes on the Denial of Svabhāva in Mahāyāna Buddhism by David Reigle
- Prehistoric Svabhāvavāda Part 1 and Part 2 by David Reigle
- The Svabhāva Teaching Not to Be Attributed to Buddhism Today by David Reigle
- Technical Terms in Stanza II by David Reigle
- Why the Form Svabhavat in Theosophical Writings by David Reigle
- The Doctrine of ‘Nature Origination’ in the Korean Ch’an Buddhism of Chinul and Li T’ung Hsuan’s ‘Hua-yen’ by Ken Small
- Adi-Nidana Svabhavat in Theosophy World
Notes
- ↑ Theosophy in Tibet: The Teachings of the Jonangpa School by David Reigle