________________
Vol. XXX, 2006
VARIOUS VIEWS ON SVABHĀVA: A CRITICAL SURVEY
33
Sources We first hear of svabhāva in the philosophical context in Šv. Up. 1.2, which runs as follows:
kālaḥ svabhāvo niyatiryadrcchā bhūtāni yonih puruşa iti cintyam/ Whether time, or own being, or destiny, or accident, or elements,
or the soul is to be considered as the cause (lit. origin). Of these six, the first two are mentioned again in Šv. Up. 6.1 as the views held by the deluded ones.
A passage in the Sphs attributed to Makkhali Gosāla, a senior contemporary of the Buddha, has been cited in support of the view that he was "[perhaps the earliest powerful protagonist of the doctrine of Svabhāva". The said passage runs as follows:
There is no power, no energy, no human strength and no human endeavour. All sentient beings, all those that breathe, all those that exist, all those that possess the principle of life are devoid of power, energy, strength and endeavour. They just happen naturally, by chance and according to their own individual
character (bhāva).
The text does not contain the word, svabhāva, but Bedekar takes the word, bhāva, to mean nature (the TSDN translation renders it as 'own individual character'). Gosāla's view is called 'the doctrine of purification by round of suffering' (saṁsārasuddhi). This is quite different from any doctrine that upholds either time' or "own being'. It is rather an affirmation of rigid predeterminism and blind necessity. No connection to svabhāva is discernible in the passage under discussion. So Gosāla's view need not detain us. Asvaghosa and other Buddhists A more detailed exposition of svabhāvavāda is first found in Asvaghosa's BC, 9.57cd - 62.' It is basically the same as the exposition of the doctrine by Ajagara and Prahlāda in the Mbh.
Asvaghosa writes:
