History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c91.101

v7.c91.101

¹⁵¹⁴ The number of Books on Buddhism is legion. For Mahāyāna Buddhism, vide 'An Introduction to Mahāyāna Buddhism' by W. M McGovern (London, 1922), 'Aspects of Mahāyāna Buddhism' by Dr. M. N. (*Continued from last page*) Dutt (1930), the 'Bodhisattva doctrine in Sanskrit Literature' by Dr Har Dayal (Kegan Paul, London 1932), 'The path of the Buddha' ed. by Prof. Kenneth W Morgan (New York, 1956) written by several scholars from different countries (for both Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna). A few books for those who want to know more of Buddhism in general and of Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna are recommended here 'The central conception of Buddhism' (London, 1923), 'the conception of Nirvāṇa' (Leningrad, 1927), 'Buddhist Logic' vol. I (1958), all by Th. Stcherbatsky; 'Vedantic Buddhism of the Buddha' by J G. Jennings (Oxford Un. Press, 1948), 'Creed of Buddha' by Edmond Homes (5th ed ); 'Introduction to Tantrik Buddhism' by Dr Shashi Bhushan Das-Gupta (Cal. University, 1950), 'the Flame and the Light' by Hugh I. Faussett (London and New York, 1958), 'the Buddha and his Dhamma' by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (1957) in which he refrains from considering Buddhist Texts except those in Pali; 'Comparative study of Buddhism and Christianity' by Prof. F. Masutani (Tokyo, 1957). The Mahāyāna-sūtrālaṅkāra of Asaṅga (ed. by Prof S. Levi) summarises in two verses (I. 9-10) the points (five) on which the two schools are in conflict. It-sing's 'Records of the Buddhist religion' translated by Dr J. Takakusu (Oxford, 1896) surprisingly enough states (p. 15) 'These two systems are perfectly in accord with the noble doctrine. Both equally conform to truth and lead us to Nirvāṇa'. Buddha at least ignored (if he did not positively deny) God, he denied the individual soul and Eternity, he did not emphasize the most vital Upaniṣad teaching viz. 'ānando brahmeti vyajānāt'. He imagined salvation as a state of absolute quiescence and therefore regarded ordinary life as misery and asserted that salvation may be attained even in this very life He did not claim to be God, but a human being There are various kinds of Mahāyāna doctrines and great diversity of definitions It may generally be said that works professing to teach Mahāyāna practically forsake the ideal of a human Buddha, preach the worship of Buddha and future Buddhas, and assert that Nirvāṇa cannot be attained by the ancient method, that salvation cannot come in this very life but after centuries and aeons of the practice of virtue and helping others. Mantrayāna and Vajrayāna are said by some to be branches of Mahāyāna, about the latter of which a good deal will be said in the next section. According to Bhikṣu Rāhula Sānkṛtyāyana, Vajrayāna (700-1200 A.D ) is a synonym of Mahāyāna (400-700 A D.) and merely the ulterior development of it (vide p. 211 of the paper 'L' Origine du Vajrayāna et Les 84 Siddhas' in J. A. vol. 225 (1934) pp. 209-230.