Misplaced Pages

#894105

95-635: The Lalitavistara Sūtra is a Sanskrit Mahayana Buddhist sutra that tells the story of Gautama Buddha from the time of his descent from Tushita until his first sermon in the Deer Park at Sarnath near Varanasi . The term Lalitavistara has been translated "The Play in Full" or "Extensive Play," referring to the Mahayana view that the Buddha's last incarnation was a "display" or "performance" given for

190-455: A "council". The Sthavira school had, by the time of Aśoka, divided into three sub-schools, doctrinally speaking, but these did not become separate monastic orders until later. Only two ancient sources (the Dīpavaṃsa and Bhavya's third list) place the first schism before Aśoka, and none attribute the schism to a dispute on Vinaya practice. Lamotte and Hirakawa both maintain that the first schism in

285-413: A Buddha is often seen as "a spiritual king, relating to and caring for the world", rather than simply a teacher who after his death "has completely 'gone beyond' the world and its cares". Buddha Sakyamuni 's life and death on earth is then usually understood docetically , as a "mere appearance", his death was an unreal show (which was done in order to teach others), while in reality he continues to live in

380-463: A Buddha, a disciple of a Buddha, a deva (heavenly being), a ṛṣi (a sage), or an emanation of one of these beings; however, they must first receive certification from a Buddha that its contents are true Dharma. The Indian Mahāyāna scholar Shantideva (8th century) states: Through four factors is an inspired utterance [ pratibhana ] the word of the Buddhas. What four? (i)...the inspired utterance

475-485: A basic framework, and not all of the early schools developed an Abhidhamma literature. Theravādin sources state that, in the 3rd century BCE, a third council was convened under the patronage of Aśoka. Some scholars argue that there are certain implausible features of the Theravādin account which imply that the third council was ahistorical. The remainder consider it a purely Theravāda- Vibhajjavāda council. According to

570-470: A body of ten Mahayana sutras translated by Lokaksema before 186 C.E. – and these constitute our earliest objectively dated Mahayana texts. This picture may be qualified by the analysis of very early manuscripts recently coming out of Afghanistan, but for the meantime this is speculation. In effect we have a vast body of anonymous but relatively coherent literature, of which individual items can only be dated firmly when they were translated into another language at

665-483: A common prevailing view of the Mahāyāna sūtras among modern Buddhist studies scholars as follows: Western scholarship does not go so far as to impugn the religious authority of Mahayana sutras, but it tends to assume that they are not the literal word of the historical Śākyamuni Buddha. Unlike the śrāvaka critics just cited, we have no possibility of knowing just who composed and compiled these texts, and for us, removed from

760-570: A considerable amount of the canonical literature of some of these schools has survived, mainly in Chinese translation. Moreover, the origins of specifically Mahāyāna doctrines may be discerned in the teachings of some of these early schools, in particular in the Mahāsānghika and the Sarvāstivāda. The schools sometimes split over ideological differences concerning the "real" meaning of teachings in

855-521: A known date. A. K. Warder notes that the Mahāyāna Sūtras are highly unlikely to have come from the teachings of the historical Buddha, since the language and style of every extant Mahāyāna Sūtra is comparable more to later Indian texts than to texts that could have circulated in the Buddha's putative lifetime. Warder also notes that the Tibetan historian Tāranātha (1575–1634) proclaimed that after

950-507: A select few individuals. The practice of visualization of Buddhas (in texts like the Sukhāvatīvyūha ) has been seen by some scholars as a possible explanation for the source of certain Mahāyāna sūtras which were seen as revelations from Buddha in other heavenly worlds. Williams also notes that there are other Mahāyāna texts which speak of sūtras being revealed or entrusted to forest dwelling monks by devas (deities). Paul Harrison notes that

1045-674: A small elite of hardcore ascetics. While some Mahāyāna sūtras like the Vimalakirti sūtra and the White Lotus sūtra criticize arhats and sravakas (referring to non-Mahāyānists) as lacking wisdom, and reject their path as a lower vehicle, i.e. ' hīnayāna ' (the 'inferior way'), earlier Mahāyāna sūtras do not do this. As noted by David Drewes "early Mahāyāna sūtras often present their teachings as useful not only to people who wish to become Buddhas, but to those who wish to attain arhatship or pratyekabuddhahood as well. The old idea that

SECTION 10

#1732781104895

1140-463: A transcendent realm in order to help all beings. Mahāyāna sūtras, especially those of the Prajñāpāramitā genre, teach the importance of the practice of the six perfections ( pāramitā ) as part of the path to Buddhahood , and special attention is given to the perfection of wisdom ( prajñāpāramitā ) which is seen as primary. The importance of developing bodhicitta , which refers to a mind that

1235-501: Is aimed at full awakening (i.e. Buddhahood) is also stressed. Another central practice advocated by the Mahāyāna sūtras is focused around "the acquisition of merit , the universal currency of the Buddhist world, a vast quantity of which was believed to be necessary for the attainment of Buddhahood". According to David Drewes, Mahāyāna sūtras teach simple religious practices that are supposed to make Buddhahood easy to achieve. Some of

1330-401: Is based on the idea that "Whatever is well spoken [ subhasita ], all that is the word of the Buddha [ buddhabhasita ]." As such, this idea holds that Mahāyāna is the "word of the Buddha" because it leads to awakening ( bodhi ), not because it was spoken by a specific individual with the title "Buddha". According to Venerable Hsuan Hua , there are five types of beings who may speak "Buddha word":

1425-633: Is believed (in Theravadin culture) that the Abhidhamma was taught by Buddha to his late mother who was living in Tavatimsa heaven. However, this is rejected by scholars, who believe that only small parts of the Abhidhamma literature may have been existent in a very early form. The Sarvastivadins also rejected this idea, and instead held that the Abhidharma was collected, edited, and compiled by

1520-527: Is connected with truth, not untruth; (ii) it is connected with the Dharma, not that which is not the Dharma; (iii) it brings about the renunciation of moral taints [ klesa ] not their increase; and (iv) it shows the laudable qualities of nirvana, not those of the cycle of rebirth [samsara]. Williams writes that similar ideas can be found in the Pali Canon , though it is interpreted in a more open ended way in

1615-433: Is evidence of disagreement as regards the details of the Buddha's teaching. John W. Pettit writes that "Mahāyāna has not got a strong historical claim for representing the explicit teachings of the historical Buddha". However, he also argues that basic Mahāyāna concepts such as "the bodhisattva ethic, emptiness (sunyata), and the recognition of a distinction between buddhahood and arhatship as spiritual ideals," can be seen in

1710-661: Is promoted in some of the sutras themselves. The Prajñāpāramitā sutras promote the copying, reading, recitation, contemplation, and distribution of the sutra, and they also teach its worship and veneration. The Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra states: Here, the sons or daughters of good family are enjoined to put up a copy of the Prajñāpāramitā on an altar, and to pay respect to it, to revere, worship and adore it, pay regard and reverence to it with flowers, incense, powders, umbrellas, banners, bells, and rows of burning lamps. The Prajñāpāramitā sutras also reference themselves as

1805-1019: The Abhidhamma Pitaka s (collectively known as the " Tripiṭaka "), was taken to Sri Lanka by Emperor Aśoka's son, the Venerable Mahinda . There it was eventually committed to writing in the Pali language. The Pāli Canon remains the most complete set of surviving Nikāya scriptures, although the greater part of the Sarvāstivādin canon also survives in Chinese translation , some parts exist in Tibetan translations, and some fragments exist in Sanskrit manuscripts, while parts of various canons (sometimes unidentified), exist in Chinese and fragments in other Indian dialects as in Gāndhārī . Around

1900-456: The Khuddaka Nikāya : The Khuddaka Nikaya can easily be divided into two strata, one being early and the other late. The texts Sutta Nipata , Itivuttaka , Dhammapada , Therigatha ( Theragatha ), Udana , and Jataka tales belong to the early stratum. The texts Khuddakapatha, Vimanavatthu, Petavatthu, Niddesa, Patisambhidamagga, Apadana, Buddhavamsa and Cariyapitaka can be categorized in

1995-715: The Sutta Piṭaka , and sometimes over disagreement concerning the proper observance of vinaya. These ideologies became embedded in large works such as the Abhidhammas and commentaries. Comparison of existing versions of the Suttapiṭaka of various sects shows evidence that ideologies from the Abhidhamma s sometimes found their way back into the Suttapiṭaka s to support the statements made in those Abhidhammas . Some of these developments may be seen as later elaborations on

SECTION 20

#1732781104895

2090-496: The Buddha taught. Some scholars argue that the first council actually did not take place. The expansion of orally transmitted texts in early Buddhism, and the growing distances between Buddhist communities, fostered specialization and sectarian identification. One or several disputes did occur during Aśoka's reign, involving both doctrinal and disciplinary ( vinaya ) matters, although these may have been too informal to be called

2185-503: The Indian Buddhist "doctrinal schools" or "schools of thought" ( Sanskrit : vāda ) which arose out of the early unified Buddhist monastic community ( saṅgha ) due to various schisms in the history of Indian Buddhism . The various splits and divisions were caused by differences in interpretations of the monastic rule ( Vinaya ), doctrinal differences and also due to simple geographical separation as Buddhism spread throughout

2280-732: The Indian subcontinent . The early Buddhist community initially split into two main Nikāyas (monastic groups, divisions), the Sthavira ("Elders"), and the Mahāsāṃghika ("Great Community"). This initial split occurred either during the reign of Aśoka (c. 268-232 BCE) or shortly after (historians disagree on the matter). Later, these groups became further divided on doctrinal grounds into numerous schools of thought and practice (with their own monastic rules and doctrinal Abhidharma texts). Some of

2375-476: The Khuddaka Nikaya within their Abhidharma Pitaka. Also, the Pali version of the Abhidhamma is a strictly Theravada collection, and has little in common with the Abhidhamma works recognized by other Buddhist schools. The various Abhidhamma philosophies of the various early schools disagree on numerous key points and belong to the period of sectarian debates among the schools. The earliest texts of

2470-509: The Lalitavistara , the Buddha explains to a mathematician named Arjuna the system of numerals in multiples of 100, starting from a koti (in later literature 10 but this is uncertain) to a tallakshana (10 then). Mahayana sutras Modern scholars of Buddhist studies generally hold that these sūtras first began to appear between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE. They continued being composed, compiled, and edited until

2565-604: The Pāli Canon . According to Pettit, this suggests that Mahāyāna is "not simply an accretion of fabricated doctrines" but "has a strong connection with the teachings of Buddha himself". Mahāyāna sūtras are generally regarded by Mahāyānists as being more profound than the śrāvaka texts as well as generating more spiritual merit and benefit. Thus, they are seen as superior and more virtuous to non-Mahāyāna sūtras. The Mahāyāna sūtras were not recognized as being Buddha word ( buddhavacana ) by various groups of Indian Buddhists and there

2660-783: The Sarvāstivāda , the Dharmaguptakas , the Saṃmitīya , and the Pudgalavādins . The Pudgalavādins were also known as Vatsiputrīyas after their putative founder. Later this group became known as the Sammitīya school after one of its subdivisions. It died out around the 9th or 10th century CE. Nevertheless, during most of the early medieval period, the Sammitīya school was numerically the largest Buddhist group in India, with more followers than all

2755-490: The Suttapitaka ). Although the literature of the various Abhidharma Pitakas began as a kind of commentarial supplement upon the earlier teachings in the Suttapitaka , it soon led to new doctrinal and textual developments and became the focus of a new form of scholarly monastic life. The various Abhidharma works were starting to be composed from about 200 years after the passing away of the Buddha. Traditionally, it

2850-587: The Vinaya Pitaka . Early Mahayana came directly from "early Buddhist schools" and was a successor to them. Between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE, the terms "Mahāyāna" and "Hīnayāna" were first used in writing, in, for example, the Lotus Sutra . The later Mahayana schools may have preserved ideas which were abandoned by the "orthodox" Theravada, such as the Three Bodies doctrine,

2945-1198: The decline of Buddhism in ancient India . Some of them may have also been composed outside of India, such as in Central Asia and in East Asia . Some of the most influential Mahāyāna sūtras include the Lotus Sutra , the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras , the Avatamsaka Sutra , the Lankavatara Sutra , the Pure Land Sutras , and the Nirvana Sutra . Mahāyāna Buddhists typically consider several major Mahāyāna sūtras to have been taught by Shakyamuni Buddha , committed to memory and recited by his disciples, in particular Ananda . However, other Mahāyāna sūtras are presented as being taught by other figures, such as bodhisattvas like Mañjuśrī and Avalokiteśvara . There are various reasons that Indian Mahāyāna Buddhists gave to explain

Lalitavistara Sūtra - Misplaced Pages Continue

3040-459: The parinirvana of Gautama Buddha , a council was held at Rajagaha Rajgir ) by some of his disciples who had attained arahantship , presided over by Mahākāśyapa , one of his most senior disciples, and with the support of king Ajātasattu , reciting the teachings of the Buddha. The accounts of the council in the scriptures of the schools differ as to what was actually recited there. Purāṇa is recorded as having said: "Your reverences, well chanted by

3135-524: The Adhidhammas of the various schools, according to some scholars , was that Buddha left no clear statement about the ontological status of the world – about what really exists. Subsequently, later Buddhists have themselves defined what exists and what not (in the Abhidhammic scriptures), leading to disagreements. Oliver Abeynayake has the following to say on the dating of the various books in

3230-673: The Apara and Uttara (Purva) Saila. Warder says that these were the early Buddhist schools as of circa 50 BCE, about the same time that the Pali Canon was first committed to writing and the presumptive origin date of the Theravada sect, though the term 'Theravada' was not used before the fourth century CE. A hypothetical combined list would be as follows: The classic sets of ten, six or four paramitas (perfections) were codified and developed by these various schools in later sources. Though

3325-407: The Buddha taught the sutras, they disappeared from the human world and circulated only in the world of the nagas . In Warder's view, "this is as good as an admission that no such texts existed until the 2nd century A.D." Paul Williams writes that while Mahāyāna tradition believes that the Mahāyāna sūtras were taught by the Buddha, "source-critical and historical awareness has made it impossible for

3420-425: The Buddha's word by the school of Theravāda Buddhism . The origins of the Mahāyāna and their sūtras are not completely understood. Modern scholars have proposed numerous theories about the origins of Mahāyāna and the Mahāyāna texts. Some of the main theories are the following: According to David Drewes, none of these theories have been satisfactorily proven and they lack sufficient evidence. Drewes writes that

3515-544: The Buddhas Amitabha , Akshobhya and Vairocana , and the bodhisattvas Maitreya , Mañjusri , Ksitigarbha , and Avalokiteshvara . An important feature of Mahāyāna is the way that it understands the nature of Buddhahood . Mahāyāna texts see Buddhas (and to a lesser extent, certain bodhisattvas as well) as transcendental or supramundane ( lokuttara ) beings, who live for eons constantly helping others through their activity. According to Paul Williams, in Mahāyāna,

3610-524: The Buddhist sangha occurred during the reign of Ashoka. According to scholar Collett Cox "most scholars would agree that even though the roots of the earliest recognized groups predate Aśoka , their actual separation did not occur until after his death." According to the Theravada tradition, the split took place at the Second Buddhist council , which took place at Vaishali , approximately one hundred years after Gautama Buddha's parinirvāṇa . While

3705-653: The Khuddaka Nikaya can thus be regarded as later additions: And the following three which are included in the Burmese Canon: The original verses of the Jatakas are recognized as being amongst the earliest part of the Canon, but the accompanying (and more famous) Jataka Stories are commentaries likely composed at later dates. The Parivara , the last book of the Vinaya Pitaka , is a later addition to

3800-624: The Mahasamghika school was known for its doctrine of "transcendentalism" ( lokottaravada ), the view that the Buddha was a fully transcendent being. As the third major division of the various canons, the Abhidharma collections were a major source of dispute among the various schools. Abhidharma texts were not accepted as canonical by the Mahasanghika school and several other schools. Another school included most of their version of

3895-530: The Mahāyāna began with the rejection of the arhat ideal in favor of that of the bodhisattva is thus clearly incorrect." Paul Williams also writes that earlier Mahāyāna sūtras like the Ugraparipṛcchā Sūtra and the Ajitasena sutra do not present any antagonism towards the hearers or the ideal of arhatship like later sutras. According to David Drewes, Mahāyāna sūtras contain several elements besides

Lalitavistara Sūtra - Misplaced Pages Continue

3990-423: The Mahāyāna in order to include a larger set of teachings that were seen as spiritually useful. The modern Japanese Zen Buddhist scholar D. T. Suzuki similarly argued that while the Mahāyāna sūtras may not have been directly taught by the historical Buddha, the "spirit and central ideas" of Mahāyāna "are those of its founder". Thus, Suzuki admits (and celebrates) how the Mahāyāna evolved and adapted itself to suit

4085-662: The Mahāyāna never had nor ever attempted to have a separate vinaya or ordination lineage from the early Buddhist schools, and therefore each bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī adhering to the Mahāyāna formally belonged to an early school. Membership in these nikāyas , or monastic sects, continues today with the Dharmaguptaka nikāya in East Asia, and the Mūlasarvāstivāda nikāya in Tibetan Buddhism . Therefore, Mahāyāna

4180-460: The Mahāyāna sūtras is the ideal of the Bodhisattva path, something which is not unique to them, however, as such a path is also taught in non-Mahayana texts which also required prediction of future Buddhahood in the presence of a living Buddha. What is unique to Mahāyāna sūtras is the idea that the term bodhisattva is applicable to any person from the moment they intend to become a Buddha (i.e.

4275-428: The Mahāyāna teachings. The reason these accounts give for the historically late disclosure of the Mahāyāna teachings is that most people were initially unable to understand the Mahāyāna sūtras at the time of the Buddha (500 BCE) and suitable recipients for these teachings had not yet arisen. Some traditional accounts of the transmission of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras claim that they were originally stored or hidden in

4370-726: The Pali Canon (the Sutta Nipata and parts of the Jataka ), together with the first four (and early) Nikayas of the Suttapitaka , have no mention of (the texts of) the Abhidhamma Pitaka. The Abhidhamma is also not mentioned at the report of the First Buddhist Council , directly after the death of the Buddha. This report of the first council does mention the existence of the Vinaya and the five Nikayas (of

4465-605: The Sautrāntikas were actually adherents of Mūlasarvāstivāda. The relation between Sarvāstivāda and the Mūlasarvāstivāda , however, is unclear. All of these early schools of Nikāya Buddhism eventually came to be known collectively as "the eighteen schools" in later sources. With the exception of the Theravāda, none of these early schools survived beyond the late medieval period by which time several were already long extinct, although

4560-481: The Silk Road. It is commonly said that there were eighteen schools of Buddhism in this period. What this actually means is more subtle. First, although the word "school" is used, there was not yet an institutional split in the saṅgha . The Chinese traveler Xuanzang observed even when the Mahāyāna were beginning to emerge from this era that monks of different schools would live side by side in dormitories and attend

4655-502: The Theravādin account, this council was convened primarily for the purpose of establishing an official orthodoxy. At the council, small groups raised questions about the specifics of the vinaya and the interpretation of doctrine. The chairman of the council, Moggaliputta Tissa , compiled a book, the Kathavatthu , which was meant to refute these arguments. The council sided with Moggaliputta and his version of Buddhism as orthodox; it

4750-477: The actual ideas of these virtues (like dhyana , sila , prajña , etc) and the idea of the Buddha's past lives are drawn from early Buddhist sources (such as early jatakas ), they were developed further into specific doctrines about the bodhisattva path and how exactly the Buddha undertook it. The new schools also developed new doctrines about important Buddhist topics. The Sarvastivadins for example were known for their doctrine of temporal eternalism . Meanwhile

4845-474: The arising of bodhicitta ) and without the requirement of a living Buddha. They also claim that any person who accepts and uses Mahāyāna sūtras either had already received or will soon receive such a prediction from a Buddha, establishing their position as an irreversible bodhisattva. Some Mahāyāna sūtras promote it as a universal path for everyone, while others like the Ugraparipṛcchā see it as something for

SECTION 50

#1732781104895

4940-424: The benefit of the beings in this world. The sutra consists of twenty-seven chapters: The story ends at the very moment when the Buddha has finally manifested all the qualities of awakening and is fully equipped to influence the world, as he did over the next forty-five years by continuously teaching the Dharma and establishing his community of followers. The Borobudur reliefs contain a series of panels depicting

5035-513: The content found in the sūtras. Numerous Mahayana sutras teach the veneration and recitation of the sutras themselves as a religious icon and as an embodiment of the Dharma and the Buddha. In Indian Mahayana Buddhism , the worship of sutras, like the Prajñāpāramitā sutra books ( pustaka ) and manuscripts became an important part of Mahayana practice which was considered to bring wisdom, merit and apotropaic protection from harm. This practice

5130-557: The designation 'Teacher' with regard to this perfection of wisdom—he thinks, 'The Teacher is face to face with me, the Teacher is seen by me.' Since the sutras teach and lead one to perfect wisdom, and perfect wisdom was considered to be the mother of all Buddhas, then to honor and to know the text was to honor and to know the Buddha. As such, the Aṣṭasāhasrikā states: Early Buddhist schools The early Buddhist schools refers to

5225-966: The early 20th century, P. L. Vaidya believed that the finished Sanskrit text dated to the 3rd century AD. The text is also said to be a compilation of various works by no single author and includes materials from the Sarvastivada and the Mahayana traditions. Concerning the origins of the text, the Dharmachakra Translation Committee states: Foucaux, Édouard. Le Lalitavistara : l’histoire traditionnelle de la vie du Bouddha Çakyamuni . Les Classiques du bouddhisme mahāyāna, Musée National des Arts Asiatiques Guimet, vol. 19. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1892. Reprinted as Le Lalitavistara : l'histoire traditionnelle de la vie du Bouddha Çakyamuni , Les Deux Océans, 1988, 1992, 450 p., ISBN   2866810228 , 9782866810221 In

5320-687: The early Mahāyāna texts, which were not written documents but orally preserved teachings. Drewes writes, that Mahāyāna sūtras advocate mnemic/oral/aural practices more frequently than they do written ones, make reference to people who have memorized or are in the process of memorizing them, and consistently attach higher prestige to mnemic/oral practices than to ones involving written texts. Study of differences in various versions of sutras translated into Chinese has directly shown that these texts were often transmitted orally. Mahāyāna sūtras were committed to memory and recited by important learned monks called "Dharma reciters" ( dharmabhāṇakas ), who were viewed as

5415-403: The early schools is often termed the early Buddhist texts and these are an important source for understanding their doctrinal similarities and differences. There were are various works of Abhidharma and other treatises written by these various schools which contain more unique doctrines which were specific to each school. According to the scriptures ( Cullavagga XI.1 ff), three months after

5510-478: The elders (sthaviras) after the Buddha's death (though they relied on the Buddha's words for this compilation). Some schools of Buddhism had important disagreements on subjects of Abhidhamma, while having a largely similar Sutta-pitaka and Vinaya-pitaka. The arguments and conflicts between them were thus often on matters of philosophical Abhidhammic origin, not on matters concerning the actual words and teachings of Buddha. One impetus for composing new scriptures like

5605-405: The elders are the Dhamma and Vinaya , but in that way that I heard it in the Lord's presence, that I received it in his presence, in that same way will I bear it in mind." [ Vinaya-pitaka : Cullavagga XI:1:11]. According to Theravāda tradition, the teachings were divided into various parts and each was assigned to an elder and his pupils to commit to memory, and there was no conflict about what

5700-413: The entire Hīnayāna corpus. There is also no evidence that Mahāyāna ever referred to a separate formal school or sect of Buddhism, but rather that it existed within the early Buddhist schools as a certain set of ideals, texts and later doctrines, for bodhisattvas. Mahāyānists also never had a separate Vinaya (monastic rule) from the early Buddhist schools . The Chinese monk Yijing who visited India in

5795-411: The fact that they only appeared at a later time. One such reason was that they had been hidden away in the land of the Nāgas (snake deities, dragons) until the proper time for their dissemination arrived. The Mahāyāna sūtras were not accepted by all Buddhists in ancient India, and the various Indian Buddhist schools disagreed on their status as "word of the Buddha". They are generally not accepted as

SECTION 60

#1732781104895

5890-493: The fifth and sixth centuries saw a great increase in their production. By this time, Chinese pilgrims, such as Faxian , Yijing , and Xuanzang were traveling to India, and their writings describe monasteries which they label 'Mahāyāna' as well as monasteries where both Mahāyāna monks and non-Mahāyāna monks lived together. Dating the Mahāyāna sūtras is quite difficult; and many can only be dated firmly to when they were translated into another language. Andrew Skilton summarizes

5985-413: The highest object of study and worship, claiming that studying, reciting, and worshiping them is superior to worshiping stupas , Buddha relics , and other objects. The Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā claims that this is because "the relics of the Tathāgata have come forth from this perfection of wisdom". Since the very concept of Prajñāpāramitā (transcendent knowledge, perfection of wisdom) is linked with

6080-458: The idea of consciousness ( vijnana ) as a continuum, and devotional elements such as the worship of saints. Although the various early schools of Buddhism are sometimes loosely classified as " Hīnayāna " in modern times, this is not necessarily accurate. According to Jan Nattier, Mahāyāna never referred to a separate sect of Buddhism (Skt. nikāya ), but rather to the set of ideals and doctrines for bodhisattvas. Paul Williams has also noted that

6175-441: The idea that devas may preach the Buddha word is also present in non-Mahāyāna texts. Paul Harrison has also noted the importance of dream revelations in certain texts such as the Arya-svapna-nirdesa which lists and interprets 108 dream signs. A different Mahāyāna justification for the authenticity of the Mahāyāna sūtras is that they are in accord with the truth, with the Buddha's Dharma and therefore they lead to awakening. This

6270-495: The introduction and emphasis on Abhidhammic literature by some schools. This literature was specific to each school, and arguments and disputes between the schools were often based on these Abhidhammic writings. However, actual splits were originally based on disagreements on vinaya (monastic discipline), though later on, by about 100 CE or earlier, they could be based on doctrinal disagreement. Pre-sectarian Buddhism, however, did not have Abhidhammic scriptures, except perhaps for

6365-401: The later stratum. The texts in the early stratum date from before the second council (earlier than 100 years after Buddha’s parinibbana), while the later stratum is from after the second council, which means they are definitely later additions to the Sutta Pitaka, and that they might not have been the original teachings by the Buddha, but later compositions by disciples. The following books of

6460-420: The life of the Buddha as described in the Lalitavistara Sutra . In these reliefs, the story starts from the glorious descent of the Buddha from the Tushita heaven, and ends with his first sermon in the Deer Park. As an example of how widely the sutra was disseminated, the Lalitavistara Sutra was known to the Mantranaya ( Vajrayana ) practitioners of Borobudur, who had the text illustrated by stonemasons. In

6555-442: The main sects included the Sarvāstivādins (" Temporal Eternalists "), the Dharmaguptakas ("Preservers of Dharma "), Lokottaravadins ("Transcendentalists"), the Prajñaptivādins ("Conceptualists"), the Vibhajyavādins ("the Analysts"), and the Pudgalavādins ("Personalists"). According to traditional accounts these sects eventually proliferated into 18 (or, less-commonly, 20) different schools. The textual material shared by

6650-405: The modern scholar to accept this traditional account." However, Williams further writes that Nevertheless, it is not always absurd to suggest that a Mahāyāna sūtra or teaching may contain elements of a tradition which goes back to the Buddha himself, which was played down or just possibly excluded from the canonical formulations of the early schools. We have seen that even at the First Council there

6745-591: The most likely origin of Mahāyāna is that it was "primarily a textual movement, focused on the revelation, preaching, and dissemination of Mahāyāna sūtras, that developed within, and never really departed from, traditional Buddhist social and institutional structures." The figures of this movement probably saw themselves as bodhisattvas entrusted with teaching and preserving the Mahāyāna sūtras. Scholars like Joseph Walser have also noted how Mahāyāna sūtras are heterogeneous and seem to have been composed in different communities with varying ideas. Walser writes that "Mahāyāna

6840-482: The most widely taught practices taught in Mahāyāna sūtras include: Another innovative "shortcut" to Buddhahood in Mahāyāna sutras are what are often called Pure Land practices. These involve the invocation of Buddhas such as Amitabha and Aksobhya , who are said to have created " Buddha fields " or "pure lands" especially so that those beings who wish to be reborn there can easily and quickly become Buddhas. Reciting certain sūtras, along with meditating on and reciting

6935-481: The names of these Buddhas can allow one to be reborn in these pure buddha-fields. One there, one can hear the Dharma directly from a Buddha and train in the bodhisattva path in a pure place without disturbances. The study of Mahāyāna sūtras is central to East Asian Buddhism , where they are widely read. In Tibetan Buddhism meanwhile, there is a greater emphasis on the study of Mahāyāna śāstras (philosophical treatises), which are seen as more systematic ways of studying

7030-552: The other schools combined. The Sarvāstivādin school was most prominent in the north-west of India and provided some of the doctrines that would later be adopted by the Mahāyāna. Another group linked to Sarvāstivāda was the Sautrāntika school, which only recognized the authority of the sutras and rejected the abhidharma transmitted and taught by the Vaibhāṣika wing of Sarvāstivāda. Based on textual considerations, it has been suggested that

7125-402: The promotion of the bodhisattva ideal, including "expanded cosmologies and mythical histories, ideas of purelands and great, 'celestial' Buddhas and bodhisattvas , descriptions of powerful new religious practices, new ideas on the nature of the Buddha, and a range of new philosophical perspectives." Several Mahāyāna sūtras depict Buddhas or Bodhisattvas not found in earlier texts, such as

7220-485: The realm of the nāgas (serpent-like supernatural beings). Later, these sūtras were retrieved by Nāgārjuna . Other Mahāyāna sources state that they were preached or preserved by bodhisattvas like Mañjuśrī or Buddhas like Vajradhāra . Another Mahāyāna explanation for the later appearance of the Mahāyāna sūtras in the historical record is the idea that they are the revelations of certain Buddhas and bodhisattvas, transmitted through visions and meditative experiences to

7315-615: The same lectures. Only the books that they read were different. Secondly, no historical sources can agree what the names of these "eighteen schools" were. The origin of this saying is therefore unclear. A.K. Warder identified the following eighteen early Buddhist schools (in approximate chronological order): Sthaviravada , Mahasamghika , Vatsiputriya , Ekavyavaharika , Gokulika (a.k.a. Kukkutika , etc.), Sarvastivada , Lokottaravāda , Dharmottariya, Bhadrayaniya, Sammitiya , Sannagarika, Bahusrutiya , Prajnaptivada , Mahisasaka , Haimavata (a.k.a. Kasyapiya ), Dharmaguptaka , Caitika , and

7410-480: The second council probably was a historical event, traditions regarding the Second Council are confusing and ambiguous. According to the Theravada tradition the overall result was the first schism in the sangha , between the Sthavira nikāya and the Mahāsāṃghika , although it is not agreed upon by all what the cause of this split was. The various splits within the monastic organization went together with

7505-523: The seventh century, writes about how Mahāyāna monastics and non-Mahāyāna monastics lived together under the same Vinaya. The only difference among them was that Mahāyāna monks venerated the bodhisattvas and read the Mahāyāna sūtras. Some scholars like Richard Gombrich think that Mahāyāna Sūtras only arose after the practice of writing down religious texts became widespread in India and thus that they were always written documents. However, James Apple and David Drewes have drawn attention to these oral features of

7600-558: The south-west and the Kañci region in the south-east. This group later ceased to refer to themselves specifically as "Vibhajjavādins", but reverted to calling themselves "Theriyas", after the earlier Theras (Sthaviras). Still later, at some point prior to the Dipavamsa (4th century), the Pali name Theravāda was adopted and has remained in use ever since for this group. Other groups included

7695-546: The state of Buddhism in India during the early medieval period. By the time the Chinese pilgrims Xuanzang and Yijing visited India, there were five early Buddhist schools that they mentioned far more frequently than others. They commented that the Sarvāstivāda / Mūlasarvāstivāda , Mahāsāṃghika , and Saṃmitīya were the principal early Buddhist schools still extant in India, along with the Sthavira sect. The Dharmaguptakas continued to be found in Gandhāra and Central Asia, along

7790-534: The substitute for the actual speaking presence of the Buddha. Much of the early extant evidence for the origins of Mahāyāna comes from early Chinese translations of Mahāyāna texts. These Mahāyāna teachings were first propagated into China by Lokakṣema , the first translator of Mahāyāna Sūtras into Chinese during the second century. The Mahāyāna movement remained quite small until the fifth century, with very few manuscripts having been found before then (the exceptions are from Bamiyan ). According to Joseph Walser,

7885-662: The sutra itself is placed or recited, it makes the ground a caitya (a sacred space, shrine, sanctuary). According to Jacob Kinnard, Prajñāpāramitā sutras even present their physical form (as books, manuscripts, etc) as being akin to the Buddha's rūpakāya (physical form to be worshiped, like his relics) as well as being his dharmakāya (which contains the Dharma , the Buddha's teachings). The Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā further states: One might hear this deep perfection of wisdom being spoken, being taught, being explained, being pointed out, and having heard it here he might bring forth

7980-413: The teachings. According to Gombrich, unintentional literalism was a major force for change in the early doctrinal history of Buddhism. This means that texts were interpreted paying too much attention to the precise words used and not enough to the speaker's intention, the spirit of the text. Some later doctrinal developments in the early Buddhist schools show scholastic literalism, which is a tendency to take

8075-622: The term Śrāvakayāna instead. The Chinese Buddhist monk and pilgrim Yijing wrote about relationship between the various "vehicles" and the early Buddhist schools in India. He wrote, "There exist in the West numerous subdivisions of the schools which have different origins, but there are only four principal schools of continuous tradition." These schools are namely the Mahāsāṃghika nikāya, Sthavira, Mūlasarvāstivāda and Saṃmitīya nikāyas. Explaining their doctrinal affiliations, he then writes, "Which of

8170-466: The texts themselves, the texts were considered to have a mystic power within, which is the source of all the merit in the other religious objects, like Buddha relics. Furthermore, Mahayana sutras like the Aṣṭasāhasrikā often claim that the Buddha is present in the text. For example the Aṣṭasāhasrikā says that "when a pūja is done to the Prajñāpāramitā, it is a pūja to the venerable past, present, and future Buddhas." This sutra also states that wherever

8265-476: The time of Aśoka that further divisions began to occur within the Buddhist movement and a number of additional schools emerged. Etienne Lamotte divided the mainstream Buddhist schools into three main doctrinal types: One of them was faction of the Sthavira group which called themselves Vibhajjavādins. One part of this group was transmitted to Sri Lanka and to certain areas of southern India, such as Vanavasi in

8360-413: The time of their authors by up to two millennia, they are effectively an anonymous literature. It is widely accepted that Mahayana sutras constitute a body of literature that began to appear from as early as the 1st century BCE, although the evidence for this date is circumstantial. The concrete evidence for dating any part of this literature is to be found in dated Chinese translations, amongst which we find

8455-441: The times by developing new teachings and texts, while at the same time maintaining the core "spirit" of the Buddha. The teachings as contained in the Mahāyāna sūtras as a whole have been described as a loosely bound bundle of many teachings, which was able to contain the various contradictions. Because of these contradictory elements, there are "very few things that can be said with certainty about Mahāyāna Buddhism". Central to

8550-542: The words and phrases of earlier texts (maybe the Buddha's own words) in such a way as to read-in distinctions which it was never intended to make. In addition, the Dipavamsa lists the following six schools without identifying the schools from which they arose: During the first millennium , monks from China such as Faxian , Xuanzang , and Yijing made pilgrimages to India and wrote accounts of their travels when they returned home. These Chinese travel records constitute extremely valuable sources of information concerning

8645-639: Was also known as being strongly opposed to the Mahayana sutras as noted by the Tibetan historian Tāranātha . Xuanzang reports that a Saṃmitīya known as Prajñāgupta composed a treatise which argued against the Mahāyāna. Various Mahāyāna sūtras warn against the charge that they are not word of the Buddha and defend their authenticity in different ways. Some Mahāyāna sūtras such as the Gaṇḍavyūha often criticize early Buddhist figures, such as Sariputra for lacking knowledge and goodness, and thus, these elders or śrāvaka are seen as not intelligent enough to receive

8740-499: Was lively debate over their authenticity throughout the Buddhist world. Buddhist communities such as the Mahāsāṃghika school and the Theravada tradition of Sri Lanka became divided into groups which accepted or did not accept these texts. Theravāda commentaries of the Mahavihara sub-school mention these texts (which they call Vedalla/Vetulla ) as not being the Buddha word and being counterfeit scriptures. The Saṃmitīya school

8835-431: Was never a separate rival sect of the early schools. Paul Harrison clarifies that while Mahāyāna monastics belonged to a nikāya, not all members of a nikāya were Mahāyānists. From Chinese monks visiting India, we now know that both Mahāyāna and non-Mahāyāna monks in India often lived in the same monasteries side by side. Additionally, Isabella Onians notes that Mahāyāna works rarely used the term Hīnayāna , typically using

8930-636: Was probably never unitary, but differed from region to region.". Likewise, Hajime Nakamura states: Unlike the various recensions of the Hīnayāna canon, which were virtually closed by the early centuries of the common era and which shared, at least ideally, a common structure . . . the Mahāyāna scriptures were composed in a variety of disparate social and religious environments over the course of several centuries, diverge widely from each other in content and outlook, and were in many cases meant to stand as individual works representing (it has been conjectured) rivals to

9025-459: Was then adopted by Emperor Aśoka as his empire's official religion. In Pali , this school of thought was termed Vibhajjavāda, literally "thesis of [those who make] a distinction". The distinction involved was as to the existence of phenomena ( dhamma s) in the past, future and present. The version of the scriptures that had been established at the third council, including the Vinaya , Sutta and

#894105