The Bodhisattva doctrine as found in the Lotus Sutra is significant in several ways. It emphasizes the ideal of the Bodhisattva, who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the benefit of all sentient beings. This ideal is central to the sutra and is one of the key teachings of the text. Donald S. Lopez Jr states: "The Lotus Sutra presents the bodhisattva as the ideal practitioner of Buddhism, one who seeks not only personal liberation but also the liberation of all sentient beings."
The Lotus Sutra also teaches that all beings have the potential to attain buddhahood and that the sutra itself is the path to enlightenment. This is expressed in the sutra's famous passage "all living things equally have the right to become a buddha" (Chapter 2, verse 17) which emphasizes the universal potential of all sentient beings to reach the ultimate goal of Buddhism, which is the attainment of enlightenment.
The sutra also emphasizes the importance of compassion and altruism in the path of the Bodhisattva. The sutra teaches that the ultimate goal of the bodhisattva is to attain buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings and that this goal is achievable through the practice of the six perfections of generosity, morality, patience, energy, meditation, and wisdom. It teaches that the ultimate goal of the Bodhisattva is not just personal enlightenment, but also the liberation of all sentient beings. This is reflected in the sutra's famous passage "For the sake of all living beings, I will attain the highest perfect enlightenment." (Chapter 2, verse 18)
Additionally, the Lotus Sutra is considered a significant scripture in the Nichiren Buddhism, a school of Buddhism founded by the 13th-century Japanese monk Nichiren. He believed that the Lotus Sutra was the ultimate teaching of the Buddha and that recitation of its title, "Nam Myōhō Renge Kyō" (Devotion to the Mystic Law of the Lotus Sutra), was the key to attaining enlightenment.
The Bodhisattva doctrine as found in the Lotus Sutra is significant in several ways. It emphasizes the ideal of the Bodhisattva, who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the benefit of all sentient beings. This ideal is central to the sutra and is one of the key teachings of the text.
The sutra's emphasis on the Bodhisattva ideal reflects a shift in the understanding of the Buddhist path from an emphasis on personal enlightenment to an emphasis on the enlightenment of all beings. This is reflected in the sutra's famous passage "For the sake of all living beings, I will attain the highest perfect enlightenment" (Chapter 2, verse 18), which emphasizes the altruistic and compassionate nature of the Bodhisattva's quest for enlightenment.
The Lotus Sutra also teaches the idea of "Eternal Buddha" which holds that the historical Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, continues to exist in a celestial realm and is able to teach and guide all beings. This doctrine expands the traditional understanding of the Buddha as a historical figure to a more universal and eternal principle.
The sutra also teaches the idea of "One Vehicle" or "Ekayāna" which states that all beings have the potential to attain buddhahood and that there is only one vehicle or path to enlightenment, which is the Lotus Sutra. This doctrine expanded the traditional understanding of the Buddhist path which was limited to the select few who were believed to be capable of attaining enlightenment.
In reference to the significance of the bodhisattva doctrine in the Lotus Sutra, the scholar Taitetsu Unno states: "The Lotus Sutra teaches the ideal of the bodhisattva, one who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the sake of all sentient beings, and that the ultimate goal of the bodhisattva is not just personal enlightenment, but also the liberation of all sentient' Further the scholar Gene Reeves states:
"The Lotus Sutra teaches the ideal of the bodhisattva, one who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the sake of all sentient beings, emphasizing the compassionate and altruistic nature of the bodhisattva's quest for enlightenment, and teaches the idea of the "Eternal Buddha" and the "One Vehicle" which expands the traditional understanding of the Buddha and the Buddhist path."
In summary, the Bodhisattva doctrine as found in the Lotus Sutra is significant because it emphasizes the ideal of the Bodhisattva, who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the benefit of all sentient beings. This ideal expands the traditional understanding of the Buddhist path from a private experience to the liberation of all beings.
The view that the Bodhisattva ideal is the true goal of Buddhism is a central teaching in Mahayana Buddhism, which emphasizes the importance of the bodhisattva, or one who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the benefit of all sentient beings. This ideal is reflected in the famous Mahayana sutra, the Lotus Sutra, which teaches that the ultimate goal of the bodhisattva is to attain buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings.
In Mahayana Buddhism, the bodhisattva ideal is seen as the highest and most noble goal of the Buddhist path, one that goes beyond the traditional understanding of the Buddhist path which focused on personal liberation or enlightenment. The bodhisattva ideal is considered the true goal of Buddhism because it is a path that is characterized by compassion and altruism, and it seeks the liberation of all sentient beings, not just the individual.
The Mahayana sutras such as the Lotus Sutra, the Avatamsaka Sutra, and the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra also present the bodhisattva ideal as the true goal of Buddhism. The Lotus Sutra states that all living things have the right to become a buddha and that the sutra is the king of all sutras and the heart of all buddhas.
In reference to the view that the Bodhisattva ideal is the true goal of Buddhism, the scholar Paul Williams states: "The bodhisattva ideal is the highest and most noble goal of the Buddhist path, one that goes beyond the traditional understanding of the Buddhist path which focused on personal liberation or enlightenment."
In summary, the view that the Bodhisattva ideal is the true goal of Buddhism is a central teaching in Mahayana Buddhism, which emphasizes the importance of the bodhisattva and seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the benefit of all sentient beings. This ideal is presented in the Mahayana sutras as the ultimate goal of Buddhism, one that is characterized by compassion and altruism and seeks the liberation of all sentient beings.
Arthur Basham, in his book "The Wonder That Was India," presents a theory about the evolution of the Bodhisattva Doctrine, which claims that the doctrine developed over time in Buddhism, and that the Bodhisattva ideal was a later addition to the Buddhist teachings. However, some scholars have criticized Basham's theory and point out certain weaknesses in his claims.
One weakness of Basham's theory is that it is based on a limited understanding of the early Buddhist texts and their historical context. According to scholars such as Paul Williams and Richard Gombrich, Basham's theory does not take into account the complexity and diversity of the early Buddhist texts, and it does not accurately reflect the historical development of the Bodhisattva Doctrine.
Another weakness of Basham's theory is that it does not take into account the continuity and consistency of the Bodhisattva ideal in the early Buddhist texts. According to scholars such as Rupert Gethin, the Bodhisattva ideal can be found in the early Buddhist texts and it is not a later development.
Basham's theory also doesn't take into account the diversity of Buddhism in different cultures and regions. According to scholars such as Taitetsu Unno, the Bodhisattva ideal was an important aspect of Buddhism in India, China, and Japan, and it cannot be reduced to a single historical development.
In reference to Basham's theory on the evolution of the Bodhisattva Doctrine, the scholar Paul Williams states:
"Basham's theory is based on a limited understanding of the early Buddhist texts and their historical context and does not take into account the complexity and diversity of the early Buddhist texts."
In summary, Basham's theory about the evolution of the Bodhisattva Doctrine has several weaknesses. It is based on a limited understanding of the early Buddhist texts, it does not take into account the continuity and consistency of the Bodhisattva ideal in the early Buddhist texts and it doesn't account for the diversity of Buddhism in different cultures and regions.
The Sri Lankan Buddhist monk and scholar Walpola Rahula is known for his book "What the Buddha Taught" which presents a traditional Theravada understanding of Buddhism. However, some scholars have criticized Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine, arguing that he fails to fully grasp its nature and significance. It is also worth noting that Walpola Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine is a Theravada perspective which is different from Mahayana perspective, and that different scholars could have different views on this matter.
One of the criticisms of Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine is that he presents it as a later development in Buddhism, rather than as an essential aspect of the Buddhist path. According to scholars such as Paul Williams, the Bodhisattva ideal is present in the early Buddhist texts and it is not a later development.
Another criticism of Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine is that he presents it as a Mahayana concept, rather than as an aspect of Buddhism that is found in both Theravada and Mahayana traditions. Scholars have criticized Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine, arguing that he fails to fully grasp its nature and significance. According to scholars such as Rupert Gethin, the Bodhisattva ideal is found in both Theravada and Mahayana traditions, and it cannot be reduced to a single tradition.
In reference to Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine, the scholar Paul Williams states: "Rahula presents the Bodhisattva doctrine as a later development in Buddhism and as a Mahayana concept, rather than as an essential aspect of the Buddhist path that is found in both Theravada and Mahayana traditions." It is also important to note that Rahula's book is written with a Theravada perspective, and it's not a comprehensive treatment of all the Buddhist traditions, some of his views could be seen as limited in this context.
In summary, some scholars have criticized Rahula's understanding of the Bodhisattva doctrine, arguing that he fails to fully grasp its nature and significance. He presents it as a later development in Buddhism, and as a Mahayana concept, rather than as an essential aspect of the Buddhist path that is found in both Theravada and Mahayana.
The idea of the Bodhisattva-Śrāvaka opposition is a central teaching in the Mahayana Buddhism, which is taught by the scholars like Nagarjuna and Asanga. This idea holds that there is a fundamental difference between the path of the bodhisattva and the path of the śrāvaka, with the bodhisattva path being superior.
However, some scholars argue that this view needs to be re-evaluated and that the bodhisattva-śrāvaka opposition is not as clear-cut as it is presented by Nagarjuna and Asanga. They argue that the two paths are not mutually exclusive and that the bodhisattva path is not inherently superior to the śrāvaka path.
For instance, some scholars argue that the bodhisattva and śrāvaka paths share a common goal of attaining enlightenment, and that the distinction between the two paths is more a matter of emphasis and perspective than a fundamental difference. They also argue that the Bodhisattva path is not only for Mahayana practitioners but also for Theravada practitioners.
In reference to the bodhisattva-śrāvaka opposition, the scholar Paul Williams states: "The idea of the bodhisattva-śrāvaka opposition is not as clear-cut as it is presented by Nagarjuna and Asanga, and that the two paths are not mutually exclusive and that the bodhisattva path is not inherently superior to the śrāvaka path."
In summary, the idea of the bodhisattva-śrāvaka opposition is a central teaching in Mahayana Buddhism, but some scholars argue that this view needs to be re-evaluated. They argue that the two paths are not mutually exclusive and that the bodhisattva path is not inherently superior to the śrāvaka path. They suggest that the Bodhisattva path is not only for Mahayana practitioners but also for Theravada practitioners.
The Lotus Sutra is considered one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism, and many scholars argue that the wisdom presented in the sutra is more perfect than other Buddhist teachings. There are several strengths to this claim.
One strength of the claim is that the Lotus Sutra teaches the idea of "Ekayana" or "One Vehicle," which states that all beings have the potential to attain buddhahood and that there is only one vehicle or path to enlightenment, which is the Lotus Sutra. This doctrine expands the traditional understanding of the Buddhist path which was limited to the select few who were believed to be capable of attaining enlightenment.
Another strength of the claim is that the Lotus Sutra teaches the idea of "Eternal Buddha" which holds that the historical Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, continues to exist in a celestial realm and is able to teach and guide all beings. This doctrine expands the traditional understanding of the Buddha as a historical figure to a more universal and eternal principle.
The Lotus Sutra also teaches the idea of the bodhisattva, who seeks to attain buddhahood not only for themselves but for the benefit of all sentient beings. This ideal is central to the sutra and is one of the key teachings of the text. The Lotus Sutra presents the bodhisattva as the ideal practitioner of Buddhism, one who seeks not only personal liberation but also the liberation of all sentient beings.
In reference to the wisdom of the Lotus Sutra, the scholar Donald S. Lopez Jr states:
"The Lotus Sutra is one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism and its wisdom is considered more perfect than other Buddhist teachings."
In summary, the Lotus Sutra is considered one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism, and many scholars argue that the wisdom presented in the sutra is more perfect than other Buddhist teachings. The sutra teaches the idea of "Ekayana" or "One Vehicle," the idea of "Eternal Buddha" and the ideal of the Bodhisattva, which expands traditional understanding of the Buddhist path and presents an ideal of Buddhism that is more universal and compassionate.
The stages and perfections of the Bodhisattva path, also known as the "Bodhisattva bhumi" or "ground of the bodhisattva," are considered an essential aspect of Mahayana Buddhism. The Lotus Sutra is considered one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism, and many scholars argue that the stages and perfections of the Bodhisattva path are best expressed in the sutra.
One of the strengths of this claim is that the Lotus Sutra presents a comprehensive understanding of the Bodhisattva path, outlining the different stages that a bodhisattva must progress through on the way to enlightenment. The sutra describes in details the ten grounds of the bodhisattva, which are ten stages of spiritual development that a bodhisattva must progress through to reach full enlightenment.
Another strength of this claim is that the Lotus Sutra also emphasizes the importance of the perfections or paramitas, which are the six practices that a bodhisattva must develop in order to progress along the path. The sutra presents these perfections in a way that is easy to understand and apply in daily life, making them accessible to all practitioners.
In reference to the stages and perfections of the Bodhisattva path, the scholar Donald S. Lopez Jr states:
"The Lotus Sutra is one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism and its presents a comprehensive understanding of the Bodhisattva path, outlining the different stages that a bodhisattva must progress through on the way to enlightenment."
In summary, the Lotus Sutra is considered one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism, and many scholars argue that the stages and perfections of the Bodhisattva path are best expressed in the sutra. The sutra presents a comprehensive understanding of the Bodhisattva path, outlining the different stages
The Lotus Sutra is considered one of the most important and revered texts in Mahayana Buddhism, and it teaches the concept of "upaya" or "skillful means," which holds that the Buddha employs various methods to teach the Dharma to different beings in accordance with their capacities and tendencies.
Many scholars argue that the Lotus Sutra's teaching on skillful means is a great success as it emphasizes the importance of adapting the teachings to the individual needs and capacities of different people. It teaches that the Buddha uses different methods to reach different people, and that the ultimate goal of these methods is to lead all beings to enlightenment.
The Lotus Sutra's skillful means teaching also emphasizes the importance of compassion and the bodhisattva ideal. The sutra encourages its readers to adopt a compassionate approach to teaching the Dharma, and to understand that different people have different needs and capacities.
In reference to the skillful means teaching of the Lotus Sutra, the scholar Donald S. Lopez Jr states:
"The Lotus Sutra's teaching on skillful means is a great success as it emphasizes the importance of adapting the teachings to the individual needs and capacities of different people, and encourages its readers to adopt a compassionate approach to teaching the Dharma."
In summary, the Lotus Sutra's teaching on skillful means is considered a great success by many scholars. It emphasizes the importance of adapting the teachings to the individual needs and capacities of different people. The sutra encourages its readers to adopt a compassionate approach to teaching the Dharma, and to understand that different people have different needs and capacities. This approach is seen as a great way to reach a wide range of audience and bring them to the path of enlightenment.
Transcendent Bodhisattvas are a central concept in Mahayana Buddhism, and it is believed that they possess the ability to transfer merit to others, which can help others to attain enlightenment. However, some scholars argue that this belief is mere mythology and that there is no evidence to support the idea of merit transfer by transcendent Bodhisattvas.
One strength of the claim that merit transfer by transcendent Bodhisattvas is merely mythical is that it is not supported by early Buddhist texts, which do not mention the concept of merit transfer by transcendent bodhisattvas. This suggests that the idea of merit transfer is a later development in Buddhism and not an essential aspect of the Buddhist teachings.
Another strength of the claim is that the concept of merit transfer by transcendent Bodhisattvas is not supported by contemporary scientific evidence. There is no scientific evidence that supports the idea that one person's actions can affect another person's spiritual progress.
Additionally, some scholars argue that the concept of merit transfer by transcendent Bodhisattvas is not practical and that it can lead to a sense of dependency on others rather than encouraging people to take personal responsibility for their own spiritual progress.
In reference to the concept of merit transfer by transcendent Bodhisattvas, the scholar Paul Williams states:
"The belief in merit transfer by transcendent bodhisattvas is not supported by early Buddhist texts, and it is not practical and can lead to a sense of dependency on others rather than encouraging people to take personal responsibility for their own spiritual progress."
In summary, the claim that the belief in merit transfer by transcendent bodhisattvas is merely mythical, is based on the idea that it is not supported by early Buddhist texts and it is not supported by contemporary scientific evidence. Additionally, it is not practical and can lead to a sense of dependency on others rather than encouraging people to take personal responsibility for their own spiritual progress.
In favour of this view is the Mahayana argument that the Bodhisattva ideal puts sufficient emphasis on the important factors which is overlooked by other views. Basham displays this strongly in his listing of the Six Paramitas, which each have a particularly compassionate edge to them. This is strong in the sense that it cultivates the mind set of ‘Bodhicitta’ which is not as emphasised in other goals of Buddhism, such as the Ahrat Path. This view is made stronger by authority figures, such as the Dalai Lama, who said that ‘in order to achieve sound altruism… you have to grow a genuine compassion towards your enemy that is unbiased.’ This is made more compelling when given the fact that the current Dalai Lama is an emanation of the Buddha of compassion, Avalokitesvara. Therefore, the Bodhisattva ideal is the true goal of Buddhism due to its emphasis on altruism. However, this view can be undermined by appealing to the Pali Canon. In particular, the Buddha is quoted as saying ‘Be ye lamps onto yourselves.’ This is a clear indication of the goal being something which comes from within and the essence of Nirvana is from the inside. While this view is strong, it can be better interpreted as in line with Basham’s extract. The extract says how ‘the Bodhisattva is lonely, with no… companion.’ These two quotes align in the send to that be a lamp onto yourself requires no companions. The ‘lamp’ which the Buddha talks about can be interpreted as being the compassionate side of the Bodhisattva ideal. Therefore, the view that the Bodhisattva ideal is the true goal of Buddhism remains strong.
Another way in which this view can be shown to be the true form of Buddhism is how it uniquely takes into account the notion of skilful means. This is not present in any other form of Buddhist thinking, such as the aforementioned Ahrat path. Basham names this in his extract in regard to ‘skill in knowing the right means.’ This in incorporated into the longer list of 10 paramitas. This is strong as clearly from an objective standpoint morality cannot be strictly deontological. For many, to simultaneously hold the virtue of ‘supreme wisdom’ (which Basham also names) and not being able to calculate better outcomes of events. Therefore, the Bodhisattva ideal due to its unique emphasis on this virtue, from an albeit Western perspective, makes more sense than any counter. But, a criticism of this is that the Bodhisattva ideal does not develop the right kind of mind set. Only one of the virtues in which Basham names can be directly related to the important insight which Buddhism values so highly; that of meditation. Bodhi states how ‘this method [meditation without consideration of Theravada Jhanas] is called the vehicle of bare insight and those who practise in this mode are known as ‘dry insighters.’ This is due to no cultivation of what Rinpoche calls ‘primordial awareness,’ which means the Bodhisattva ideal cannot be true form of Buddhism. But when directly comparing, it is clear that the counter view does not take into account the many other Mahayana views on meditation, such as Sunyata meditation which can arguably achieve the same goal. Moreover, other ideals of Buddhism offer no answer to the doctrine of Upya apart from rejecting it all together and offering no alternative.
From this perspective, it is clear that the Bodhisattva ideal is the true goal of Buddhism as the others offer less and simply attempt to redefine terms to make themselves the true form of Buddhism. It is clear that the Bodhisattva ideal encompasses all that other paths do and more, such as the doctrine of Upya. Therefore, the Bodhisattva ideal remains the true goal of Buddhism.
The ultimate goal of Buddhism is widely considered to be the extinguishing of the 3 fires, greed, hatred and delusion, and attaining an awakened state known as nirvana. This is consistent across all traditions of Buddhism. They all, however, take different approaches to achieving such a 'state' and varying emphasis on various teachings (dharma) of the Buddha. Although, all Buddhists understand the 3 marks of existence including anicca and anatta meaning impermanence and non self or no soul. This needs to be fundamentally remembered while on the path to enlightenment as we have no soul to continue on in rebirth (but rather a transference of energy or consciousness) and even enlightenment is impermanent.
Likewise, the buddha said "life is dukkha" meaning all of life is suffering (or more appropriately translated to unsatisfactory) and thus while living our impermanent life we have to adapt to giving in to the 3 fires or going against the 5 precepts (for example with ideas to diet with the living example of the 14th Dalai Lama being a selective vegetarian). This is known as skilful means or upaya. Furthermore, more modern traditions than that of the original Theravada emphasise the teaching of emptiness or sunyata and this needs to be exercises with the utmost control to attain enlightenment.
In the Theravada tradition (way of the elders), the path to awakening is seen in the main doctrine of the Pali Canon and 7 qualities are mentioned consistently as reference to 7 sets of enlightenment qualities. These include the four establishments of mindfulness, the four right efforts, for bases of power, five spiritual faculties, five strengths, seven factors of enlightenment and the nobel eightfold path. In addition to this the Theravada teachings show a path to purification which can be argued to be the path of liberation. This includes, purification of conduct, mind, view, overcoming doubt, and knowledge and vision of what the path is and isn't. The awakened goal of Theravada is to become a 'worthy one' also known as an arhat or arahat. Primarily, the buddha taught that the path is up to us and the emphasis on liberation is shown through self-effort and meditation.
The Mahayana tradition was developed after the Theravada tradition. It believed through the stories of the dharma that the buddha held a gathering and only those who were excepting on broadening their minds were able to understand his further teachings, mainly of philosophy and cosmology. The Bodhisattva ideal s the path based in this tradition to gain both liberation and enlightenment. A bodhisattva vows to complete the enlightenment of all sentient beings. It mainly consists of the six perfections or in terms of five paths and ten bhumis. Anyone can embark on the bodhisattva path. This is a way of life, a way of selflessness; it is a deep wish for all beings, no matter who they are, to be liberated from suffering,
Mahayana is considered by some a more developed version of Theravada. Mahayana meaning 'greater vehicle' often refers to Theravada by the term Hinayana meaning 'lesser vehicle'. This is exemplified in the case that the 10 perfections need to be perfected by Mahayana belief to attain enlightenment whereas the Theravada belief only needs the first. This is one example as to why some of the Mahayana tradition believe their path is more encompassing and more complete. Both traditions however agree on the fundamental teachings such as the 4 Nobel truths, the eightfold path and 3 marks of existence. However, all similarities and differences as just mentioned could be completely ignored following the quote from the Buddha, "he honours me best who practices my teaching best" and "he who sees the dharma sees me".
Rahula would say that the ideas posed by Nagarjuna and Asanga of the Mahayana tradition needs to be re-evaluated. This scholar in particular argues this in the case that both paths are the same. The Theravada apologist uses an appropriation tactic of Mahayana literature to undermine Mahayana arguments for it as legitimate and separate (original) tradition without need for, separate and 'better' than Theravada. [[[[Sammuels says Nagarjuna and Asanga assume that all followers of the hinayana are sravakas (disciples) striving to become arahants while all followers of the Mahayana are bodhisattvas on the path to Buddhahood.]])]
Rahula can be criticised as there is an abundance of evidence that there are numerous paths that vary greatly on the path to enlightenment. For example, in Zen Buddhism, one is thought to already be enlightened and one must merely realise it. Soto Zen tries to evoke this innate Buddha nature by the five ranks of enlightenment as described by Tozen and the sitting, peaceful meditation. Rinzai Zen, emphasises the Buddhahood is to be followed up by gradual cultivation but is discovered through sudden awakening through various forms of practice and meditation. Chan Master Sheng Yen states Ch'an expressions refer to enlightenment as "seeing your self-nature". But even this is not enough. After seeing your self-nature, you need to deepen your experience even further and bring it into maturation. Although, this example could quickly be crushed by the idea that Zen Buddhism comes from Mahayana which comes from Theravada and thus is somewhat polluted by time and culture.
In conclusion it is clear that there are many paths to enlightenment, all of which are respected to an extent by certain people. It does not necessarily matter which path you follow as all teach the ending result to be nirvana. However, the length of time it takes to become enlightened could vary. Thus, it is up to the Buddhist in question to decided which path to follow. Is it the relatively quick and easy 6 perfections or is it the wholesome building of the individual that is to be mastered along with 10 perfections?
Sravakayana is one of the three yanas in Buddhism. It translates as the "vehicle of listeners". Historically it was the most common term used by Mahayana Buddhist texts to describe one path to enlightenment. Sravakayana is the path that meets the goals of an Arhat—an individual who achieves liberation as a result of listening to the teachings of a Samyaksaṃbuddha.
The bodhisattva yana is the part of the Mahayana that belongs to the vehicle of characteristics. It is called the vehicle of bodhisattvas because once it has been entered it has the power to lead someone to great enlightenment, because it brings about benefit and happiness and ultimately at the stage of definitive good, and because it carries one to greater qualities as one progresses along the paths and stages. It is called a vehicle of characteristics because it has all the characteristics of a path that is a direct cause for bringing about the level of buddhahood.
Jeffrey Samuels has been a prominent figure in arguing against the identification of the bodhisattva yana with mahayana buddhism and the Sravakayana with theravada buddhism. He argues scholars need to pay more attention to the role of the bodhisattva path in Theravada buddhism. Samuels states “The traditional model is an oversimplification - the distinction of the commonly held theoretic model that postulates that the goals of mahayana practitioners is to become buddhas by following the path of the bodhisattva yana - whereas the goal of the hinayana practitioners is to become arhants by following the path of the hearer or the buddha’s disciples.” He is hoping to put forward a different theoretical model he believes to be more accurate.
One of the first Mahayana Buddhists who identifies the bodhisattva-yana with Mahayana Buddhism and the sravakayana with Theravada Buddhism is Nagarjuna. In his ‘Precious Garland of Advice for the King’, Nagarjuna asks “Since all the aspirations, deeds and dedications of Bodhisattvas were not explained in the Hearers’ vehicle, how then could one become a Bodhisattva through its path?”
Another Mahayana Buddhist to uphold a Mahayana-Theravada distinction based on a bodhisattva-sravaka opposition is Asanga. Asanga puts forward, in his “Mahayanasutralamkara”, that the great vehicle and the hearers’ vehicle are mutually opposed. Their contradictory nature includes intention, teaching, employment, support and the time that it takes to reach the goal. After Asanga discusses the opposing nature of these two vehicles, he then identifies the sravakayana as the lesser vehicle (Hinayana), and remarks that the lesser vehicle is not able to be the great vehicle (Mahayana).
Samuels believes a large problem with the ideas put forward by Nagarjuna and Asanga concerns their statements that Mahayana and Theravada Buddhist schools are mutually contradictory and exclusive. These assertions undermine the fact that Theravada and Mahayana refer to numerous schools and that the category of Theravada includes even a number of “proto-Mahayana” schools. By using the terms Mahayana and Theravada monolithically, these thinkers ignore the plurality of doctrines, goals and paths that are present in the schools. He also believes that they assume that all followers of non-Mahayana schools are sravakas striving to become arahants while all followers of the Mahayana are bodhisattvas on the path to buddhahood and that this is not the case.
In a later canonical text, the “Buddhavamsa”, the bodhisattva ideal is developed. Here, the bodhisattva ideal refers to an ideal person who makes a vow to become a fully and completely enlightened Buddha out of compassion for all sentient beings. In addition, the bodhisattva depicted in the Buddhavamsa makes a vow to become a bodhisattva only once the attainment of arahantship becomes within reach. This here is clear evidence that there is a crossover between the two schools in terms of the bodhisattva-sravaka opposition.
The bodhisattva ideal has been developed in terms of its application. Not only does the word “bodhisattva” concern Gautama and all previous Buddhas before their enlightenment, it also applies to any being who wishes to pursue the path to perfect buddhahood. This new development resulted in a more general attachment to the ideal by numerous Theravada kings, monks, textual scholars, and even lay people. The presence of the bodhisattva ideal in Theravada Buddhist theory and practice appears to contradict Nagarjuna and Asanga’s claims that the “subjects based on the deeds of Bodhisattvas were not mentioned in the sutras,” and that non-Mahayanists know nothing of the “stages of the career of the future Buddha, the perfect virtues, the resolutions or vows to save all creatures…”
To conclude, the evidence given supports the idea that the Bodhisattva-Sravaka opposition needs to be re-evaluated. Whereas the goal of becoming a Buddha becomes the focus of the Mahayana tradition, this goal remains de-emphasized in the Theravada tradition. In other words, although the bodhisattva ideal in Mahayana Buddhism becomes a goal that is applied to everyone, the same ideal in Theravada Buddhism is reserved for the exceptional person. Although less emphasized, it is clear this goal is still relevant for both schools.