English
Specially we- find the use of these perfect comparative terms jn’ the works of Nagarjuna. For example, he said in his Prajiidparamit&-sastra or commentary of Mahaprajiadpiramita-sitra :— “There are two kinds of Buddhism,one is Hinayaina and the other is Mahayana,” ! Of course, we meet with the terms ‘Mahayana’ and ‘Hinayaéna’ some time in the Mahayana sitras which definitely existed before the time of Nagarjuna, but there the terms were seldom used and even if used, it was not in a comparative sense of superiority and inferiority.; From the above-we can very well understand that the terms ‘Mahayana’ and § Hinayana’- ‘practically came into .use in their proper usual sense from the time of Nagarjuna. Our ‘next ‘question would then be “ How these terms have been formed by the Mahasanghikas?” “As we. know every word has a history at its back, therefore, on the face of ‘it terms like ‘Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana’ did not come into use all ona sudden; they must have passed through previous historical stages. _As I have already. said the Mahasanghikas, before they: could finally arrive -at these terms, passed through many similar other terms. Then what are these ? If, we look at the Mahayana sittras we find many other terms like Ekayana, Agrayaina, Bhadrayana, Paramirthayina, Bodhisattvayina and Buddhayana, as synonym: of the term ‘Mahayana.’ Among these, . ‘Ekayana,’ “‘Buddhayana’ and - ‘ Bodhisattvayana’ have been used most frequently; and when the term ‘Ekayany’ was used in the place of the ‘term ‘Mahayana,’ then the corresponding terms ‘ Dviyana’ 1 Wang Bundle, Vol. 5, p. 69a of Chinese Tripitaka 14 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM or ‘Triyina’ were used in the place of the term ‘Himayina.’ Similarly when the term ‘ Bodhisattva- yana’? and the term ‘ Buddhaysna’ were used for the term ‘Mahayana,’ then the term ‘Arhatyéna’ and : Sravakayana’ were used for the term ‘ Hinayana.’ ' Again, we’ see that the term ‘Ekayana’ appears in ais place where Buddha’s Ontological doctrines ' are dealt with, while’ on the contrary when there is an indication of Buddha’s personality or his theory upon human beings then the terms ‘ Buddhayaina’ and ‘ Bodhisattvayana’ were used. Now, let us see which is the earlier one of these previous kinds of terms. We find in the Pali- Nikayas the term ‘Ekayana.’ There it only indicates the ‘ Astamgika-marga.’ Hence it is to be more correct, we may say that the term ‘ Kkay&na’ has been used by Buddha himself and the Sthaviras in the lifetime of the Master as_well as after His Parinirvana. From what has been said above we are at once led to the conclusion that as soon as the Mahasanghikas were excommunicated by the Sthaviras, the latter attached contemptuous epithets to the name of the former and the former in their turn could not but borrow the term ‘Ekayina’ from the Nikayas: Thereby they thought, that it would be the most suitable term to distinguish themselves from the Sthaviras in thé’ point of doctrine and at the same time to assert their own superiority. Again, they called the Sthaviras by the name ‘Dviyana’ to indicate their inferiority. But it appears to me that some time- after the Mahiasanghikas were puzzled to find that the term ‘Ekayina’ is common to both (both in the Sthavira and Mahasanghika), so that -} When similar Qntological aspects of doctrines ave indicated then some time the tert ‘Satya’ occur for the term ‘Mahiyana.’ In such case the term ‘ Updya- Kanéalya’. hag been used in the place of the term ‘ Hinay&ua’ such example we do find in the Amritirtha siitra, In Wang Bundle, Vol. I, p. 8a of Chinese Tripitaka, and - Saddharmapundarika sitra, Part I, p. 29, Bibliotheca Buddhica edition. INTRODUCTORY NOTE 15 they once more began to search for another suitable term, This time they invented the term ‘ Buddhayaina’ or ‘ Bodhisattvayana.’ But even at this stage too when they began to think a little deeply over these new terms they saw their shortcoming, It was clear that the terms like ‘ Bodhisattvayana’ and ‘ Buddhayina’ only indicate a particular aspect of Buddhism, namely—Buddha’s personality. But the doctrinal side was totally missed and left out of consi deration. So they again began to search for yet another newer and more suitable term which would indicat both aspects of Buddhism, and at last they invented th: terms ‘ Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana.’ One very important point regarding the term ‘Mahayana’ and ‘ Hinayana’ must be here referred tc As a matter of fact the implication of these terms varie: in the two periods, viz.—first in what we have calle Mahayana sitra period (ie, from Mahasanghik separation to the time of Nagarjuna) and _ secon Mahayana school period (é.-¢., the time of Nag&rjuns Maitreyanath, Asanga, Vasubandhu, ete.). As you know the terms were originally coined by th Mahasanghikas and in the siitra period they applie them to indicate a fundamental doctrinal difference, viz Buddha's Ontological and Phenomenological perception respectively. However, in the time of Nagarjuna an later on, that is to say, when the Madhyamika schoc of Nagirjuna and the Yogacara school of Maitreyanatk Asaiga and Vasubandhu came to be established (i. e in the school period), the terms ‘ Mahayana’ anu ‘Hinayana’ began to change their connotation. They are henceforth applied not only in a sense of doctrinal difference of Buddha’s perception, bat at the same time they carry with them the sense of the relation of different schools; the Mahiyanists went further and in ‘16 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM ¥ “the term ‘ Mahayana * they included only their schools like Madhyamika, Yogacara, etc., while in ‘Hinayana’ they put in first not only the original doctrine of Buddha but at the same time Sarvastivada schools and secondly even the Mahasanghika school. and as well as their allied schools. Other important allied terms referred to above, will require elucidation for a thorough understanding of the doctrinal aspect of Buddhism. Therefore, let us next take them up-one by one. These terms which should be noted here were quite unknown to Southern Buddhism. A The terms Vyaktayana (or Pyakta-upadesa) Guhyayana (or Guhya-upadeéa). “These doctrinal terms indicate Buddha’s mode or way of preaching. Etymologically, Vyakta-upadesa means the 'exoteric doctrines and Guhya-upadesa means the esoteric doctrines that is to say, the former indicatés the doctrines which’ Buddha preached publicly among all men, andthe latter indicates the doctrines which ‘Buddha preached in secret only for his advanced disciples. Therefore, Nagarjuna said in his Prajiapiramita- Sistra; °— , “There are two kinds of doctrines in Buddhism ; one is the esoteric -_(Guhya), and another is exoteric (Vyakta)” *. ~ , ' These are my restoration; because, up to this time, I ceuld nut tind out proper terme ia Sanskrit text. In Japanese, the former is called ‘Kev-kyo' and jatier is called ‘ Mikkyo.” * The commentary of Prejhdpairamita sfiixa. # Prajiiiparamitt S&stra, fascien!. 4. and 84.08 Wang Bunile, Vol. I, p. 280 and Vol. 4, p. 25b of Chinese Tripitaka. INTRODUCTORY NOTE 7 So far as my knowledge goes, these terms were for the first time invented and applied by Nagarjuna, the great. teacher of Mahayana, with reference to the above. But we should here bear in mind’ the fact that the meaning of these two terms have varied according as they were applied and confined to different schools, different countries, and different historical periods of the time. For example, the great teacher K’-i, sometimes also called K?-Ké-t3-sh, the founder of the Thien-thai school in China (in 597 A. D. he died in his sixty-seventh year), has applied these terms for a classification of whole Buddhism, in a more radical sense than that of Nagarjuna. But since the Mantrayaéna school was introduced into. Japan from China in 805-6 A.D., the terms were applied in a very limited sense exclusively to that school and its own classification of Buddha’s doctrine. Herice these terms became in course of time more and more complicated and at the same time, it began to beara more and more limited sense than that of Nagarjuna and even of K’-i. The Mantrayana school in Japan is mainly divided into two different schools: the first was established by the teacher Kii-kai who is better known by his posthumous title Ko-bd-dai-shi, and another school was established by the teacher Ji-kaku-dai-shi:' Both these teachers applied the same terms differently: The former applied the terms in a narrow sectarian sense, that is to say, according to the teacher Ku-kai, the whole of Buddhism, either Mahayana or Hinayana, either Developed or Original Buddhism, as preached by the historical Buddha, belongs to the ‘ Vyakta-upadega.’ While according to him ‘ Ku-kai has founded his Mantrayaina school on the mountain of Koya. Ji-ka-ku waéa great expander of the doctrine of Ten-dai sect in Japan after the great teacher Den-gyo, Both have introduced the same Mantrayéna Buddhism from China bat their opinions differed from each other. 18 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM also the preaching of Vairachana Buddha’ only is the ‘Guhya-upadega’ and he is not Rupa-kaya Buddha but Dharma-kaya Buddha. It was said that the so-culled -Vairachana-siitra records his preaching. Against this Ji-ka-ku has applied’ the terms rather in a proper sense from our point of view and at the same time it seems that the sense of the terms ‘ Vyaktayana’ and ‘ Guhyayana’ has a much more correct and complete form than that of the former, even the teacher K’-i or even Nagarjuna. According to.this teacher the so-called Dviyadna doctrine or.