{"id":257,"date":"2012-03-30T05:52:31","date_gmt":"2012-03-30T03:52:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/?p=257"},"modified":"2012-03-30T05:52:31","modified_gmt":"2012-03-30T03:52:31","slug":"from-svabhava-to-dharmata-to-dhatu","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/from-svabhava-to-dharmata-to-dhatu\/","title":{"rendered":"From Svabh\u0101va to Dharmat\u0101 to Dh\u0101tu"},"content":{"rendered":"

In my post titled \u201cNotes on the Denial of Svabh\u0101va in Mah\u0101y\u0101na Buddhism,\u201d Candrak\u012brti\u2019s Prasannapad\u0101<\/em> commentary on N\u0101g\u0101rjuna\u2019s M\u016bla-madhyamaka-k\u0101rik\u0101<\/em> (chapter 15, verse 2) was quoted saying that svabh\u0101va, \u201cinherent nature,\u201d is ultimately only in the range of the \u0101ryas (those who have achieved the \u201cpath of seeing\u201d). Candrak\u012brti had earlier quoted this same verse and the preceding one from N\u0101g\u0101rjuna, in his Madhyamak\u0101vat\u0101ra-bh\u0101\u1e63ya<\/em>. Here in his commentary a questioner asks Candrak\u012brti if the kind of svabh\u0101va accepted by N\u0101g\u0101rjuna exists. He replies that it is the dharmat\u0101, literally, \u201cdharma-ness,\u201d often translated as \u201ctrue nature.\u201d In giving this reply, Candrak\u012brti quotes the famous catechism-like phrase, “Whether Tath\u0101gatas arise or do not arise, this dharma-ness [dharmat\u0101] of dharmas remains.”<\/p>\n

As noted in the introductory post to the \u201ckey subject\u201d of dh\u0101tu, titled \u201cBasic Space, the One Element, the dh\u0101tu,\u201d this phrase more often says that the dh\u0101tu remains. But the dharmat\u0101 is a common variant. They are used as synonyms in this phrase. So we have this ultimate svabh\u0101va, \u201cinherent nature,\u201d defined as dharmat\u0101, \u201ctrue nature,\u201d which is here the same as dh\u0101tu, \u201celement,\u201d or \u201cbasic space.\u201d Here is Candrak\u012brti\u2019s passage, again as accurately translated by William L. Ames, in \u201cThe Notion of Svabh\u0101va in the Thought of Candrak\u012brti\u201d (previously linked), p. 163. Candrak\u012brti begins by quoting N\u0101g\u0101rjuna\u2019s two verses:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe arising of svabh<\/em>\u0101va <\/em>through causes and conditions is not right. A svabh<\/em>\u0101va <\/em>arisen from causes and conditions would be artificial (k<\/em>\u1e5btaka). <\/em>(15-1)<\/p>\n

\u201cBut how will svabh<\/em>\u0101va <\/em>be called artificial? For svabh<\/em>\u0101va <\/em>is non-contingent (ak<\/em>\u1e5btrima) <\/em>and without dependence on another. (15-2)<\/p>\n

\u201c[Question:] But does there exist a svabh<\/em>\u0101va <\/em>of the sort defined by the \u0101c\u0101rya<\/em> [N\u0101g\u0101rjuna] in the treatise [M<\/em>\u016blamadhyamakak\u0101rik\u0101s<\/em>], <\/em>which is accepted by the \u0101c\u0101rya<\/em>? [Answer:] What is called dharma-ness (chos nyid, dharmat<\/em>\u0101<\/em>) exists, regarding which the Blessed One said, “Whether Tath\u0101gatas arise or do not arise, this dharma-ness of dharmas remains,” etc. [Question:] But what is this which is called dharma-ness? [Answer:] The svabh<\/em>\u0101va <\/em>of these [dharmas], such as the eye. [Question:] But what is their svabh<\/em>\u0101va<\/em>? [Answer:] That which these have which is non-contingent and without dependence on another; [it is their] intrinsic nature, which is to be comprehended by cognition free from the ophthalmia of misknowledge. Who [would] ask whether that exists or not? If it did not exist, for what purpose would bodhisattvas cultivate the path of the perfections? Because [it is] in order to comprehend that dharma-ness [that] bodhisattvas undertake hundreds of difficult [actions].\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In my post titled \u201cNotes on the Denial of Svabh\u0101va in Mah\u0101y\u0101na Buddhism,\u201d Candrak\u012brti\u2019s Prasannapad\u0101 commentary on N\u0101g\u0101rjuna\u2019s M\u016bla-madhyamaka-k\u0101rik\u0101 (chapter 15, verse 2) was quoted saying that svabh\u0101va, \u201cinherent nature,\u201d is ultimately only in the range of the \u0101ryas (those who have achieved the \u201cpath of seeing\u201d). Candrak\u012brti had earlier quoted this same verse and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-257","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-dhatu"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=257"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":258,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257\/revisions\/258"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}