In the centuries
following the death of the Buddha, the Sangha (Buddhist community) split
into various groups and subgroups; although these different traditions
generally maintained close contact with each other, the “first schism” between the Sthaviravada [Pali: Theravada] (Doctrine of the
Elders) and the Mahasangika (Great
Community) eventually hardened into a major division between two
significantly different approaches to Buddhism.
In later centuries, the term Mahayana came to denote a movement self-consciously distinct from what some of its adherents called the Hinayana,
or Lesser Vehicle, their derogatory term for the mainstream that denied
the authority of the Mahayana sutras and continued to adhere to the
goal of arhatship. But evidence from the period under consideration
here [i.e. the first century BCE to the second century CE] shows that
the authors of the early bodhisattva sutras saw the Mahayana not as a
separate social or sectarian movement, but simply as one of three
soteriological options [i.e. to become an arhat, a pratyekabuddha, or a Tathagata], all well within the traditional fold.
|
 Most
simply, the word bodhisattva can be defined as meaning “a
being headed for Buddhahood,” that is, a being in whom the aspiration
for complete enlightenment has been roused. In Mainstream [i.e.
Theravada] Buddhism, the word refers primarily
to the Buddha Gautama prior to his enlightenment (in all of his past
lives as a bodhisattva), and to the future Buddha Maitreya,
who is presently a bodhisattva, awaiting his turn for Buddhahood.
In the Mahayana, however, every sentient being can be seen as
ultimately “headed for Buddhahood” and so is potentially or actually on
the bodhisattva path. [EB, 173]
One
prominent pan-Buddhist trend during this period was the growth of the
cult of Maitreya, the next Buddha to appear in our world....The Pali
canon (DN.26) contains a brief account of the conditions leading up to
Maitreya’s
coming: Life will grow shorter as human beings become less virtuous,
culminating in a “sword-interval” when people with a life
expectancy of ten years will hunt one another like animals. A few of
them, however, will hide in the wilderness to escape slaughter, and on
emerging from their hideouts will resolve to take up a life of virtue.
The revival of virtue, over the generations, will increase the natural
human life span until it peaks at 80,000 years. At that point, human
beings will know only three diseases: desire, lack of food, and old
age. Maitreya will come to Earth, gain Awakening, and lead a Sangha
composed of thousands of monks, compared to the mere hundreds in
Sakyamuni’s....
Over the
centuries, Maitreya’s cult developed four
dimensions, corresponding to the way his devotees hoped to tap into
this presence. These dimensions can be placed under a fourfold
rubric—here/now; here/then; there/now; and
there/then. In the here/now
dimension, devotees hoped to gain visions or dreams of Maitreya here in
the present life. In some cases, simply having the vision was
considered auspicious, in line with the belief that the mere sight of a
holy figure was a blessing. In other cases, devotees would hope
to receive dharanis (mnemonic
protective spells), to hear Dharma, or to request material boons from
the vision....In the here/then
dimension, people who had difficulties practicing the Dharma under
present conditions could dedicate the merit of their current practice
to being reborn on Earth in Maitreya’s time to
practice under more favorable conditions. In the there/now dimension, devotees would
meditate or practice austerities in hopes of being taken up into the
Tusita heaven to meet with Maitreya and ask him questions about the
Dharma.....Finally, in the there/then
dimension (a variant of the here/then), devotees would make merit in
hopes of being reborn in the Tusita heaven as part of Maitreya’s
retinue, thus escaping the sword-interval and other horrors of human
degeneracy, finally returning to Earth along with Maitreya and
attaining arhatship or furthering their bodhisattva careers under his
tutelage. Of the four dimensions, this last was—and
still is—the most
pervasive, as part of a recurrent motif in many Buddhist
countries: the belief that the current age is too degenerate for
the practice of the Dharma. [BR, 78-9]
|
|
The motivating force
behind the actual practice
of the bodhisattva path is the element of compassion, the desire to help
alleviate the sufferings of others, either by guiding them to
enlightenment or by assisting in more material ways. This factor,
it is sometimes claimed, is one of the things that differentiated the
bodhisattva from the arhat, and in some contexts, as we shall see, it
led to the notion of bodhisattvas who reject the option of arhatship in
order to continue to work in samsara for the welfare of all sentient
beings. [EB, 173] |
Practicing the Perfections
The
act of arousing the
mind set on enlightenment was formalized and fixed by the making of a
vow (pranidhana)....In its simplest form, the vow is a solemn
commitment by the bodhisattva to use his or her own life and
enlightenment not for the sake of a personal achievement or bliss but
to assist others who are still on the path toward
enlightenment. As one early formulaic declaration has it:
“After crossing over
the stream of samsara, may I help others across; being freed, may I
free others; being comforted, may I comfort others; gone to nirvana,
may I lead others there.” As time went on, however, such
vows
became more elaborate and detailed. Whole lists of promises (see
5.4.1 and 5.4.2) were developed, and the bodhisattva’s Buddhahood
was
made contingent upon their fulfillment.
Be that as it may, once a bodhisattva had made
his or her vow and embarked on the bodhisattva path, there followed the
phase that Santideva calls the actual “progression toward
enlightenment” (bodhiprasthana). One way in which this is
described is in terms of the practice of the six perfections
(paramitas): giving (dana),
morality (sila), forbearance (ksanti, sometimes
translated as “patience” or “stamina”), striving (virya, sometimes
translated as “heroism” or “energy”), meditation
(dhyana), and wisdom (prajna).
To this list is sometimes added four more perfections to make a total
of ten: skillful means, firm resolution or vow
(pranidhana), strength or power
(bala), and knowledge (jnana).
[EB, 178-9]
A more novel approach to the bodhisattva path—one
that further explores the implications of the avadana paradigm—is
exemplified by the Perfection of Discernment [i.e. Wisdom] in 8,000
Lines (the Asta)....For the
authors of the Asta, the
perfection of discernment is exemplified in the thought of Awakening (bodhi-citta)—one’s
first aspiration for Awakening prior to one’s decisive act of service
to a Buddha—which they define as a state of
no-thoughtness, free from modification and discrimination. They
advise the bodhisattva to “course” in this state of no-thoughtness,
maintaining it in all activities. Because there can be no
thoughts of existence or nonexistence in a state of no-thoughtness, a
person coursing in this state will have no concept of dharmas arising
or ceasing, no concept of beings, no concept of attainment. Thus
the ideal bodhisattva courses in the perfection of discernment like a
bird through space, with no sense of path or attainment, viewing all
dharmas, beings, and so on, as mirages, dreams, illusions, empty of any
individual reality. For such a person, the Suchness of all things—the
reality underlying all concepts of things—is one
and the same, without differentiation. The concepts have reality
only as words and names. The name for this insight of radical
nominalism is “the nonarising of dharmas.” [BR, 88-89]
|
Canonical
Authority
From the Mahayana perspective, the sutras associated
with the Theravada
tradition are only a partial reflection of the Buddha’s true
teaching. Indeed, the Buddha gradually came to be seen as a
transcendental deity who did not, as it turns out, disappear quite so
thoroughly as the early sutras would lead one to believe. The
notion that the Buddha might still, somehow, be accessible to the world
allowed for the production of various new sutras, which were presumably
“inspired” by revelation—and not only by
the historical Buddha, but by a host of other Buddhas as well (such as Maitreya, the Buddha of the future).
Thus, one of the main distinctions between the Theravada and Mahayana
traditions came down to whether or not one accepted the “authenticity”
of these new sutras.
|
The
Lotus Sutra
The Parable of the Burning House
Sariputra, let us suppose that somewhere...[there
was a householder who was] wealthy and enjoying life. Suppose
that he had a great mansion....And suppose that this mansion had a
single door....And suppose that all of a sudden the whole mansion burst
forth into flames, that the householder managed himself to get out, but
that he had several little boys who were still inside....
But the little boys did not pay any
attention
to the words of the man, though he desired only their
well-being. They were not perturbed, not afraid, not
frightened....Instead, they
ran around playing here and there, occasionally gazing out at their
father. Why? Simply because of their being foolish children.
So then, Sariputra, the man thought: “...I should by some skillful means [upaya]
cause these children to come out of the house.” Now the man knew
the mental dispositions of his children and understood their interests,
and he knew that there were many kinds of toys that pleased them....So
he said to them: “Children, all of those toys that are pleasing
to you—for instance, little ox carts, goat carts,
and deer carts—so dear and captivating; well, I
have put all of them outside the gate of the house! I will give
each of you whatever you need and want. Come quickly! Come
out for the sake of these playthings!”
Then the little boys...quickly dashed out of the
burning house at great speed....However, Sariputra, that man then gave
his children...ox carts only....And, Sariputra, that man
reflected: “I am very wealthy and have many treasures and
storehouses; I could give other vehicles to these children, but why
should I? All of these children are my children, and all of them
are dear and delightful to me. I should think of all of my
children as being equal and the same [and should give all of them the
best vehicle].”
 |
Trikaya ~ The Three Bodies
|
