For a millennium [Buddhism] was a powerful force in molding
the religious, moral, artistic, educational, and social
life of India. But by the end of that thousand-year period
its decline in the subcontinent had begun, and in another
five hundred years it had practically disappeared from the
land of its birth. But Buddhism lived and continued to
grow because of its missionary fervor. The eagerness of its
followers to carry the saving way to others had by this
time spread it far and wide through northern and southern
Asia; it became one of the living religions of China and
Korea; it won Tibet and contended successfully with Shinto
for the soul of Japan.
In this process of missionary expansion it was itself
profoundly transformed.... During the early centuries of
that period -- from about 200 B.C. to A.D. 200 -- a
cleavage into the two great schools of subsequent Buddhist
history, Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism, was taking place.
SINCE THESE TWO TERMS THEMSELVES REFLECT THE MAHAYANA
VIEWPOINT (MAHAYANA MEANING "THE GREATER VEHICLE" OF
SALVATION, AND HINAYANA "THE LESSER VEHICLE") I shall refer
to the Hinayana school by a different term that is
nonprejudicial and is acceptable in the Hinayana countries,
namely "Theravada" Buddhism ("the way of the elders").
_The Teachings of the Compassionate Buddha_, ed. E.A.Burtt;
Mentor Books, 1955; p. 23. MY EMPH.
___________________________________________________________
The Mahayana emerges into history as a loose confederation
of groups, each associated with one or more of a number of
new *Sutras* [Buddha-teachings].... These attained a written
form, in Middle Indian dialects, very soon after they were
composed. Scribal amendations then gradually transformed
them into 'Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit', which approximated
to classical Sanskrit, the prestige language of India.
ANYONE ACCEPTING THE NEW LITERATURE AS GENUINE *SUTRAS* --
AUTHORITATIVE TEACHINGS OF THE BUDDHA -- THEREBY BELONGED
TO THE NEW MOVEMENT. This did not necessitate monks and
nuns abadoning their old fraternities, as they continued
to follow the monastic discipline of the fraternities in
which they had been ordained....
Traditionalists denied that the new literature was 'the
word of the Buddha' (*Buddha-vacana*), like the early
*Suttas*. This early material did include teachings and
inspired utterances of the Buddha's major disciplines,
but these were accepted as 'the word of the Buddha' as
he had agreed with the teachings, or because of his general
praise for such disciples. Even after these were all dead,
some remembered material was added to the *Suttas* if it
harmonized well with the existing corpus in style and
content. The new *Sutras* were very different in style
and tone, but were defended as 'the word of the Buddha'
through various devices. Firstly, they were seen as
inspired utterances coming from the still-existing Buddha,
through meditative visions and vivid dreams. Secondly,
they were seen as the products of the same kind of perfect
wisdom which was the basis of the Buddha's own teaching of
*Dharma*.... Thirdly, in later Mahayana, they were seen
as teachings hidden by the Buddha in the world of serpent-
deities (*naga's*), till there were humans capable of seeing
the deeper implications of his message, who would recover
the teachings by means of meditative powers. Each explanation
saw the *Sutras* as arising from meditative experiences.
Nevertheless, they take the form of dialogues between the
'historical' Buddha and his disciples and gods....
The new *Sutras* [were seen to contain a] liberating truth,
[being] a deeper level of teaching than the early *Suttas*,
[and] there was said to be a huge amount of 'merit' in
copying them out, and disseminating, reciting, expounding,
understanding, practising, and even ritually venerating them.
Such claims suggest defensiveness on the part of a new, small
movement trying to establish itself. THE MAHAYANA *SUTRAS*
WERE PROBABLY PRODUCED BY THE NEW BREED OF CHARISMATIC
*DHARMA*-PREACHERS WHO CHAMPIONED THEM. These monks, and some
lay-people, directed their preaching both within and beyond
the existing Buddhist community, to win converts. This they
did by extolling the virtues of perfect Buddhahood, so as to
elicit a conversion experience of profound psychological
effect....
The new perspective on scriptural legitimacy led to the
Mahayana having an open, ongoing 'revelation', which produced
a huge outpouring of new *Sutras* in India in the period
up to around AD 650. These were composed anonymously,
often by a number of authors elaborating a basic text, to
produce works frequently running to hundreds of pages in
length. In contrast, the early *Suttas* are ninety-five
printed pages long at most, and often only run to a page
or two. In certain early *Suttas* such as the *Maha-samaya*...,
the Buddha is a glorious spiritual being surrounded by
countless gods and hundreds of disciples. The Mahayana
*Sutras* developed this style. In them, the Buddha uses
hyperbolic language and paradox, and makes known many
heavenly Buddhas and high-level heavenly *Bodhisattvas*,
existing in many regions of the universe. A number of these
saviour beings, Buddhas and in time *Bodhisattvas*, became
objects of devotion and prayer, and greatly added to the
appeal and missionary success of the Mahayana.
The nature of the Mahayana and its attitude to earlier schools
At first, the new movement was called the *Bodhisattva-yana*,
or '(spiritual) vehicle of the *Bodhisattva*'. This was in
contradistinction to the 'vehicle of the Disciple' (*Sravaka-
yana*), followed by the disciples of the Buddha's earlier
teachings, who sought Arhatship rather than perfect Buddhahood.
It was also contrasted to the 'vehicle of the solitary Buddha'
(*Pratyeka-buddha-yana*), a term used to cover the practice of
certain solitary ascetics, mainly of an age past, who were
seen to have attained Buddhahood, but who were unable to teach
others as perfect Buddha did. AS THE NEW MOVEMENT RESPONDED TO
CRITICISMS FROM THOSE WHO DID NOT ACCEPT THE NEW *SUTRAS*, IT
INCREASINGLY STRESSED THE SUPERIORITY OF THE *BODHISATTVA-YANA*,
AND REFERRED TO IT AS THE 'GREAT VEHICLE', THE *MAHA-YANA*. THE
OTHER 'VEHICLES' WERE DISPARAGED AS BEING THE 'INFERIOR VEHICLE',
OR *HINA-YANA*. The 'greatness' of the new vehicle was seen
to lie in three areas: its compassionate motivation, directed
at the salvation of countless beings; the profundity of the
wisdom it cultivated; and its superior goal, omniscent
Buddhahood....
The peculiarity of the Mahayana was that it urged all 'sons and
daughters of good family' to tread the *Bodhisattva*-path.
Even so, the stereotype of the Mahayana as being more open to
lay aspirations does not seem straightforwardly applicable to
the early Mahayana. In early Chinese translations of
Mahayana texts, the lay *Bodhisattva* is expected to live a
life free of attachment to family, and to aim to ordain as
soon as possible....
Over the centuries, many monks studied and practised according
to both the Sravakayana and Mahayana; not infrequently, both
were present in the same monastery. The Chinese, in fact, did
not come to clearly differentiate the Mahayana as a separate
movement till late in the fourth century. Moreover, in Eastern
and Northern Buddhism, the term 'Hinayana' came to be mostly
used to refer to the lower level of spiritual motivation and
practice which prepared for the Mahayana level. In fact, IT
IS A MISTAKE TO EQUATE THE 'HINAYANA' WITH THE THERAVADA SCHOOL,
BOTH BECAUSE THE TERM IS A DISPARAGING ONE NOT ACCEPTED BY THE
SCHOOL, AND ALSO BECAUSE IT WAS USED TO REFER TO ALL SCHOOLS
WHICH DID NOT ACCEPT THE MAHAYANA *SUTRAS* AS AUTHORITATIVE.
Moreover, these schools also included a *Bodhisattva*-path,
so it is incorrect to see them as purely Sravakayana in nature.
_An Introduction to Buddhism_, by Peter Harvey, Cambridge
University Press, 1991; pp. 90-4.
________________________________________________________________
the term 'vehicle' implies a place or a state to attain to, a 'goal'
which many associate, perhaps incorrectly, with *Nirvana*. the notion
that certain systems of Buddhism could be metaphorized as carrying-
devices into Nirvana does not appear to have itself been an instruction
of the Buddha in the earliest sutras. in fact this is easily seen as
one of the many artifices (along with the revision of the status of
Ar(a)hat to that of Bodhisattva) which enthusiastic Buddhists have
utilized for proselytizing efforts (or maybe as 'skilful means').
intentionally poking fun at this idea, the Avidyana (Vehicle of
Ignorance) neither accepts it nor denies its facility. instead we
envision the scapegoat of ignorance (avidya) as the central hub around
which revolves all systems of buddhism. we do not attempt to either
claim that our texts are from the Buddha (*Buddha-vacana*) or not from
the Buddha, since we are ignorant of where this central figure (the
Buddha) resides, and observe that ignoring and its refined exercise
are the typical instruction of buddhist schools.
back to Avidyana
nagasiva