Hi,

>
>
>In Nikaya, khayadhamma, vayadhamma etc. are used to
>describe the five aggregates and their like. The
>commentary glosses vayadhamma with
>vigacchanakasabhaava. What does sabhaava mean here? Is
>it a bahubhiihi compound or kammadhaaraya compound?

Based on the minimal context, it would look like a bahubbiihi. I would read it: whose nature is X. The gloss seems to exactly model the glossed word. Vayadhamma is also a bahubbiihi, and vaya corresponds to vigacchana, dhamma to sabhava. The exact meaning of sabhava is only important insofar as it points out which of the many meanings of dhamma is intended in the original, i.e. whose nature is... I wouldn't think that the use of sabhava here has any doctrinal importance, as in asserting fixed essences of any sort or so. This is a typical feature of this sort of gloss: one often shouldn't attach doctrinal importance to the words used in glossing other terms. They are often just indicators, close enough synonyms to make the point clear.

best regards,

/Rett