1. Svabhāva and Yadṛcchā in Early Indian Thought

Svabhāva (own being) and yadṛcchā (chance, accident) are named as two different claimants among others as the first cause (jagatkāraṇa) in Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 1.2. But in later works, such as Aśvaghoṣa’s poems, svabhāva is synonymous with yadṛcchā and entails a passive attitude to life. Later still, svabhāva is said to be inhering in the Lokāyata materialist system, although in which sense is not always clearly mentioned. Svabhāva is also a part of the Sāṃkhya doctrine and is mentioned in the two medical compilations, the Caraka and the Suśruta Saṃhitās.

Svabhāva was one of the oldest concepts formulated somewhat vaguely before or during the sixth century BCE in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. It continued to be invoked, along with other concepts such as time, destiny, chance, karman, etc., as one of the many claimants for the role of the first cause. In course of time, definitely before the first century CE, svabhāva, instead of, or rather in addition to, signifying causality, became synonymous with chance or accident and was derided as an inactivist approach to life in the Mokṣadharma section of the Mahābhārata. The Buddhists (and the Naiyāyikas too) adopted this changed connotation of svabhāva as a namesake for yadṛcchā, while some followers of Sāṃkhya and almost all Vedāntins, right from the ninth century, continued to hold the original view that svabhāva stood for causality while yadṛcchā, for accident.

2. Evolution and Assimilation into Lokāyata

The idea of svabhāva as cosmic order became a part of Lokāyata between the sixth and the eighth century CE and got widely accepted by the tenth century, so much so that in the fourteenth century Sāyaṇa-Mādhava aka Vidyāraṇya could categorically declare that the Cārvāka/Lokāyata upheld causality, not chance. But the other meaning of svabhāva, identical with yadṛcchā, continued to circulate along with kāla, time, which was originally another claimant for the title of the first cause and similarly had acquired several significations in course of time. Both significations of svabhāva continued to be employed by later writers, and came to be used in another domain, that of daiva (fate) vis-à-vis puruṣakāra (manliness or human endeavour).

Till the eighth century svabhāvavāda (whether as a doctrine advocating causality or chance) and the Cārvāka/Lokāyata were considered by some (Śāntarakṣita and Haribhadra, for instance) to be unrelated to each other. At a certain point of time (we do not know exactly when, but definitely before Utpala and Jñānaśrībhadra, i.e., between the eighth century and the tenth century CE) svabhāva-as-causality had already got associated with the Cārvāka/Lokāyata, perhaps because of their common atheistic and anti-supernatural character. Svabhāvavāda thereafter ceased to be a separate view and somehow got assimilated in the Cārvāka/Lokāyata materialism. Other materialist views such as bhūtavāda, mentioned in the Tamil epic Maṇimēkalāi, in the mean time seem to have withered away.

3. Svabhāva Across Other Traditions and Domains

In spite of all this, svabhāva has its own place in the Sāṃkhya tradition. In the medical literature too svabhāva occupies an important place. In the medical texts as well as in the Brahminical and Jain philosophical literature, a syncretic doctrine, which has been named kālādisāmagrīvāda, involving time, svabhāva, niyati and karman by some Jain writers, although by no means all. For all practical purposes svabhāva turned out to be, so to say, a lance free and readily available for use by anyone and everyone; it was no longer attached to any particular school of thought. In the fields of astronomy and grammar too svabhāva is sometimes invoked when no plausible explanation of an odd phenomenon confronts the authors. More importantly, both the meanings of svabhāva, namely, causality and accident, continued to circulate simultaneously and anyone could choose either of the two meanings. The same situation evolved in course of time in relation to kālavāda as well.

4. Svabhāva in the Context of Daiva and Puruṣakāra

Another aspect of svabhāva to be noted is that in the dispute between two forces, daiva and puruṣakāra, svabhāva-as-accident is akin to the former, while svabhāva-as-causality, to the latter. Sometimes, however, two more forces, namely, chance and time, are also added. The confusion of significations around the word svabhāva in philosophical literature can be resolved if it is remembered that, besides Sāṃkhya and the Cārvāka/Lokāyata, other materialist views were current in India long before the redaction of the first base work of the Cārvāka/Lokāyata, which most probably was redacted before the eighth century CE; between the sixth and the eighth, to be more specific.