MAIN FEATURES OF THE MAHAYANA
The obscurest period in the history of Buddhism is that which follows
the reign of Asoka, but the enquirer cannot grope for long in these
dark ages without stumbling upon the word Mahayana. This is the name
given to a movement which in its various phases may be regarded as a
philosophical school, a sect and a church, and though it is not always
easy to define its relationship to other schools and sects it
certainly became a prominent aspect of Buddhism in India about the
beginning of our era besides achieving enduring triumphs in the Far
East. The word[1] signifies Great Vehicle or Carriage, that is a means
of conveyance to salvation, and is contrasted with Hinayana, the
Little Vehicle, a name bestowed on the more conservative party though
not willingly accepted by them. The simplest description of the two
Vehicles is that given by the Chinese traveller I-Ching (635-713 A.D.)
who saw them both as living realities in India. He says[2] "Those who
worship Bodhisattvas and read Mahayana Sutras are called Mahayanists,
while those who do not do this are called Hinayanists." In other
words, the Mahayanists have scriptures of their own, not included in
the Hinayanist Canon and adore superhuman beings in the stage of
existence immediately below Buddhahood and practically differing
little from Indian deities. Many characteristics could be added to
I-Ching's description but they might not prove universally true of the
Mahayana nor entirely absent from the Hinayana, for however divergent
the two Vehicles may have become when separated geographically, for
instance in Ceylon and Japan, it is clear that when they were in
contact, as in India and China, the distinction was not always sharp.
But in general the Mahayana was more popular, not in the sense of
being simpler, for parts of its teaching were exceedingly abstruse,
but in the sense of striving to invent or include doctrines agreeable
to the masses. It was less monastic than the older Buddhism, and more
emotional; warmer in charity, more personal in devotion, more ornate
in art, literature and ritual, more disposed to evolution and
development, whereas the Hinayana was conservative and rigid, secluded
in its cloisters and open to the plausible if unjust accusation of
selfishness. The two sections are sometimes described as northern and
southern Buddhism, but except as a rough description of their
distribution at the present day, this distinction is not accurate, for
the Mahayana penetrated to Java, while the Hinayana reached Central
Asia and China. But it is true that the development of the Mahayana
was due to influences prevalent in northern India and not equally
prevalent in the South. The terms Pali and Sanskrit Buddhism are
convenient and as accurate as can be expected of any nomenclature
covering so large a field.
Though European writers usually talk of _two_ Yanas or Vehicles--the
great and the little--and though this is clearly the important
distinction for historical purposes, yet Indian and Chinese Buddhists
frequently enumerate _three_. These are the _Sravakayana_, the
vehicle of the ordinary Bhikshu who hopes to become an Arhat, the
_Pratyekabuddhayana_ for the rare beings who are able to become
Buddhas but do not preach the law to others, and in contrast to both
of these the _Mahayana_ or vehicle of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. As a
rule these three Vehicles are not regarded as hostile or even
incompatible. Thus the _Lotus sutra_,[3] maintains that there is
really but one vehicle though by a wise concession to human weakness
the Buddha lets it appear that there are three to suit divers tastes.
And the Mahayana is not a single vehicle but rather a train comprising
many carriages of different classes. It has an unfortunate but
distinct later phase known in Sanskrit as Mantrayana and Vajrayana but
generally described by Europeans as Tantrism. This phase took some of
the worst features in Hinduism, such as spells, charms, and the
worship of goddesses, and with misplaced ingenuity fitted them into
Buddhism. I shall treat of it in a subsequent chapter, for it is
chronologically late. The silence of Hsuean Chuang and I-Ching implies
that in the seventh century it was not a noticeable aspect of Indian
Buddhism.
Although the record of the Mahayana in literature and art is clear and
even brilliant, it is not easy either to trace its rise or connect its
development with other events in India. Its annals are an interminable
list of names and doctrines, but bring before us few living
personalities and hence are dull. They are like a record of the
Christian Church's fight against Arians, Monophysites and Nestorians
with all the great figures of Byzantine history omitted or called in
question. Hence I fear that my readers (if I have any) may find these
chapters repellent, a mist of hypotheses and a catalogue of ancient
paradoxes. I can only urge that if the history of the Mahayana is
uncertain, its teaching fanciful and its scriptures tedious, yet it
has been a force of the first magnitude in the secular history and art
of China, Japan and Tibet and even to-day the most metaphysical of its
sacred books, the Diamond Cutter, has probably more readers than Kant
and Hegel.
Since the early history of the Mahayana is a matter for argument
rather than precise statement, it will perhaps be best to begin with
some account of its doctrines and literature and proceed afterwards to
chronology. I may, however, mention that general tradition connects it
with King Kanishka and asserts that the great doctors Asvaghosha and
Nagarjuna lived in and immediately after his reign. The attitude of
Kanishka and of the Council which he summoned towards the Mahayana is
far from clear and I shall say something about this difficult subject
below. Unfortunately his date is not beyond dispute for while a
considerable consensus of opinion fixes his accession at about 78
A.D., some scholars place it earlier and others in the second century
A.D.[4] Apart from this, it appears established that the
Sukhavati-vyuha which is definitely Mahayanist was translated into
Chinese between 147 and 186 A.D. We may assume that it was then
already well known and had been composed some time before, so that,
whatever Kanishka's date may have been, Mahayanist doctrines must have
been in existence about the time of the Christian era, and perhaps
considerably earlier. Naturally no one date like a reign or a council
can be selected to mark the beginning of a great school. Such a body
of doctrine must have existed piecemeal and unauthorized before it was
collected and recognized and some tenets are older than others.
Enlarging I-Ching's definition we may find in the Mahayana seven lines
of thought or practice. All are not found in all sects and some are
shared with the Hinayana but probably none are found fully developed
outside the Mahayana. Many of them have parallels in the contemporary
phases of Hinduism.
1. A belief in Bodhisattvas and in the power of human beings to become
Bodhisattvas.
2. A code of altruistic ethics which teaches that everyone must do
good in the interest of the whole world and make over to others any
merit he may acquire by his virtues. The aim of the religious life is
to become a Bodhisattva, not to become an Arhat.
3. A doctrine that Buddhas are supernatural beings, distributed
through infinite space and time, and innumerable. In the language of
later theology a Buddha has three bodies and still later there is a
group of five Buddhas.
4. Various systems of idealist metaphysics, which tend to regard the
Buddha essence or Nirvana much as Brahman is regarded in the Vedanta.
5. A canon composed in Sanskrit and apparently later than the Pali
Canon.
6. Habitual worship of images and elaboration of ritual. There is a
dangerous tendency to rely on formulae and charms.
7. A special doctrine of salvation by faith in a Buddha, usually
Amitabha, and invocation of his name. Mahayanism can exist without
this doctrine but it is tolerated by most sects and considered
essential by some.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: Sanskrit, _Mahayana_; Chinese, _Ta Ch'eng_ (pronounced
_Tai Sheng_ in many southern provinces); Japanese, _Dai-jo_; Tibetan,
_Theg-pa-chen-po_; Mongolian, _Yaekae-kuelgaen_; Sanskrit, _Hinayana_;
Chinese, _Hsiao-Ch'eng_; Japanese, _Sho-jo_; Tibetan, _Theg-dman_;
Mongolian _Uetsuekaen-kuelgaen_. In Sanskrit the synonyms agrayana and
uttama-yana are also found.]
[Footnote 2: Record of Buddhist practices. Transl. Takakusu, 1896, p.
14. Hsuean Chuang seems to have thought that acceptance of the
Yogacaryabhumi (Nanjio, 1170) was essential for a Mahayanist. See his
life, transl. by Beal, p. 39, transl. by Julien, p. 50.]
[Footnote 3: Saddharma-Pundarika, chap. III. For brevity, I usually
cite this work by the title of The Lotus.]
[Footnote 4: The date 58 B.C. has probably few supporters among
scholars now, especially after Marshall's discoveries.]