Aspects of Mahayana Buddhism and its Relation to Hinayana c6.s9.16
Aspects of Mahāyāna Buddhism and its Relation to Hīnayāna c6.s9.16
- Language
- English
c6.s9.16.1
The second statement of the Hinayānists, that Buddha preaches his dharma in a way suited to the tendencies and capabilities of the hearers, has given opportunity to the Puṇḍarīka⁵ to parade the intellectual superiority of the Mahāyānists over the Hinayānists. It says that Buddha preached to people his dharma by adopting hundreds of expedients (upāyakauśalyaśatair anekaiḥ) after observing their mental tendencies (āśaya), their spiritual aspirations, their religious merits, and the variety of their actions (citrāṇi karmāṇi). To make his dharma universally attractive, he had recourse to various kinds of expressions, reasonings, and illustrations, and in fact, it was with this object that his teachings were imparted in nine forms, viz., sūtra, gāthā, itivṛttaka, jātaka, adbhuta, nidāna, aupamya, citra, and geyya.¹ It was for those who had lower aspirations, who had not performed the necessary duties under the previous Buddhas, and who were still attached to the world with its pleasures and sorrows that he had to preach how to attain Nirvāṇa only for their own selves. This was an expedient adopted by him to make them all ultimately realise the Buddhajñāna, but he never told them that they would become Buddhas, as the time was not ripe for it. Now that the time had arrived, the truth that the navāṅgas were only upāyakaśalyas for leading all men to the highest perfection was given out.
c6.s9.16.2
As they were sons of Buddha, pure in conduct, wise and learned, and had performed duties under previous countless Buddhas, the Vaipulya Sūtras were preached to them.² Aware of the noble aspirations of these disciples, Buddha tells them that they will, in future, become Buddhas and benefactors of the world. If the Śrāvakas can retain in their memory one verse of this great śāsana, (i.e., the Puṇḍarīka),³ they will attain Bodhi. To show that the Teacher had only one form of teaching, understood differently by different persons according to their capabilities, the treatise uses some interesting analogies, one of which is that the clouds water the trees, plants, and shrubs of the countless lokadhātus but the trees, plants, and shrubs absorb the water in different ways according to their capabilities and grow according to their sizes and species; similarly Buddha showers the dharma possessing the same qualities (rasa), viz., vimuktirasa (emancipation), virāgarasa (absence of attachment) and nirodharasa (suppression of senses), etc.,⁴ and leading to omniscience (sarvajña-jñāna) but producing different results according to the capabilities of the disciples. The simile of the sun shedding the same kind of light over all beings has also been used to show Buddha imparting the same teachings. This could not convince some of the Śrāvakas who enquired as to why there existed distinctions as Śrāvakas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas.
c6.s9.16.3
The two analogies cannot be applied with all their implications to Buddha, for the sun or the clouds remain unconcerned about the subjects of their benefactions, while Buddha always discriminates between them according to their lower, medium, or higher aspirations,¹ and degrees of religious merit and capabilities. Not only this. He, in fact, did not think it desirable to teach everybody the dharma which leads to sarvajña-jñāna (omniscience possessed by a Buddha), for it may not conduce to the welfare of disciples not yet fit to utilize same. The treatise, therefore, uses a parable to emphasize this point, viz., that of a potter. A potter turns out of the same clay earthen pots of various descriptions, such as, curd-jar, milk-jar, and so forth, just as the dharma of Buddha passing under three names has really the same substance. This refers to one yāna explained in three ways, the Buddhabodhi delivered in three forms (Buddhabodhim tridhā vibhāsye' ha prakāśayeyam).² The parable concludes by saying that Buddha cannot be regarded as having said that he would lead some of his disciples by Hīnayāna, for that would attribute to the Teacher niggardliness (mātsarya), envy (īrṣyā), whim (chandarāga) and ill-will (pāpacitta),—which is absurd. From all this it is apparent that according to the Saddharma-Puṇḍarīka, Hīnayānism was really a lower form of teaching, but it was only an upāyakauśalya adopted by the Teacher on account of the poverty of intellect of his early disciples.