MAHAYANA BUDDHISM

In the first half of the first millennium ce, a new strand of Buddhism gradually emerged in China and India.11 This new strand was called Mahayana (greater vehicle) Buddhism. Mahayana Buddhists referred to earlier forms of Buddhism as Hinayana (lesser vehicle). Since Hinayana was a somewhat derogative term, here I use the term “early Buddhism” to refer to the Buddhist traditions that predated and coexisted with Mahayana Buddhism in India. Whereas early Buddhism focused on the life, and previous lives, of the Buddha himself, Mahayana Buddhism added several other incarnations of the Buddha as well as numerous other Bodhisattvas. Bodhisattvas were beings who had achieved enlightenment but, unlike the historical Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama) of early Buddhism, some Bodhisattvas (e. g., Avalokiteshvara) delayed final enlightenment in order to assist all beings in their own attainment of salvation. Where early Buddhists believed the Buddha had attained nirvana and left this world behind, Mahayana Buddhists understood the Buddha and other Bodhisattvas to be continuing, compassionate presences. In this sense, Mahayana Buddhists viewed the Buddha and the Bodhisattvas as more active and immediate than early Buddhists.

Mahayana thought and scripture emerged slowly over several centuries. In his account of his travels in India in the early fifth century GE, the Chinese pilgrim Faxian noted that while Mahayana and early Buddhism were more or less popular in different regions, both were practiced in most regions and, critically, Mahayana and early Buddhists often lived within the same monasteries. Mahayana Buddhism was not a single, coherent body of thought that emerged at a specific time and place. For this reason, it is not possible to provide a simple description of the principles of Mahayana Buddhism that differentiate it from earlier Buddhist traditions, though, with time, the differences between Mahayana and earlier Buddhist traditions become more pronounced.

Many of the foundational concepts of early Mahayana Buddhism are found in several texts, collectively known as the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. While some argue that the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras were authored in the first few centuries bge, modern scholars place them in the first half of the first millennium GE (Lopez 2001). In either case, the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras were later additions to the Buddhist canon, and marked the beginnings of what became Mahayana Buddhism. Though they are later additions to the Buddhist canon, Mahayana texts were presented as faithful accounts of the Buddha’s sermons. This seeming discrepancy was explained through calls to a set of secret sermons and texts, hidden from the Buddha’s followers, only to be rediscovered when the sangha was ready for these more advanced teachings. Thus, various Perfection of Wisdom Sutras were said to be hidden in caves, placed in relic caskets at the bottom of the sea, or divinely revealed to their authors.

[T]he Perfection of Wisdom texts were not systematic treatises that set forth philosophical points and doctrinal categories in a straightforward manner. Instead, they strike the modern reader as having something of the nature of revelations, bold pronouncements proclaimed with certainty rather than speculative arguments developed in a linear fashion. The perfection of wisdom that the sutras repeatedly praised, rather than presented, was the knowledge of emptiness (sunyata). To see that all phenomena are empty is to see the truth. (Lopez 2001:27)

Among the more important of the early proponents of doctrine of emptiness was Nagarjuna. Though his biography is poorly known, most modern scholars believe he lived in the first and second centuries ce, perhaps in South India. He is credited with numerous texts, including the Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Stanzas and the Treatise on the Middle Way. Both of these texts are extremely complex and cryptic, resulting in numerous Buddhist commentaries and an extensive academic study that cannot be suitably addressed here.12 Perhaps the most concise explanation of emptiness can be found in the Heart Sutra (Lopez 1988, 1996), a short work that has become the most popular and common sutra of Mahayana Buddhism (see Box 5.1). Though still complex, the Heart Sutra shows that the recognition that everything, including the self, is empty is a prerequisite for the attainment of nirvana. As such, the development of Mahayana Buddhism marked a shift in the degree of philosophical abstraction over and above the forms of Buddhism that had preceded it.

In the centuries after the creation of the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, Mahayana scholars also began arguing that people have an innate Buddha-nature—an inner Buddha consciousness yet to be discovered. Through the guidance of Bodhisattvas, prominent monks, and the discovery of the Buddha-nature, Mahayana Buddhists saw a faster and more universal path to enlightenment. This view, in at least an abstract sense, also favored more ascetic and meditative practices. That is, if people already have an innate Buddha-nature, the path to enlightenment is ultimately a path of self-discovery. This explains, in part, the emphasis on asceticism within early Mahayana texts—though, as discussed below, this romantic view of asceticism was not commonly practiced in the second through

Box 5.1

THE BHAGAVATI HEART OF THE PERFECTION OF WISDOM SUTRA

— (Lopez 1996:vii-viii)

Thus did I hear. At one time the Bhagavan [Lord Buddha] was abiding at Vulture Peak in Rajagrha with a great assembly of monks and a great assembly of bodhisattvas. At that time, the Bhagavan entered into a samadhi on the categories of phenomena called “perception of the profound.” Also at that time, the bodhisattva, the mahasattva, the noble Avalokitesvara beheld the practice of the profound perfection of wisdom and saw that those five aggregates also are empty of intrinsic existence. Then, by the power of the Buddha, the venerable Sariputra said this to the bodhisattva, the mahasattva, the noble Avalokitesvara, “How should a son of good lineage who wishes to practice the profound perfection of wisdom train?” He said that and the bodhisattva, the mahasattva, the noble Avalokitesvara said this to the venerable Sariputra, “Sariputra, a son of good lineage or a daughter of good lineage who wishes to practice the profound perfection of wisdom should perceive things in this way: form is empty; emptiness is form. Emptiness is not other than form; form is not other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, discrimination, conditioning factors, and consciousnesses are empty. Therefore. Sariputra, all phenomena are empty, without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless, nor stainless, undiminished, unfilled. Therefore, Sariputra, in emptiness there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no conditioning factors, no consciousnesses, no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object of touch, no phenomenon, no eye constituent up to and including no mental consciousness constituent, no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance, no aging and death up to and including no extinction of aging and death. In the same way, no suffering, origin, cessation, path, no wisdom, no attainment, no nonattainment. Therefore, Saliputra, because bodhisattvas have no attainment, they rely on and abide in the perfection of wisdom; because their minds are without obstruction, they have no fear. They pass completely beyond error and go to the fulfillment of nirvana. All the Buddhas who abide in the three times have fully awakened into unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment in dependence on the perfection of wisdom. Therefore, the mantra of the perfection of wisdom is the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequaled, the mantra that completely pacifies all suffering. Because it is not false, it should be known to be true. The mantra of the perfection of wisdom is stated thus: [om] gate gate paragate para-samgate bodhi svaha. Sariputra, a bodhisattva mahasattva should train in

(continued)

The profound perfection of wisdom in that way.” Then the Bhagavan rose from samadhi and said, “Well done” to the bodhisattva, the mahasattva, the noble Avalokitesvara. “Well done, well done, child of good lineage, it is like that. It is like that; the practice of the profound perfection of wisdom is just as you have taught it. Even the tathagatas admire it.” The Bhagavan having so spoken, the venerable Sariputra, the bodhisattva, the mahasattva, the noble Avalokitesvara, and all those surrounding, and the entire world, the gods, humans, demigods, and gandharvas, admire and praised the speech of the Bhagavan.

Sixth centuries GE. In later centuries, with the rise of Tantric Buddhism (Chapter 7), the idea of an innate Buddha-nature became progressively more central to Buddhist thought, with a corresponding increase in the number of Buddhist ascetics.

There is substantial debate over the geographic origins of Mahayana Buddhism in India. Some argue that Mahayana Buddhism emerged in the mainstream Buddhist monasteries of the Gangetic Plain in the first through fifth centuries GE, spreading outward from there (Lamotte 1988). More recently, Schopen (2005:ch. 1) has argued that Mahayana Buddhism initially developed among small factions of the sangha living in the peripheries of India, in the Northwest, the Northeast, and peninsular India. For example, some of the biographies of Nagarjuna claim he lived in South India, well outside the Buddhist heartland in the Gangetic Plain. The rhetoric of these fringe monastics, Schopen (2005:14) argues, reveal them to be “a small, isolated, embattled minority group struggling for recognition” from the settled monastic communities. Using inscriptional evidence from the second through sixth centuries GE, Schopen argues that fringe monastics, like Nagarjuna, initially developed and promoted Mahayana Buddhism, with the mainstream monasteries in the Buddhist heartland only adopting Mahayana teachings beginning in the sixth century GE (Schopen 2005:ch. 1). Whether emerging in the Gangetic Plain or in the peripheries, the shift from early Buddhism to Mahayana Buddhism was a gradual process, taking several centuries. The debate centers on the degree of marginalization that early Mahayana practitioners in India faced in the first through fifth centuries GE.

A final element of many early Mahayana sutras are their frequent calls for the abandonment of monasteries and a return to the more ascetic life of the forest. In part, this call to asceticism can be viewed as a way that early Mahayana Buddhists discredited the arguments of the mainstream by pointing to the corrupting influences of wealth, land, honors, and even wives on the mainstream sangha (Schopen 2005:15).

It is clear that by the time of the final composition of the mainstream Vinayas. . . ascetic practices were—for the compilers—all but dead letter. . . .

It is, however, equally clear that some strands of early Mahayana sutra literature were attempting to reinvent, revitalize, or resurrect these extreme ascetic practices.

While it is clear that early Mahayana sutras celebrated asceticism, advocating life in the forest and the renunciation of the corrupt life of the mainstream monasteries, it less clear whether early Mahayana Buddhists actually abandoned life in the monastery for the solitary lives of the ascetics. Phrased more simply, was the asceticism of Mahayana texts real or ideal? These questions can only be addressed through examinations of the material evidence of Buddhism, the archaeological and iconographic evidence of Buddhist practice in the second through sixth centuries GE.