Aspects of Mahayana Buddhism and its Relation to Hinayana c6.s3.1

c6.s3.1

As the Hīnayānists were confident of having preserved the original teachings of the Master, and of existing anterior to the Mahāyānists, they did not think it worth while to show the agreements and disagreements between their own doctrines and those of the Mahāyānists. But the Mahāyānists, aware of their later origin and remoteness from the Founder of their religion in point of time, could not help devoting some thought to establishing their claim as the true representatives of the Founder. They attempted to prove that the real point of view of the Founder had been missed by the Hīnayānists to whom they usually referred as Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas. They did not deny the authenticity of the literature of the Hīnayānists and the doctrines propounded by them, but what they desired to prove was that Buddha knew the mediocre character of the intellect of most of his disciples and delivered some discourses in a modified form to suit their understanding while to the select few he gave out his real teachings, which became known as the Mahāyāna sūtras. They did not say that Buddha had different truths for people of different mental calibres. According to them, Buddha preached one and only one Truth and Path; but the Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas see and practise only a portion of same. They are not debarred from seeing the whole truth and the real path, for many of them do so by becoming Mahāyānists after the attainment of Arhathood or Pratyekabuddhahood. They do not state that there could be two kinds of knowledge (prajñā), one for the Hīnayānists and another for the Mahāyānists for the realisation of the Truth; so the Prajñāpāramitās say in their opening verses addressed to Prajñā: