{"id": "svabhava", "label": "Svabhava", "label_alt": ["own-being", "intrinsic existence", "inherent existence", "self-nature"], "sanskrit": "svabhāva", "pali": "sabhāva", "tibetan": "rang bzhin", "tradition": ["madhyamaka", "abhidharma"], "definition": "The idea that things possess existence from their own side, independently of causes, conditions, and conceptual designation. The primary target of Madhyamaka negation.", "negated_by": ["sunyata"], "presupposed_by": ["abhidharma_realism"], "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["mmk_nagarjuna", "heart_sutra", "vigrahavyavartani_nagarjuna", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9"]}
{"id": "sunyata", "label": "Sunyata", "label_alt": ["emptiness", "voidness", "shunyata"], "sanskrit": "śūnyatā", "pali": "suññatā", "tibetan": "stong pa nyid", "tradition": ["mahayana", "madhyamaka", "vajrayana"], "definition": "The absence of svabhava in all phenomena. Not nothingness but the lack of intrinsic existence. Phenomena exist dependently, not from their own side.", "presupposes": ["pratityasamutpada"], "is_presupposed_by": ["two_truths"], "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["heart_sutra", "mmk_nagarjuna", "sunyatasaptati_nagarjuna", "diamond_sutra"]}
{"id": "anatta", "label": "Anatta", "label_alt": ["non-self", "no-self", "anatman"], "sanskrit": "anātman", "pali": "anattā", "tibetan": "bdag med", "tradition": ["theravada", "mahayana"], "definition": "The absence of a permanent, independent self in persons and/or phenomena. Theravada focuses on the person; Mahayana extends to all dharmas (phenomena).", "theravada_scope": "person_only", "mahayana_scope": "persons_and_dharmas", "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["anattalakkhana_sutta", "milindapanha_chariot", "heart_sutra", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9"]}
{"id": "anatta_of_persons", "label": "Pudgala-nairatmya", "label_alt": ["no-self of persons", "personal selflessness"], "sanskrit": "pudgala-nairātmya", "pali": "puggala-anattā", "tibetan": "gang zag gi bdag med", "tradition": ["theravada", "mahayana", "madhyamaka"], "definition": "The absence of a substantial, independent self in persons. Agreed upon by all Buddhist schools. The chariot argument is its classic formulation.", "is_subset_of": "anatta", "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["anattalakkhana_sutta", "milindapanha_chariot", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara"]}
{"id": "anatta_of_dharmas", "label": "Dharma-nairatmya", "label_alt": ["no-self of phenomena", "phenomenal selflessness"], "sanskrit": "dharma-nairātmya", "pali": null, "tibetan": "chos kyi bdag med", "tradition": ["mahayana", "madhyamaka", "yogacara"], "definition": "The absence of svabhava in all phenomena (dharmas), not just persons. This is the distinctively Mahayana extension of anatta. Theravada Abhidharma denied pudgala-nairatmya but asserted svabhava of dharmas, which Mahayana then negates.", "is_subset_of": "anatta", "theravada_position": "denied", "mahayana_position": "asserted", "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["heart_sutra", "mmk_nagarjuna", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara"]}
{"id": "pratityasamutpada", "label": "Pratityasamutpada", "label_alt": ["dependent origination", "dependent co-arising", "interdependence"], "sanskrit": "pratītyasamutpāda", "pali": "paticca-samuppāda", "tibetan": "rten cing 'brel bar 'byung ba", "tradition": ["theravada", "mahayana", "madhyamaka"], "definition": "All phenomena arise in dependence upon causes, conditions, and designations. Nothing arises independently. For Nagarjuna, dependent origination IS emptiness — they are coextensive, not two different things.", "nagarjuna_claim": "identical_to_sunyata", "twelve_nidanas": true, "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["anattalakkhana_sutta", "mmk_nagarjuna", "sunyatasaptati_nagarjuna", "vigrahavyavartani_nagarjuna"]}
{"id": "two_truths", "label": "Two Truths", "label_alt": ["samvrti-satya and paramartha-satya", "conventional and ultimate truth"], "sanskrit": "dve satye", "pali": "dve sacca", "tibetan": "bden pa gnyis", "tradition": ["mahayana", "madhyamaka"], "definition": "The framework distinguishing conventional truth (how things appear and function) from ultimate truth (how things actually are — empty of svabhava). Nagarjuna: the teaching of the two truths is itself the teaching of emptiness.", "schools_differ_on": ["what_counts_as_ultimate", "whether_conventional_is_mind_dependent"], "category": "methodological_framework", "key_texts": ["mmk_nagarjuna", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara", "samdhinirmocana_sutra"]}
{"id": "prasanga", "label": "Prasanga", "label_alt": ["consequence", "reductio ad absurdum", "unwanted consequence"], "sanskrit": "prasaṅga", "pali": null, "tibetan": "thal 'gyur", "tradition": ["madhyamaka"], "definition": "The primary logical method of Madhyamaka. Nagarjuna never asserts a thesis of his own — he takes the opponent's position and derives an absurd consequence. Chandrakirti made this the defining mark of Prasangika vs Svatantrika.", "category": "logical_method", "is_method_of": ["mmk_nagarjuna", "vigrahavyavartani_nagarjuna", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara"]}
{"id": "dependent_designation", "label": "Dependent Designation", "label_alt": ["prajnapti", "mere imputation", "nominal existence"], "sanskrit": "prajñapti", "pali": "pannatti", "tibetan": "btags pa tsam", "tradition": ["madhyamaka", "prasangika"], "definition": "Things exist only as conventional designations dependent on their bases. Not mind-independent (against realism) and not mind-created (against idealism). The Prasangika middle: conventional existence as mere imputation.", "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["milindapanha_chariot", "mmk_nagarjuna", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara"]}
{"id": "emptiness_of_emptiness", "label": "Emptiness of Emptiness", "label_alt": ["sunyata-sunyata"], "sanskrit": "śūnyatā-śūnyatā", "pali": null, "tibetan": "stong pa nyid kyi stong pa nyid", "tradition": ["mahayana", "madhyamaka"], "definition": "Emptiness itself is empty of svabhava. This prevents sunyata from becoming a new absolute — the thing everything is empty of/into. Key to showing Nagarjuna is not a nihilist.", "category": "meta_ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["mmk_nagarjuna", "ashtasahasrika_prajnaparamita", "vigrahavyavartani_nagarjuna"]}
{"id": "alayavijnana", "label": "Alayavijnana", "label_alt": ["storehouse consciousness", "base consciousness", "all-ground consciousness"], "sanskrit": "ālayavijñāna", "pali": null, "tibetan": "kun gzhi rnam par shes pa", "tradition": ["yogacara", "zen", "vajrayana_partial"], "definition": "The Yogacara postulation of a substratum consciousness that stores karmic seeds. Not recognized by Madhyamaka (Chandrakirti explicitly refutes it).", "refuted_by": "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara", "approximated_by": "kun_gzhi_dzogchen", "category": "consciousness_concept", "key_texts": ["lankavatara_sutra", "samdhinirmocana_sutra", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara"]}
{"id": "three_natures", "label": "Three Natures (Yogacara)", "label_alt": ["trisvabhava", "parikalpita-paratantra-parinishpanna"], "sanskrit": "trisvabhāva", "pali": null, "tibetan": "rang bzhin gsum", "tradition": ["yogacara"], "definition": "Yogacara ontology: (1) parikalpita — the imagined nature, what we falsely project; (2) paratantra — the dependent nature, causally produced events; (3) parinishpanna — the perfected nature, the absence of the imagined in the dependent. Emptiness = absence of parikalpita in paratantra.", "category": "ontological_framework", "key_texts": ["samdhinirmocana_sutra", "lankavatara_sutra"]}
{"id": "tathagatagarbha", "label": "Tathagatagarbha", "label_alt": ["buddha-nature", "buddha-embryo", "buddha-matrix"], "sanskrit": "tathāgatagarbha", "pali": null, "tibetan": "de bzhin gshegs pa'i snying po", "tradition": ["mahayana", "vajrayana", "zen"], "definition": "The buddha-nature present in all sentient beings. Textual tension with strict Madhyamaka sunyata: is this a positive absolute? Rangtong schools read it as metaphor; Shentong schools read it as genuinely luminous ground.", "tension_with": "sunyata", "rangtong_reading": "conventional_teaching_only", "shentong_reading": "ultimate_luminous_ground", "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["lankavatara_sutra", "lotus_sutra_ch2"]}
{"id": "five_aggregates", "label": "Five Aggregates", "label_alt": ["five skandhas", "pancaskandha"], "sanskrit": "pañcaskandha", "pali": "pañcakkhandha", "tibetan": "phung po lnga", "tradition": ["theravada", "mahayana"], "definition": "Form (rupa), feeling (vedana), perception (samjna), mental formations (samskara), consciousness (vijnana). The analysis that shows there is no self over and above these. The Heart Sutra negates svabhava in each.", "components": ["rupa", "vedana", "samjna", "samskara", "vijnana"], "category": "analytical_framework", "key_texts": ["anattalakkhana_sutta", "heart_sutra", "milindapanha_chariot"]}
{"id": "twelve_nidanas", "label": "Twelve Nidanas", "label_alt": ["twelve links of dependent origination", "dvadasha-nidana"], "sanskrit": "dvādaśa-nidāna", "pali": "dvādasanidāna", "tibetan": "rten 'brel bcu gnyis", "tradition": ["theravada", "mahayana"], "definition": "Ignorance → formations → consciousness → name-and-form → six sense-bases → contact → feeling → craving → clinging → becoming → birth → aging-and-death. The causal structure of samsaric existence. Nagarjuna uses this to argue that without emptiness, the chain cannot function.", "category": "causal_framework", "key_texts": ["anattalakkhana_sutta", "mmk_nagarjuna"]}
{"id": "two_truths_theravada", "label": "Two Truths (Theravada)", "label_alt": ["sammuti-sacca and paramattha-sacca"], "pali": "sammuti-sacca, paramattha-sacca", "tradition": ["theravada", "abhidharma"], "definition": "Conventional truth (persons, tables, etc.) vs. ultimate truth (dhammas — the irreducible constituents of experience). Unlike Mahayana, Theravada Abhidharma asserts dhammas have sabhava (own-nature) at the ultimate level.", "contrasts_with": "two_truths", "category": "methodological_framework", "key_texts": ["milindapanha_chariot"]}
{"id": "dharmadhatu", "label": "Dharmadhatu", "label_alt": ["realm of phenomena", "expanse of reality", "space of phenomena"], "sanskrit": "dharmadhātu", "tibetan": "chos kyi dbyings", "tradition": ["mahayana", "madhyamaka"], "definition": "The totality of phenomena as they are in their emptiness. In Madhyamaka, the dharmadhatu is sunyata viewed as the open space in which all phenomena dependently arise and function without svabhava.", "madhyamaka_reading": "sunyata_as_space", "dzogchen_reading": "rigpa_ground_expanse", "category": "ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["ashtasahasrika_prajnaparamita"]}
{"id": "nonduality", "label": "Nonduality", "label_alt": ["advaya", "non-dual", "beyond two extremes"], "sanskrit": "advaya", "tibetan": "gnyis su med pa", "tradition": ["mahayana", "madhyamaka", "yogacara"], "definition": "Not-two. Beyond the dualisms of existence/nonexistence, self/other, samsara/nirvana. Vimalakirti's silence is the classic gesture. In Madhyamaka: the two truths are nondual.", "category": "meta_ontological_concept", "key_texts": ["vimalakirti_sutra", "mmk_nagarjuna"]}
{"id": "skillful_means", "label": "Skillful Means", "label_alt": ["upaya", "upaya-kausalya"], "sanskrit": "upāya-kauśalya", "pali": "upāya-kosalla", "tibetan": "thabs mkhas pa", "tradition": ["mahayana"], "definition": "The Buddha's adaptation of teaching to the capacity of the listener. The three vehicles as one vehicle in the Lotus Sutra is the premier example. Also: why emptiness teachings are dangerous without preparation — they can slide into nihilism.", "category": "soteriological_concept", "key_texts": ["lotus_sutra_ch2", "diamond_sutra", "ashtasahasrika_prajnaparamita"]}
{"id": "nihilism_extreme", "label": "Nihilism (Extreme of Nonexistence)", "label_alt": ["uccheda-vada", "annihilationism"], "sanskrit": "ucchedavāda", "pali": "ucchedavāda", "tibetan": "chad pa'i lta ba", "tradition": ["madhyamaka_opponent"], "definition": "The view that things are completely nonexistent — the mistaken reading of sunyata as nothingness. Nagarjuna's constant refutation: emptiness does not deny conventional existence, only svabhava.", "is_avoided_by": ["pratityasamutpada", "two_truths", "emptiness_of_emptiness"], "category": "view_to_avoid", "key_texts": ["mmk_nagarjuna", "vigrahavyavartani_nagarjuna", "sunyatasaptati_nagarjuna"]}
{"id": "eternalism_extreme", "label": "Eternalism (Extreme of Existence)", "label_alt": ["sassata-vada", "substantialism"], "sanskrit": "śāśvatavāda", "pali": "sassatavāda", "tibetan": "rtag pa'i lta ba", "tradition": ["madhyamaka_opponent"], "definition": "The view that things have permanent, fixed existence — own-being (svabhava). This is what Madhyamaka primarily refutes. Abhidharma realism is the internal Buddhist version.", "is_avoided_by": ["sunyata", "pratityasamutpada"], "category": "view_to_avoid", "key_texts": ["mmk_nagarjuna", "vigrahavyavartani_nagarjuna"]}
{"id": "abhidharma_realism", "label": "Abhidharma Dharma-Realism", "label_alt": ["dharma-svabhava", "Abhidharma realism"], "tradition": ["theravada_abhidharma", "sarvastivada"], "definition": "The Abhidharma position that while persons are conventional, the dhammas (irreducible constituents of experience) possess sabhava/svabhava at the ultimate level. This is the target of Mahayana's extension of anatta to dharmas.", "refuted_by": ["heart_sutra", "mmk_nagarjuna", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9"], "category": "position_refuted", "key_texts": ["anattalakkhana_sutta", "heart_sutra", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9"]}
{"id": "cittamatra", "label": "Cittamatra", "label_alt": ["mind-only", "Yogacara", "Vijnanavada"], "sanskrit": "cittamātra", "tibetan": "sems tsam pa", "tradition": ["yogacara"], "definition": "The Yogacara position that external objects do not exist — only consciousness and its projections. Emptiness of external objects follows from this. Refuted by Prasangika Madhyamaka (Chandrakirti, Shantideva) as still positing svabhava of consciousness.", "asserts": "mind_has_svabhava", "refuted_by": ["bodhicharyavatara_ch9", "chandrakirti_madhyamakavatara"], "category": "philosophical_school", "key_texts": ["lankavatara_sutra", "samdhinirmocana_sutra", "bodhicharyavatara_ch9"]}
{"id": "bodhichitta", "label": "Bodhichitta", "label_alt": ["awakening mind", "mind of enlightenment"], "sanskrit": "bodhicitta", "tibetan": "byang chub kyi sems", "tradition": ["mahayana", "vajrayana"], "definition": "The aspiration and engagement to attain enlightenment for the benefit of all beings. Shantideva's entire text is structured around cultivating this. The connection to emptiness: bodhichitta dissolves the self/other boundary that emptiness reveals to be illusory.", "connected_to": ["sunyata", "compassion", "nonduality"], "category": "soteriological_concept", "key_texts": ["bodhicharyavatara_ch9", "ratnavali_nagarjuna", "ashtasahasrika_prajnaparamita"]}
{"id": "three_kayas", "label": "Three Kayas", "label_alt": ["dharmakaya-sambhogakaya-nirmanakaya", "truth-enjoyment-emanation bodies"], "sanskrit": "trikāya", "tibetan": "sku gsum", "tradition": ["mahayana", "vajrayana"], "definition": "Dharmakaya: the emptiness-body of reality itself, corresponding to sunyata. Sambhogakaya: the enjoyment-body of luminosity. Nirmanakaya: the compassionate form-body manifest in the world. Central to Mahayana soteriology.", "dzogchen_mapping": {"dharmakaya": "kadag", "sambhogakaya": "lhundrub", "nirmanakaya": "thugs_rje"}, "category": "soteriological_framework", "key_texts": ["lotus_sutra_ch2"], "notes": "The trikaya doctrine bridges emptiness to buddha-activity. Dharmakaya is the emptiness aspect; nirmanakaya is compassion manifest. Nagarjuna's Ratnavali addresses how the form-body arises through merit despite emptiness."}