Aspects of Mahayana Buddhism and its Relation to Hinayana c6.s9.8

c6.s9.8

The first statement cited above that Buddha was wavering just after attaining Bodhi as to whether he should live in peace in a solitary place, or go out to preach the abstruse doctrines found out by him, has been taken by the *Puṇḍarīka* as an admission on the part of the Hinayānists that their intellect is of a lower order. The story woven around it is that Śākyamuni came into existence when one of the five kaṣāyas² (evils) or the sixty-two wrong views like ‘nityam astīti nāstīti tathāsti nāsti’³ prevailed, when men were overwhelmed by tṛṣṇā (desire), moha (delusion) and kāma (passion) and did not possess the merits usually acquired by Bodhisattvas in their previous lives (cīrṇacaryā purimajātiṣu). When the evils were raging over the land, Buddha at Brahmā’s request came out to preach the religion, but found the vision of his audience too dim to get an insight into his abstruse doctrines. There was even the likelihood of their incurring sin by scoffing at these doctrines. Hence he thought it wiser to follow the previous Buddhas by devising some means to impart the Truth robed in different forms. The people inspired as they were by lower aims (hīnādhimukta) would not strive heartily if they were asked to aspire to Buddhahood. He therefore proceeded to Benares and preached to the five monks the dharma of quietude (dharmam praśāntabhūmim)⁴ and of which, the Nirvāṇa, as conceived by the Hinayānists, was the highest goal. Later on (paścime ca kāle), when he found some excellent men (putrān dvipadottamān), who had already been working through many rebirths to attain the highest Bodhi, he thought it fit to preach his excellent religion (sāmutkarṣiki dharmadeśanā) relating to the attainment of Buddhajñāna.¹ This was, however, preached in such a language that it could not be understood by the untrained.² The Puṇḍarīka goes to the length of saying that it was beyond the comprehension of Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas.³ The Prajñāpāramitā proceeds so far as to state that the collective prajñā of countless Maudgalyāyanas and Śāriputras would not be an infinite part of the prajñā of a Bodhisattva who has practised the prajñāpāramitā.⁴