Aspects of Mahayana Buddhism and its Relation to Hinayana c6.s7.3

c6.s7.3

Mr. Suzuki admits, therefore, that Mahāyāna may not be the teaching of Buddha, but Mr. Kimura, without denying the fact that the "Mahāyāna sūtras and the statements embodied therein undoubtedly came into being after Buddha's death", puts forward his theory about the possession of two kinds of "perception" by Buddha, Mahāyāna representing the "introspectional or esoteric" side of the "perception" and Hinayāna the "phenomenological or exoteric" side ². He believes that Buddha imparted his introspectional teachings to the select few among his disciples, preaching his 'phenomenological' teachings to all the rest. This theory is based partly on the traditions to the same effect preserved in Japan and partly on an uncritical acceptance of some of the statements relating to Sāmvṛta and Paramārtha truths found in the early Mahāyāna treatises, specially the Saddharma-Puṇḍarīka. There could be no objection to accept Mr. Kimura's view if he could point out the "advanced and brilliant disciples" who "rightly grasped Buddha's introspectional ideas" and of which they made an exposition resulting in the development of "Mahāyānic ideas". If Śāriputra, Subhūti, Mahāmaudgalyāyana were not able to grasp Buddha's ontological teachings as the Saddharma-Puṇḍarīka actually states, then who were the others able to do so? They certainly cannot be the Bodhisattvas, who have the appearance of fictitious figures even in the Mahāyāna literature. In fact, the interlocutors in the early Mahāyāna treatises, such as the Prajñāpāramitās, are the Hinayāna savants, Śāriputra, Subhūti, etc., and the names that we most frequently come across in the Mahāyāna works are those of the prominent figures of the Hīnayāna literature. No student of history will probably believe the statement of the *Prajñāpāramitās* that these disciples delivered the Mahāyāna teachings only by being inspired by Buddha¹ and without properly grasping them. Japanese traditions, which are relied upon in this connection to establish the authenticity of the Mahāyāna, reveal, I think, the actual state of things. They accord priority of origin to Hīnayāna, as will be seen from the following:—