English
’ Whenever he strikes at a relation or comparison among different Buddhist schools, he did it by the terms ‘ Mahayana’ and ‘Hinayana.’ One of his works states thus :— “saamifiregta ware g2ue | smaKaGe agai) x va Batwa: o aeariiresg eeu: | MIATA aTETaTTa: 0” * “The people of the small vehicle (Hinayana) are afraid of death at every step ; their achievement of victory . ‘There are Sata-dastra, Sata-éastra-vaipulya and Sastra on the refutation of the principles of four heretical HinaySna schools mentioned in the Lahkavatéra-édatra, as well as Sastra on the explanation of the Nirvéna of twenty heretical Hinayana (teachers) mentioned in the Lankavatéra-siitra.” ? See Bundle, Vol. 5, p. 58b of Chinese Tripitaka. 3 This work did not exist in Chinese Tripitaka. However, the original one hus been discovered from Nepal by MM. H. P. Sastri and also bas been published in J B.A.S., Vol. VEIT, Part 1, No. 2, p. 180, 1898. DIFFERENT APPLICATION OF THE TERMS 167 in war lies indeed very far off ; while the men of the great vehicle (Mahayana) are clad with the armour of mercy ; they are intent on saving the world and are fully equipped with the bow and arrows of sympathy and: morality. The application of the terms ‘Mahayana’ and ‘Hinayana in Aryadeva is comparatively simple for our understanding than in Nag&rjuna. From this, I venture to say that Aryadeva was more busily engaged in-the task of defeating Brahmanical and non-Brahmanical schools than in making a comparative estimate of the different schools of Buddhism. Because, there can be no - denial of the fact that it was a period in which Brahmanical and non-Brahmanical faiths and Philosophies were in a. very flourishing condition. IV The Application in Sthiramatt. Sthiramati was one of the great followers of Nagarjuna. He flourished about a hundred. years after Nagarjuna. Sthiramati’s work entitled Mahayanadvataraka-sastra! has been translated into Chinese by TAo-thai, of the Northern Lida dynasty, 397-439 A.D. From this we may conjec- ture that his date ran some year between 200-300 A.. D. He belonged to the lineage of Nagarjuna and developed to a great extent the ‘Sarva-Siinyata’ doctrine. His application of the terms ‘Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana ’ on the relation or comparison between the primitive and developed Buddhism, was rather of a more concrete form than that of Aryadeva and even than that of Nagarjuna so to say. In his Mahayanivataraka-sastra, we read :—. “ The slandering of Mahayana is the direct cause of falling into evil. ways.” * + See Nenjio’s Catalogue, p. 273, No. 1243. ? So Bundle, Vol, 2, p. Gla of Chinese Tripitaka. 168 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM Again, in the same Sastra, we find :— “Tf you think that Sravakayana is equal to Mahayana it'‘would be very wrong and it cannot be so. Because, the cause (religious practices) and its effect (salvation) are different in the two vehicles (Mahayana and Hinayana). The cause of Sravakayana being the same with that of Mahayana, the effects of both must also be the same. But their effects are actually different. Therefore, the same should: be the case with their cause too: that: is to say, their cause also must be different. Because the Srivakas have only cut off all hindrances and penetrated into imper- manence. Besides this, the Sravakas understand a doctrine only by hearing from others and by being instructed. While the Bodhisattvas have cut off not only all hindrances but also their minute ‘semblances’ and ‘ perfumes’ and have at all the same time penetrated into all existence (sarva-dharma) as Dharma-tathata and, unlike the Srivakas, have not to hear others but they by themselves understand any doctrine naturally in their own wisdom. So there is much difference between the Sravakayana and the Mahayana.” ! The above quotation helps us to understand how the relation or comparison between the two aspects of Buddha’s perception, ¢.e., the primitive and developed Buddhism assumed a more concrete form, through the use of the terms ‘Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana’ by Sthiramati than it wont to doin the age of his previous teachers. _ _ Besides the above-mentioned teachers, we have many others belonging to the lineage of Nagarjuna before the University of Nalanda came into being. They are: Rahulabhadra, the younger contemporary of Aryadeva; Buddhapalita, the older contemporary of Bhavaviveka ' Su Bundle, Vol. 2, p, 62a of Chinese Tripitaka, DIFFERENT APPLICATION OF THE TERMS 169 who .flourished about the end of the 5th century A. D. This Buddhapélita held, as we know, the doctrine of ‘Prasanga’ on the Madhyamika system. While Bhavaviveka held the doctrine of ‘Svatantra’ on the same system.’ We have nothing to mention in particular regarding the application of the terms ‘ Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayadna’ in works of the above teachers besides what has already been pointed out. ‘We have so far tried to indicate the application of these terms by various teachers of the Madhyamika school previous to the foundation of the Nalanda University. Let us now turn our attention to the application of the terms ‘ Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana’ by the teachers of the Yogacara school. Vv The Application in Mattreyanatha. Arya Maitreyanatha was the founder of the Yogacara school in India, According to Dr. H. Ui he flourished sometime between 270-350 A. D.’ Nagarjuna established the “Madhyamika school in Southern India while * Both Buddhapalita and Bh4vaviveka belonged to the lineage of Nigdrjuna and they equally enhanced the doctrine of Madhyamika system, But their opinions differentiated one from another, The former held the doctrine of ‘Prasanga,’ that is to say : every existence came into being only by the ‘cause’ (hetu) ‘conditions’ (pratyayas). And such existence has no kind of permanent nature (sabhdva nityat&). Therefore, they are all unyata (emptiness). And he taught; this is the real doctrine of Nag&rjuna. While, the latter held, on the contrary, the doctrine of ‘Svatantra,’ that is to say: from conventional (sathurti satya), point of view, all existence is production only through ‘cause’ and ‘condition.’ But from tran- scendental (paraméttha-satya) point of view, original nature of all existence is permanent. 2 A learned article on this appeared in the Philosophical Journal of Imperial University, Tokyo, No. 411, 1922, 22 170 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM Maitreyanatha founded the Yogacara school near Ayodhya. It will not be out of place to state here something of the historical authenticity of Maitreyanatha. Hitherto, Maitreyanatha, the founder of Yogicira schoo!, lad been regarded as a mythical person, or sumetimes as the Maitreya Bodhisattva or the future Buddha. But since MM. H. P. Sastri pointed out the historicity of Maitreyanatha from the colophon vf Abhisamaya- lamkara-karika which is a commentary from the Yogicara point of view, on Paificavinsati-sdhasrika- prajiaparamita-stitra by Maitreyanaitha, I myself have been at pains to see if it ean be confirmed from Chinese sources. And I am very glad to say that my learned friend Dr. H. Ui, Professor of Tohoku Imperial University, wrote an article! supporting MM. H. P. Sastri on the point. Now, let us look to the application of the terms ‘Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana’ made by Maitreyaniatha. From his works we come to understand that his applica- tion does not bear the sense of ‘ rejecting others’ doctrines’ but definitely points to ‘unfolding one’s own doctrines.’ A. few examples will make the point clear. In the 35th fasciculi of Yogacarya-bhimi-sastra we find :— *On the whole there are two kinds of purification ; one is the purification of ‘hinderance’ (klesavarana), another is the purification of ‘intellectual hinderance’ (jfiinavaraya). Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas are able ito obtain the purification only of ‘hinderance* but not of intellectual hinderance. But Boddhisattvas alone can obtain both kinds of purification. Therefore, it has been said that they (Bodhisattvas) in comparison with all, are the highest and supreme. Again, there are four things in which Bodhisattvas are superior to the Sravakas and 1 In the Philosophical Journal of Imperial University of Tokyo, No. 411, 1921, DIFFERENT APPLICATION OF THETERMS 171 the Pratyekabuddhas. These are—(1) superior nature ; (2) superior conduct ; (3) superior skilfulness ; (4) superior effect.” ? Again, in the 46th fasciculi of the same Sastra, we have the following :— “The Bodhisattvayana is characterised by seven great features, Therefore, it has been called ‘Mahayana.’ What are then these seven ? These are :-— 1. The great characteristic in the doctrine 7.e., among the twelve different divisions of Buddha’s doctrines (dvadasinga-Buddha-vacanam), the Bodhisattva-pitaka belongs to the extensive teaching (vaipulya). 2. The great characteristic in the aspiration (cittot- pada), ze. one kind of people alone can desire to obtain the perfect form of knowledge. -3. The great characteristic of the perfect understand- ing (adhimukti), z.e., one kind of people have got perfect understanding as well as faith on the extensive doctrine. 4. The great characteristic of excessive pleasure (adhyasaya), #.e., one kind of people being possessed of adhimukti-caryabhtiimi can obtain the perfect pleasure- stage (anutrisaya-bhiimi). 5. The great characteristic of the way, i.e, perfect religious practices with the virtue and knowledge can secure the most perfect knowledge. 6, The great characteristic of the period (kala), ¢.e., after passing through three numberless great kalpas one kind of people can obtain the most perfect knowledge.” ? Of the above mentioned seven great characteristics No. 1 relates to the doctrine; Nos. 2,3 and 4 apply to the religieux (of different kinds). Nos.