English
Hinayana doctrine or Original Buddhism is the ‘Vyakta-upadega,’ because it has been spoken by Buddha in public‘and that doctrine itself represents the Buddha's Phenomenological perception. But Ekayana doctrine or Mahayana or Developed Buddhism belongs to the * Guhya-upadega,’ because it is the externalization of ‘Buddha’s introspectional perception. The explanation of Ji-ka-ku is quite identical with the statement of Mahayina sitras; for example, inthe Saddharmapundarika-siitra as well as Amitarth-siitra we find thus :— “qed wa mfqa ania wae oaraigraraar ararfa 9 : “None but a Tathagata, Sariputra, can impart to ‘Tathagata those’ Dharma which the Tathagata alone knows ”* ' This says quite plainly that Buddha’s introspectional perception can only be understood by a man like Tathagata but_to the..common people it will appéar as esoteric or Guhya. 1 According to the Mantrayéna school Vairachana Buddha is the only idea Buddha. It means the personification of essence of Bodhi and absolute purity. * Saddharamapuodarika-siitra, Vol. I, p. 80, of Bibliotheca Budghica edition. And Amitértle-siitra: In Bundle, Vol. 1, p. 46 of Chinese Tripitaka, "2 §.B,E., Vol, XXI, p. 32. nti ree ee INTRODUCTORY NOTE 19 B The Terms Sahajayana and Kathinayane The terms ‘Sahajayana’ and ‘Kathinayana’! have been formed from religious point of view or more correctly, from the point of religious practice; that is to say, Buddhism as a whole can be broadly divided into two types from the point of view of religious practice. Etymologically, ‘Sahajayana’ means ‘The ‘Easy. Path’ and ‘ Kathinayana,’ ‘‘Ihe difficult path.’ It is not an easy task to ascertain the origin of the terms historically. However, situated as we are, it would not be wrong to suppose that these terms were formed for the first time, by Nagarjuna who applied them in order to divide Buddha’s doctrines from the point of view of religious practice. This is the reason, therefore, that we meet in his treatise for.the first.time, these terms as well as their explanation. In his Dasahnmi-vihhasa- Sastra we read as follows :— “There are numerous paths which one must tread to reach the Buddhistic emancipation, just in the same Way as in the ordinary world we find different paths ; the difficult ones and the easy ones. Walking along the land-roads is difficult, while sailing in water by a boat is much more refreshing and easy. It is the same case in the Bodhisattva-mirga. The difficult path is that which entails a long rigorous period of religious practice to reach the region of perfect peace from which there is no * The terms ‘Sahajaydna’ or ‘Sabaja-marga’ is met with in Buddhist Sanskrit Manuecript, but the term ‘ Kathinayana’ or ‘ Kathina-maérga’ does not at present eccur in the existing manuscripts. Therefore, I could not but restore it from Japanese sources, ‘Sahaja-maérgo’ is called in Japanese “Lgya-do’ and ‘Kathiaa-marga’ ig called ‘ Nan-gyo-do.’ —— ; 20 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM return, The easy path is that which at once leads easily to the destination by, means of faith.” ' Just after the above, Nagarjuna ‘has enumerated many names of the Past, Present, and Future Buddhas especially the name of Amitébha Buddha. At the same time he stated like this : “If one is willing to obtain perfect peace he should worship Buddhas with a heart full of faith and should recite their name.” Again, in his Prajiiapiramita-Sastra he has said :— . “Tf one hears even the name of the Buddha of the holy land (Amitabha Buddha), he would obtain salvation.”® From the above statements we understand very easily that Nagarjuna for the first time formed the terms ‘Sahajayana’ and ‘Kathinayana’ from the point of view of religious practice. All paths (margas) either Hinayana or Mahayana are -included under ‘ Kathina-marga’ and reciting Buddha’s names only comes under ‘ Sahaja-marga.’ From the above, we come to know at the same time that Nagarjuna encouraged the common people to follow the ‘ Sahaja- margs.’ We must bear in mind that the idea of reciting the name of Buddha from historical point of view undoubtedly dates as early as original Buddhism. “~~ Now a question may arise, why Nagarjuna has formed two new terms to indicate the two-kinds of path in _ Buddhism from the point of view of religious practice and’ why he sought to encourage the common people to follow the ‘Sahaja-marga’ rather than the ‘ Kathina- marga?’ Before we attempt this question, it is very ? Doéabimi-Vibh&sha-éastra, fascicul. 9, ¢.e., Su Bundle, Vol. 8, p, 190. of Chinese Tripitaka. _* Prajiiéparamité-6astra, fascicul. 93, Wang Bundle, Vol. 5, p.70b of Chinese Tripitake. INTRODUCTORY NOTE 9) important for our investigation to set clearly before you the exact religious and philosophical atmosphere of India at that time or rather shortly before Nagarjuna. -—- In the time of Nagarjuna shortly before him, both the Brahmanical and non-Brahmanical philosophy‘ as well as religion were much developed and came to hold such ar influential position that they were strong enough to push away Buddbism from Central India where it was in the zenith of its power in the time “of King Asoka. We know from the political history of India that in the course of fifty years after the death of Asoka his descendants lost their power. The central power passed away into the hand of his Ministers. One of them Pushpamitra when holding a general review of the imperial army at Pataliputra in the presence of the last Maurya King, Vrihadratha, treacherously, it is said, killed him and the Sunga dynasty under Pushpamitra came into power about 185 B. C. Kings of this dynasty were patrons of Brahmanism and specially Pushpamitra had great faith in the Vedic religion ; he sanctified animal sacrifices which were essential to Vedie Brahman- ism, contradictory to the most cherished feature of Buddhism. From Tibetan® as well as Chinese records * we come to know that Pushpamitra has been regarded as one of the greatest persecutors of Buddhism. He is said to have burnt Buddhist monasteries. and slain many 2 Of the so-called six systems of Hindu philosophy, to my mind, the Purva Mimarmsa and Uttara Mimidthst (or Vedanta) alone belonged to the pure Vedic o1 Brahmanical system, so to speak. While the Sarakhys and Vaisesika were originally un-Vedic, afterwards absorbed and adopted by the Brahmanical or Vedic system. [-take the Yoga and Nyaya system as common to both. Vaisnavism, Saiviam and Saktism, from this point of view, stood outside the pale of the pure Brahmanical system influenced, adopted and re-ehaped according to its own light. 2 Taranath : Schiefner’s Translation, p. 81. * 25th fascicnli of Sathyuktagama-siitra; Shen Bandle, Vol 3, p. 485 of Chinese Tripitaks, 23 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM monks from Magadha to Jalandhara in the Punjab, though we have an epigraph on the-.gate-way of the Buddhist stupa at Bharhut which records its erection, “ during the supremacy of the Sungas.”! From the latter it may be gathered that the successors of Pushpamitra ‘were more tolerant and liberal than him. Next to Sunga, the Kanva dynasty came to power. They, too, were of the Brahmanical faith and continued for 45 years, from King Vasudeva (73 B.C.) to the last King Sugarman (28 B. C.)? Therefore, during the period extending from 185 B. C. to 28 B. C., Vedic Brihmanism underwent a great revival in Central India. Not only that, it took great care to Brahmanise and re-shape many non-Bramanical systems of philosophy and religion. That precisely is why it became such a great movement. This was undoubtedly a re-action of the powerful propaganda of Buddhism under the great royal support of King Asoka. Now let us first of all see what was the condition of Hindu philosophy at that time. The so-called six systems of Hindu philosophy except the Nyaya system had formed their schools,.in my opinion, during the period from the 3rd _century_B._C. to. the 1st century_B. C.° and the Nyaya system, according to Dr. H. Ui and myself, formed its school sometime in the 2nd century A. D.* Among these schools, the Mimarzns& and the Vedanta systems are only purely Vedic or Brahmanic while the other systems, in my opinion, are not of a Vedic origin but ““t A Guide to Sénchi, Sir John Marshall, p. 10, *Subganam raje.” _ ? Dynasties of the Kali Age of Pargiter, p. 71. 8 This and allied points I will fully discuss when dealing with the Indian philosophy in future. , * Dr. A. Of s translation of Nyayapravefatarka-6istra from Chinese to Japaneses, p. 46. INTRODUCTORY NOTE 23. originally belonged, nevertheless, to Aryan thought outside the Vedic circle. However, afterwards, these latter were Brihmanized and regarded as pure Brahmanical thought. From Brahmanical source as well as from Buddhist works we come to know that the six systems of Hindu philosophy were in a much flourishing condition at the time of the. later Andhra and Gupta Kings. That is exactly the time .of Nagarjuna, Aryadeva of Madhyamika school, Maitreyandtha, Asanga and Vasubandhu of Yogicara school. If we now look at Nagarjuna’s: Dasabhtimi- vibhas&-sastra we find the names.of Siiakbya and Yoga mentioned,’ and in his EkaSloka-sastra we meet the names of Kapila and Ulika,® and in his Prajidparamita-sastra reference is made to the doctrines of the Sarnkhya system. And in his Dvadasanikaya-sastra also we come across the term ‘ Satkarya’ which indicates the doctrine of the Samkhya Again, in the Satyasiddhi-saistra of Harivarman who flourished about 260 or 280 A. D. and was a later contemporary of Nagarjuna, mention has been made of the Vaisesika, the Sarnkhya and the Nyayd systems.’ In the Upayakausalyahridaya-sastra which deal: much with the Buddhist Nyadya system, the names o!