MahÄyÄna (Sanskrit: महायान mahÄyÄna, literally the "Great Vehicle") is one of two (or three, under some classifications) main existing branches of Buddhism and a term for classification of Buddhist philosophies and practice. The Buddhist tradition of Vajrayana is sometimes classified as a part of Mahayana Buddhism, but some scholars may consider it as a different branch altogether.
According to the teachings of MahÄyÄna traditions, "MahÄyÄna" also refers to the path of the Bodhisattva seeking complete enlightenment for the benefit of all sentient beings, also called "BodhisattvayÄna", or the "Bodhisattva Vehicle." A bodhisattva who has accomplished this goal is called a samyaksaá¹buddha, or "fully enlightened Buddha." A samyaksaá¹buddha can establish the Dharma and lead disciples to enlightenment.
The MahÄyÄna tradition is the largest major tradition of Buddhism existing today, with 53.2% of practitioners, compared to 35.8% for TheravÄda and 5.7% for VajrayÄna in 2010.
In the course of its history, MahÄyÄna Buddhism spread from India to various other Asian countries such as Bangladesh, China, Japan, Vietnam, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Tibet, Bhutan, Malaysia, and Mongolia. Major traditions of MahÄyÄna Buddhism today include Zen, Chinese Chán, Pure Land, Tiantai, and Nichiren. It may also include the VajrayÄna Buddhist traditions of Shingon, Tendai and Tibetan Buddhism, which add esoteric teachings to the MahÄyÄna tradition.
Etymology
According to Jan Nattier, the term MahÄyÄna ("Great Vehicle") was originally an honorary synonym for BodhisattvayÄna ("Bodhisattva Vehicle")Â â" the vehicle of a bodhisattva seeking buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings. The term MahÄyÄna was therefore formed independently at an early date as a synonym for the path and the teachings of the bodhisattvas. Since it was simply an honorary term for BodhisattvayÄna, the creation of the term MahÄyÄna and its application to BodhisattvayÄna did not represent a significant turning point in the development of a MahÄyÄna tradition.
The earliest MahÄyÄna texts often use the term MahÄyÄna as a synonym for BodhisattvayÄna, but the term HÄ«nayÄna is comparatively rare in the earliest sources. The presumed dichotomy between MahÄyÄna and HÄ«nayÄna can be deceptive, as the two terms were not actually formed in relation to one another in the same era.
Among the earliest and most important references to the term MahÄyÄna are those that occur in the Lotus SÅ«tra (Skt. Saddharma Puá¹á¸arÄ«ka SÅ«tra) dating between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE. Seishi Karashima has suggested that the term first used in an earlier GandhÄri Prakrit version of the Lotus SÅ«tra was not the term mahÄyÄna but the Prakrit word mahÄjÄna in the sense of mahÄjñÄna (great knowing). At a later stage when the early Prakrit word was converted into Sanskrit, this mahÄjÄna, being phonetically ambivalent, was mistakenly converted into mahÄyÄna, possibly due to what may have been a double meaning in the famous Parable of the Burning House, which talks of three vehicles or carts (Skt: yÄna).
History
Origins
The origins of MahÄyÄna are still not completely understood. The earliest Western views of MahÄyÄna assumed that it existed as a separate school in competition with the so-called "HÄ«nayÄna" schools. Due to the veneration of buddhas and bodhisattvas, MahÄyÄna was often interpreted as a more devotional, lay-inspired form of Buddhism, with supposed origins in stÅ«pa veneration, or by making parallels with the history of the European Protestant Reformation. These views have been largely dismissed in modern times in light of a much broader range of early texts that are now available. These earliest MahÄyÄna texts often depict strict adherence to the path of a bodhisattva, and engagement in the ascetic ideal of a monastic life in the wilderness, akin to the ideas expressed in the Rhinoceros SÅ«tra. The old views of MahÄyÄna as a separate lay-inspired and devotional sect are now largely dismissed as misguided and wrong on all counts.
The earliest textual evidence of "MahÄyÄna" comes from sÅ«tras originating around the beginning of the common era. Jan Nattier has noted that in some of the earliest MahÄyÄna texts such as the Ugraparipá¹ccha SÅ«tra use the term "MahÄyÄna", yet there is no doctrinal difference between MahÄyÄna in this context and the early schools, and that "MahÄyÄna" referred rather to the rigorous emulation of Gautama Buddha in the path of a bodhisattva seeking to become a fully enlightened buddha.
There is also no evidence that MahÄyÄna ever referred to a separate formal school or sect of Buddhism, but rather that it existed as a certain set of ideals, and later doctrines, for bodhisattvas. Paul Williams has also noted that the MahÄyÄna never had nor ever attempted to have a separate Vinaya or ordination lineage from the early schools of Buddhism, and therefore each bhiká¹£u or bhiká¹£uá¹Ä« adhering to the MahÄyÄna formally belonged to an early school. Membership in these nikÄyas, or monastic sects, continues today with the Dharmaguptaka nikÄya in East Asia, and the MÅ«lasarvÄstivÄda nikÄya in Tibetan Buddhism. Therefore MahÄyÄna was never a separate rival sect of the early schools. Paul Harrison clarifies that while monastic MahÄyÄnists belonged to a nikÄya, not all members of a nikÄya were MahÄyÄnists. From Chinese monks visiting India, we now know that both MahÄyÄna and non-MahÄyÄna monks in India often lived in the same monasteries side by side.
The Chinese monk Yijing who visited India in the 7th century CE, distinguishes MahÄyÄna from HÄ«nayÄna as follows:
Both adopt one and the same Vinaya, and they have in common the prohibitions of the five offences, and also the practice of the Four Noble Truths. Those who venerate the bodhisattvas and read the Mahayana sÅ«tras are called the MahÄyÄnists, while those who do not perform these are called the HÄ«nayÄnists.
Much of the early extant evidence for the origins of MahÄyÄna comes from early Chinese translations of MahÄyÄna texts. These MahÄyÄna teachings were first propagated into China by Lokaká¹£ema, the first translator of MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras into Chinese during the 2nd century CE.
Earliest MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras
Several scholars have suggested that the PrajñÄpÄramitÄ sÅ«tras, which are among the earliest MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras, developed among the MahÄsÄá¹ghika along the Ká¹á¹£á¹a River in the Ändhra region of South India.
The earliest MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras to include the very first versions of the PrajñÄpÄramitÄ genre, along with texts concerning Aká¹£obhya Buddha, which were probably written down in the 1st century BCE in the south of India. Guang Xing states, "Several scholars have suggested that the PrajñÄpÄramitÄ probably developed among the MahÄsÄá¹ghikas in southern India, in the Ändhra country, on the Ká¹á¹£á¹a River." A.K. Warder believes that "the MahÄyÄna originated in the south of India and almost certainly in the Ändhra country."
Anthony Barber and Sree Padma note that "historians of Buddhist thought have been aware for quite some time that such pivotally important Mahayana Buddhist thinkers as NÄgÄrjuna, Dignaga, CandrakÄ«rti, Äryadeva, and Bhavaviveka, among many others, formulated their theories while living in Buddhist communities in Ändhra." They note that the ancient Buddhist sites in the lower Ká¹á¹£á¹a Valley, including Amaravati, NÄgÄrjunakoá¹á¸Ä and Jaggayyapeá¹a "can be traced to at least the third century BCE, if not earlier." Akira Hirakawa notes the "evidence suggests that many Early Mahayana scriptures originated in South India."
Some scholars think that the earliest MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras were mainly composed in the south of India, and later the activity of writing additional scriptures was continued in the north. However, the assumption that the presence of an evolving body of MahÄyÄna scriptures implies the contemporaneous existence of distinct religious movement called "MahÄyÄna", may be a serious misstep. Some scholars further speculate that the PrajñÄpÄramitÄ sÅ«tras were written in response to the ultrarealism of abhidharma.
Some early MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras were translated by the Kuá¹£Äá¹a monk Lokaká¹£ema, who came to China from the kingdom of GandhÄra. His first translations to Chinese were made in the Chinese capital of Luoyang between 178 and 189 CE. Some MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras translated during the 2nd century CE include the following:
- Aá¹£á¹asÄhasrikÄ PrajñÄpÄramitÄ SÅ«tra
- VimalakÄ«rti NirdeÅa SÅ«tra
- Larger SukhÄvatÄ«vyÅ«ha SÅ«tra
- Aká¹£obhyatathÄgatasyavyÅ«ha SÅ«tra
- Ugraparipá¹ccha SÅ«tra
- MañjuÅrÄ«paripá¹cchÄ SÅ«tra
- DrumakinnararÄjaparipá¹cchÄ SÅ«tra
- ÅÅ«raá¹ gama SamÄdhi SÅ«tra
- BhadrapÄla SÅ«tra
- AjÄtaÅatrukauká¹tyavinodana SÅ«tra
- KÄÅyapaparivarta SÅ«tra
- LokÄnuvartana SÅ«tra
- An early sÅ«tra connected to the Avataá¹saka SÅ«tra
This corpus of texts often emphasizes ascetic practices and forest dwelling, absorbed in states of meditative concentration.
Harrison points to the enthusiasm in the Lokaká¹£ema sÅ«tra corpus for the extra ascetic practices, for dwelling in the forest, and above all for states of meditative absorption (samÄdhi). Meditation and meditative states seem to have occupied a central place in early MahÄyÄna, certainly because of their spiritual efficacy but also because they may have given access to fresh revelations and inspiration.
Earliest inscriptions
The earliest stone inscription containing a recognizably MahÄyÄna formulation and a mention of the Buddha AmitÄbha was found in the Indian subcontinent in Mathura, and dated to around 180 CE. Remains of a statue of a Buddha bear the BrÄhmÄ« inscription: "Made in the year 28 of the reign of King Huviá¹£ka, ... for the Blessed One, the Buddha AmitÄbha." There is also some evidence that Emperor Huviá¹£ka himself was a follower of MahÄyÄna Buddhism, and a Sanskrit manuscript fragment in the Schøyen Collection describes Huviá¹£ka as having "set forth in the MahÄyÄna." Evidence of the name "MahÄyÄna" in Indian inscriptions in the period before the 5th century is very limited in comparison to the multiplicity of MahÄyÄna writings transmitted from Central Asia to China at that time.
Early MahÄyÄna Buddhism
During the period of early MahÄyÄna Buddhism, four major types of thought developed: MÄdhyamaka, YogÄcÄra, Buddha Nature (TathÄgatagarbha), and Buddhist Logic as the last and most recent. In India, the two main philosophical schools of the MahÄyÄna were the MÄdhyamaka and the later YogÄcÄra. During the Kushan Empire, Mahayana Buddhism teachings encouraged societies to give generous donations to the Buddhist monasteries, which gave the people "religious merits".
Earlier stage forms of MahÄyÄna such as the doctrines of PrajñÄpÄramitÄ, YogÄcÄra, Buddha Nature, and the Pure Land teachings are still popular in East Asia. In some cases these have spawned new developments, while in others they are treated in the more traditional syncretic manner. Paul Williams has noted that in this tradition in the Far East, primacy has always been given to study of the sÅ«tras.
Late MahÄyÄna Buddhism
Late stage forms of MahÄyÄna Buddhism in India are found largely in the schools of Esoteric Buddhism. These were replaced in India and Central Asia after the early millennium by Islam (Sufism etc.) and Hinduism, and in south-east Asia by TheravÄda Buddhism from Sri Lanka and Islam. They continue to exist in certain regions of the Himalayas. In contrast to the East Asian traditions, there has been a strong tendency in Tibetan Buddhism and the Himalayan traditions to approach the sÅ«tras indirectly through the medium of exegetical treatises if at all.
Doctrine
Few things can be said with certainty about MahÄyÄna Buddhism, especially its early Indian form, other than that the Buddhism practiced in China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Korea, Tibet, and Japan is MahÄyÄna Buddhism. MahÄyÄna can be described as a loosely bound collection of many teachings with large and expansive doctrines that are able to exist simultaneously.
MahÄyÄna constitutes an inclusive tradition characterized by plurality and the adoption of new MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras in addition to the earlier Ägama texts. MahÄyÄna sees itself as penetrating further and more profoundly into the Buddha's Dharma. An Indian commentary on the MahÄyÄnasaá¹graha, entitled Vivá¹taguhyÄrthapiá¹á¸avyÄkhyÄ, gives a classification of teachings according to the capabilities of the audience:
[A]ccording to disciples' grades, the Dharma is [classified as] inferior and superior. For example, the inferior was taught to the merchants Trapuá¹£a and Ballika because they were ordinary men; the middle was taught to the group of five because they were at the stage of saints; the eightfold PrajñÄpÄramitÄs were taught to bodhisattvas, and [the PrajñÄpÄramitÄs] are superior in eliminating conceptually imagined forms.
There is also a tendency in MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras to regard adherence to these sÅ«tras as generating spiritual benefits greater than those that arise from being a follower of the non-MahÄyÄna approaches to Dharma. Thus the ÅrÄ«mÄlÄdevÄ« SÅ«tra claims that the Buddha said that devotion to MahÄyÄna is inherently superior in its virtues to the following the ÅrÄvaka or pratyekabuddha paths.
The fundamental principles of MahÄyÄna doctrine were based on the possibility of universal liberation from suffering for all beings (hence the "Great Vehicle") and the existence of buddhas and bodhisattvas embodying Buddha Nature. The Pure Land school of MahÄyÄna simplifies the expression of faith by allowing salvation to be alternatively obtained through the grace of the AmitÄbha Buddha by having faith and devoting oneself to mindfulness of the Buddha. This devotional lifestyle of Buddhism has greatly contributed to the success of MahÄyÄna in East Asia, where spiritual elements traditionally relied upon mindfulness of the Buddha, mantras and dhÄraá¹Ä«s, and reading of MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras. In Chinese Buddhism, most monks, let alone lay people, practice Pure Land, some combining it with Chán (Zen).
Most MahÄyÄna schools believe in supernatural bodhisattvas who devote themselves to the perfections (Skt. pÄramitÄ), ultimate knowledge (Skt. sarvajñÄna), and the liberation of all sentient beings. In MahÄyÄna, the Buddha is seen as the ultimate, highest being, present in all times, in all beings, and in all places, and the bodhisattvas come to represent the universal ideal of altruistic excellence.
Bodhisattva
The MahÄyÄna tradition holds that pursuing only the release from suffering and attainment of NirvÄá¹a is too narrow an aspiration, because it lacks the motivation of actively resolving to liberate all other sentient beings from Saá¹sÄra. One who engages in this path is called a bodhisattva. Bodhisattvas could reach nirvana, but they believed it was more important to help others on their path of finding nirvana rather than committing fully to nirvana themselves.
The defining characteristic of a bodhisattva is bodhicitta, the intention to achieve omniscient Buddhahood (Trikaya) as fast as possible, so that one may benefit infinite sentient beings. Sometimes the term bodhisattva is used more restrictively to refer to those sentient beings on the grounds. As Ananda Coomaraswamy notes, "The most essential part of the Mahayana is its emphasis on the Bodhisattva ideal, which replaces that of the arhat, or ranks before it." According to MahÄyÄna teachings, being a high-level bodhisattva involves possessing a mind of great compassion and transcendent wisdom (Skt. prajñÄ) to realize the reality of inherent emptiness and dependent origination. MahÄyÄna teaches that the practitioner will finally realize the attainment of Buddhahood.
Six perfections (Skt. pÄramitÄ) are traditionally required for bodhisattvas:
- dÄna-pÄramitÄ: the perfection of giving
- ÅÄ«la-pÄramitÄ: the perfection on behavior and discipline
- ká¹£Änti-pÄramitÄ: the perfection of forbearance
- vÄ«rya-pÄramitÄ: the perfection of vigor and diligence
- dhyÄna-pÄramitÄ: the perfection of meditation
- prajñÄ-pÄramitÄ: the perfection of transcendent wisdom
Expedient means
Expedient means (Skt. upÄya) is found in the Lotus Sutra, one of the earliest dated MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras, and is accepted in all MahÄyÄna schools of thought. It is any effective method that aids awakening. It does not necessarily mean that some particular method is "untrue" but is simply any means or stratagem that is conducive to spiritual growth and leads beings to awakening and nirvana. Expedient means could thus be certain motivational words for a particular listener or even the noble eightfold path itself. Basic Buddhism (what MahÄyÄna would term ÅravakayÄna or pratyekabuddhayÄna) is an expedient method for helping people begin the noble Buddhist path and advance quite far. But the path is not wholly traversed, according to some MahÄyÄna schools, until the practitioner has striven for and attained Buddhahood for the liberation of all other sentient beings from suffering.
Some scholars have stated that the exercise of expedient means, "the ability to adapt one's message to the audience, is also of enormous importance in the PÄli canon." In fact the PÄli term upÄya-kosalla does occur in the PÄli Canon, in the Sangiti Sutta of the Digha NikÄya.
Liberation
MahÄyÄna Buddhism includes a rich cosmology, with various Buddhas and bodhisattvas residing in different worlds and buddha-realms. The concept of the three bodies (trikÄya) supports these constructions, making the Buddha himself a transcendental figure. Dr. Guang Xing describes the MahÄyÄna Buddha as "an omnipotent divinity endowed with numerous supernatural attributes and qualities ...[He] is described almost as an omnipotent and almighty godhead."
Under various conditions, the realms Buddha presides over could be attained by devotees after their death so, when reborn, they could strive towards buddhahood in the best possible conditions. Depending on the sect, liberation into a buddha-realm can be obtained by faith, visualization, or sometimes even by the repetition of Buddha's name. These practices are common in Pure Land Buddhism.
Buddha nature
Buddha-nature, Buddha-dhatu or Buddha Principle (Skt: Buddha-dhÄtu, TathÄgatagarbha; Jap: Bussho), is taught differently in various Mahayana Buddhism traditions. Broadly speaking Buddha-nature is concerned with ascertaining what allows sentient beings to become Buddhas. The term, Buddha nature, is a translation of the Sanskrit coinage, 'Buddha-dhÄtu', which seems first to have appeared in the MahÄyÄna MahÄparinirvÄá¹a SÅ«tra, where it refers to "a sacred nature that is the basis for [beings'] becoming buddhas," and where it is also spoken of as the 'Self' (atman).
It is called TathÄgatagarbha Buddha-dhÄtu at the stage of sentient beings because it is covered with defilements, and it is called DharmakÄya at the stage of Buddhahood, because its pure nature is revealed.
The teaching of a "Buddha nature" (Skt. tathÄgatagarbha) may be based on the "luminous mind" concept found in the Ägamas. The essential idea, articulated in the Buddha nature sÅ«tras, but not accepted by all MahÄyÄnists, is that no being is without a concealed but indestructible interior link to the awakening of bodhi and that this link is an uncreated element (dhÄtu) or principle deep inside each being, which constitutes the deathless, diamond-like "essence of the self". The MahÄyÄna MahÄparinirvÄá¹a SÅ«tra states: "The essence of the Self (Ätman) is the subtle Buddha nature..." while the later Laá¹ kÄvatÄra SÅ«tra states that the Buddha nature might be taken to be self (Ätman), but it is not. In the sagathakam section of that same sutra, however, the Tathagatagarbha as the Self is not denied, but affirmed: "The Atma [Self] characterised with purity is the state of self-realization; this is the Tathagata's Womb (garbha), which does not belong to the realm of the theorisers." In the Buddha nature class of sÅ«tras, the word "self" (Ätman) is used in a way defined by and specific to these sÅ«tras. (See Atman (Buddhism).)
According to some scholars, the Buddha nature discussed in some MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras does not represent a substantial self (Ätman); rather, it is a positive language and expression of emptiness (ÅÅ«nyatÄ) and represents the potentiality to realize Buddhahood through Buddhist practices. It is the "true self" in representing the innate aspect of the individual that makes actualizing the ultimate personality possible.
The actual "seeing and knowing" of this Buddha essence is said to usher in nirvanic liberation. This Buddha essence or "Buddha nature" is stated to be found in every single person, ghost, god and sentient being. In the Buddha nature sÅ«tras, the Buddha is portrayed as describing the Buddha essence as uncreated, deathless and ultimately beyond rational grasping or conceptualisation. Yet, it is this already real and present, hidden internal element of awakeness (bodhi) that, according to the Buddha nature sÅ«tras, prompts beings to seek liberation from worldly suffering, and lets them attain the spotless bliss that lies at the heart of their being. Once the veils of negative thoughts, feelings, and unwholesome behaviour (the kleÅas) are eliminated from the mind and character, the indwelling Buddha principle (Buddha-dhÄtu: Buddha nature) can shine forth unimpededly and transform the seer into a Buddha.
Prior to the period of these sÅ«tras, MahÄyÄna metaphysics was dominated by teachings on emptiness, in the form of Madhyamaka philosophy. The language used by this approach is primarily negative, and the Buddha nature genre of sÅ«tras can be seen as an attempt to state orthodox Buddhist teachings of dependent origination and on the mysterious reality of nirvana using positive language instead, to prevent people from being turned away from Buddhism by a false impression of nihilism. In these sÅ«tras the perfection of the wisdom of not-self is stated to be the true self; the ultimate goal of the path is then characterized using a range of positive language that had been used in Indian philosophy previously by essentialist philosophers, but was now transmuted into a new Buddhist vocabulary that described a being who has successfully completed the Buddhist path.
A different view is propounded by Tathagatagarbha specialist, Michael Zimmermann, who sees key Buddha-nature sutras such as the Nirvana Sutra and the Tathagatagarbha Sutra, as well as the Lankavatara Sutra, enunciating an affirmative vision of an eternal, indestructible Buddhic Self. Zimmermann observes:
the existence of an eternal, imperishable self, that is, buddhahood, is definitely the basic point of the TGS [Tathagatagarbha Sutra] ... the Mahaparinirvanasutra and the Lankavatarasutra characterize the tathagatagarbha explicitly as atman [Self].
The Uttaratantra (an exegetical treatise on Buddha nature) sees Buddha nature not as caused and conditioned (saá¹ská¹ta), but as eternal, uncaused, unconditioned, and incapable of being destroyed, although temporarily concealed within worldly beings by adventitious defilements. According to C. D. Sebastian, the Uttaratantra's reference to a transcendental self (Ätma-pÄramitÄ) should be understood as "the unique essence of the universe," thus the universal and immanent essence of Buddha nature is the same throughout time and space.
Scriptures
Ägamas
MahÄyÄna Buddhism takes the basic teachings of the Buddha as recorded in early scriptures as the starting point of its teachings, such as those concerning karma and rebirth, anÄtman, emptiness, dependent origination, and the Four Noble Truths. MahÄyÄna Buddhists in East Asia have traditionally studied these teachings in the Ägamas preserved in the Chinese Buddhist canon. "Ägama" is the term used by those traditional Buddhist schools in India who employed Sanskrit for their basic canon. These correspond to the NikÄyas used by the TheravÄda school. The surviving Ägamas in Chinese translation belong to at least two schools, while most of the Ägamas teachings were never translated into Tibetan.
In addition to accepting the essential scriptures of the early Buddhist schools as valid, MahÄyÄna Buddhism maintains large collections of sÅ«tras that are not used or recognized by the TheravÄda school. These were not recognized by some individuals in the early Buddhist schools. In other cases, Buddhist communities were divided along these doctrinal lines. In MahÄyÄna Buddhism, the MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras are often given greater authority than the Ägamas. The first of these MahÄyÄna-specific writings were written probably around the 1st century BCE or 1st century CE.
In the 4th century MahÄyÄna abhidharma work Abhidharmasamuccaya, Asaá¹ ga refers to the collection which contains the Ägamas as the ÅrÄvakapiá¹aka and associates it with the ÅrÄvakas and pratyekabuddhas. Asaá¹ ga classifies the MahÄyÄna sÅ«tras as belonging to the Bodhisattvapiá¹aka, which is designated as the collection of teachings for bodhisattvas.
Turnings of the Dharma Wheel
Dating back at least to the Saá¹dhinirmocana SÅ«tra is a classification of the corpus of Buddhism into three categories, based on ways of understanding the nature of reality, known as the "Three Turnings of the Dharma Wheel". According to this view, there were three such "turnings":
- In the first turning, the Buddha taught the Four Noble Truths at Varanasi for those in the Åravaka vehicle. It is described as marvelous and wonderful, but requiring interpretation and occasioning controversy. The doctrines of the first turning are exemplified in the Dharmacakra Pravartana SÅ«tra. This turning represents the earliest phase of the Buddhist teachings and the earliest period in the history of Buddhism.
- In the second turning, the Buddha taught the MahÄyÄna teachings to the bodhisattvas, teaching that all phenomena have no-essence, no arising, no passing away, are originally quiescent, and essentially in cessation. This turning is also described as marvelous and wonderful, but requiring interpretation and occasioning controversy. Doctrine of the second turning is established in the PrajñÄpÄramitÄ teachings, first put into writing around 100 BCE. In Indian philosophical schools, it is exemplified by the MÄdhyamaka school of NÄgÄrjuna.
- In the third turning, the Buddha taught similar teachings to the second turning, but for everyone in the three vehicles, including all the Åravakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas. These were meant to be completely explicit teachings in their entire detail, for which interpretations would not be necessary, and controversy would not occur. These teachings were established by the Saá¹dhinirmocana SÅ«tra as early as the 1st or 2nd century CE. In the Indian philosophical schools, the third turning is exemplified by the YogÄcÄra school of Asaá¹ ga and Vasubandhu.
Some traditions of Tibetan Buddhism consider the teachings of Esoteric Buddhism and VajrayÄna to be the third turning of the Dharma Wheel. Tibetan teachers, particularly of the Gelugpa school, regard the second turning as the highest teaching, due to their particular interpretation of YogÄcÄra doctrine. The Buddha Nature teachings are normally included in the third turning of the wheel. The Chinese tradition has a different scheme.
The Chinese scholar T'ien-T'ai believed the Buddha taught over Five Periods. These are:
- The Flower Garland Period.
- The Agama Period.
- The Correct and Equal Period (provisional Mahayana Sutras, including the Amida, Mahavairochana and Vimalakirti Sutras).
- The Wisdom Period (Perfection of Wisdom Sutras).
- The Lotus and Nirvana Period (when Shakyamuni taught from the standpoint of his Enlightenment).
Early canon
Scholars have noted that many key MahÄyÄna ideas are closely connected to the earliest texts of Buddhism. The seminal work of MahÄyÄna philosophy, NÄgÄrjuna's MÅ«lamadhyamakakÄrikÄ, mentions the canon's KatyÄyana SÅ«tra (SA 301) by name, and may be an extended commentary on that work. NÄgÄrjuna systematized the MÄdhyamaka school of MahÄyÄna philosophy. He may have arrived at his positions from a desire to achieve a consistent exegesis of the Buddha's doctrine as recorded in the canon. In his eyes the Buddha was not merely a forerunner, but the very founder of the MÄdhyamaka system. NÄgÄrjuna also referred to a passage in the canon regarding "nirvanic consciousness" in two different works.
YogÄcÄra, the other prominent MahÄyÄna school in dialectic with the MÄdhyamaka school, gave a special significance to the canon's Lesser Discourse on Emptiness (MA 190). A passage there (which the discourse itself emphasizes) is often quoted in later YogÄcÄra texts as a true definition of emptiness. According to Walpola Rahula, the thought presented in the YogÄcÄra school's Abhidharma-samuccaya is undeniably closer to that of the Pali Nikayas than is that of the Theravadin Abhidhamma.
Both the MÄdhyamikas and the YogÄcÄrins saw themselves as preserving the Buddhist Middle Way between the extremes of nihilism (everything as unreal) and substantialism (substantial entities existing). The YogÄcÄrins criticized the MÄdhyamikas for tending towards nihilism, while the MÄdhyamikas criticized the YogÄcÄrins for tending towards substantialism.
Key MahÄyÄna texts introducing the concepts of bodhicitta and Buddha nature also use language parallel to passages in the canon containing the Buddha's description of "luminous mind" and may have been based on this idea.
TheravÄda school
Role of the Bodhisattva
In the early Buddhist texts, and as taught by the modern Theravada school, the goal of becoming a teaching Buddha in a future life is viewed as the aim of a small group of individuals striving to benefit future generations after the current Buddha's teachings have been lost, but in the current age there is no need for most practitioners to aspire to this goal. Theravada texts do, however, hold that this is a more perfectly virtuous goal.
Paul Williams writes that some modern Theravada meditation masters in Thailand are popularly regarded as bodhisattvas.
Cholvijarn observes that prominent figures associated with the Self perspective in Thailand have often been famous outside scholarly circles as well, among the wider populace, as Buddhist meditation masters and sources of miracles and sacred amulets. Like perhaps some of the early MahÄyÄna forest hermit monks, or the later Buddhist Tantrics, they have become people of power through their meditative achievements. They are widely revered, worshipped, and held to be arhats or (note!) bodhisattvas.
TheravÄda and HÄ«nayÄna
In the 7th century, the Chinese Buddhist monk Xuanzang describes the concurrent existence of the MahÄvihara and the Abhayagiri Vihara in Sri Lanka. He refers to the monks of the MahÄvihara as the "HÄ«nayÄna Sthaviras" (Theras), and the monks of the Abhayagiri Vihara as the "MahÄyÄna Sthaviras". Xuanzang further writes:
The MahÄvihÄravÄsins reject the MahÄyÄna and practice the HÄ«nayÄna, while the AbhayagirivihÄravÄsins study both HÄ«nayÄna and MahÄyÄna teachings and propagate the Tripiá¹aka.
The modern TheravÄda school is usually described as belonging to HÄ«nayÄna. Some authors have argued that it should not be considered such from the MahÄyÄna perspective. Their view is based on a different understanding of the concept of HÄ«nayÄna. Rather than regarding the term as referring to any school of Buddhism that hasn't accepted the MahÄyÄna canon and doctrines, such as those pertaining to the role of the bodhisattva, these authors argue that the classification of a school as "HÄ«nayÄna" should be crucially dependent on the adherence to a specific phenomenological position. They point out that unlike the now-extinct SarvÄstivÄda school, which was the primary object of MahÄyÄna criticism, the TheravÄda does not claim the existence of independent entities (dharmas); in this it maintains the attitude of early Buddhism. Adherents of MahÄyÄna Buddhism disagreed with the substantialist thought of the SarvÄstivÄdins and SautrÄntikas, and in emphasizing the doctrine of emptiness, Kalupahana holds that they endeavored to preserve the early teaching. The TheravÄdins too refuted the SarvÄstivÄdins and SautrÄntikas (and other schools) on the grounds that their theories were in conflict with the non-substantialism of the canon. The TheravÄda arguments are preserved in the KathÄvatthu. According to this view, no form of real HÄ«nayÄna Buddhism survives today.
Some contemporary TheravÄdin figures have indicated a sympathetic stance toward the MahÄyÄna philosophy found in texts such as the Heart SÅ«tra (Skt. PrajñÄpÄramitÄ Há¹daya) and NÄgÄrjuna's Fundamental Stanzas on the Middle Way (Skt. MÅ«lamadhyamakakÄrikÄ).
See also
Notes
References
Sources
Further reading
- Beal (1871). Catena of Buddhist Scriptures from the Chinese, London, Trübner
- Lowenstein, Tom (1996). The Vision of the Buddha, Boston: Little Brown, ISBN 1-903296-91-9
- Lynch, Kevin (2005). The Way Of The Tiger: A Buddhist's Guide To Achieving Nirvana. Yojimbo Temple
- Schopen, G. "The inscription on the Kusan image of Amitabha and the character of the early Mahayana in India", Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 10, 1990
- Suzuki, D. T. (1914). "The Development of Mahayana Buddhism", The Monist Volume 24, Issue 4, 1914-10-01, p565-581
- Suzuki, D. T. (1908). Outline of Mahayana Buddhism, Open Court, Chicago
- Williams, Paul (1989). Mahayana Buddhism. Routledge.
External links
- Digital Dictionary of Buddhism
- Comparison of Buddhist Traditions (Mahayana - Therevada - Tibetan)
- The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra: complete text and analysis.
- Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in Mahayana Buddhism
- Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, Berkeley, translations of Mahayana sutras