Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Dharmas in post-canonical Abhidharma literature are defined by their svabhāva (intrinsic nature)

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Vasubandhu's Yogācāra works argue that dharmas lack fixed svabhāva, arising only through dependent designation (prajñapti), undermining intrinsic nature claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If svabhāva were truly intrinsic and self-sustaining, dharmas could not participate in causal relations, yet Abhidharma systematically catalogs their causal functions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Candrakīrti's Prasannapadā demonstrates that Sarvāstivādin svabhāva-language commits Abhidharmikas to a form of svabhāva-dṛṣṭi (reification) the Buddha explicitly rejected.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Pāli Nikāyas define dhammas functionally and contextually, not through intrinsic natures, suggesting post-canonical svabhāva definitions represent doctrinal innovation, not recovery.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya defines dharma as 'upholding intrinsic nature (svabhāva)'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Mahāvibhāṣā states that intrinsic nature upholds its own identity and does not lose it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Theravādin Abhidhamma commentaries define dhammas as bearing their intrinsic natures or being borne by causal conditions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.