The History of Buddhist Thought c29.11

c29.11

Here four have disappeared, and the Haimavatas have been added. This can be explained if we suppose that the recorders did not depend merely upon traditional lists, but were influenced by the actual state of the sects as they knew them. What they recorded as Mahāsanghika sects would necessarily be those which claimed to belong to that group. From this point of view the Aparaśailas and Pūrvaśailas would be rightly included. They held Mahāsanghika doctrines, but being south Indian sects they are much later than the others. Their lateness is recognized by the *Kathāvatthu* commentator, though he shows their close connection with the Mahāsanghikas in doctrine. The most significant name is Prajñaptivāda, the doctrine that knowledge is not real but convention. It is probable that we have here a reference to the Mahāyāna epistemological theories.² These theories were certainly in existence when the above lists were compiled. It has been noticed that there is no direct connection between the Mahāyāna epistemology and the bodhisattva doctrine. The latter came from the Sarvāstivādins, and the Mahāyānists appear to have received their two characteristic doctrines from these two independent sources.