Meanwhile, laypersons were expected to observe those aspects of the
Buddhist ethic appropriate for the householder – for example, generosity
to the monks and refraining from killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct;
but laypeople were not expected to practice meditation. In turn, they were
promised happy rebirths and improvement in their religious and mundane
lives. As with Jainism, the Buddhist movement was attractive to merchants
who were economically powerful but didn’t necessarily receive social status
in the vaidikasystem. Those from lower echelons of society also saw the
movement as offering them opportunities, both religious and social.^19
Within a century of the Buddha’s death, questions were already arising
as to the nature of the dhamma– the teaching of the Buddha. A meeting at
Ra ̄jagr.ha along the Ganges led to a split in the community of monks. Those
who were more “conservative” in their understanding came to be known
as Sthaviras (literally, “heroic elders”); and the more “progressive” group
became known as the Maha ̄sa ̄n.ghikas (those of the large assembly). The
questions that divided them included the rules for monastic living – the
vinaya. Some of the questions were significant: should a monk possess
anything? Some questions were trivial: should a monk refrain from eating
until sundown or only until the sun was three fingers from the horizon?
A more important issue was how the life of the Buddha should be under-
stood and consequently what was the role of the monks. The Sthaviras
maintained that Buddha was an ideal man, a perfected arhat(that is, one
who had “killed” the passions); hence, all monks were arhatsseeking
to attain Buddhahood. The Maha ̄sa ̄n.ghikas doubted that the notion of
perfection was available to mere mortals – Buddha must have been one
who transcended the five skandhas; further, they thought arhatswere flawed
and subject to retrogression. Within centuries, in this school, there was a
sense that the ideal for monks was the role of a bodhisattva– one who was
characterized by the virtue of wisdom, who postponed attainment of ultimate
nirva ̄n.auntil all creation had been enlightened. By the first century, this
group was maintaining that the Buddha nature was innate in all sentient
beings (not the attainment of the few) and that those who had become
Buddhas were supra-mundane. This stream of Buddhism came to be known
asMaha ̄ya ̄na(the “great vehicle”) as opposed to the Therava ̄da schools which
sprang from the tradition of the Sthaviras.
Several schools emerged in the first few centuries of Buddhism. Two of
these are worth mentioning here. The Sarva ̄stiva ̄dins argued that the past
and the future did not exist. More important was their articulation of the
paths of virtue thought to be appropriate for the monks, known as the six
perfections: generosity, morality, patience, vigor, meditation, and wisdom.
This appears to be the school that most influenced King As ́oka’s
interpretation of Buddhism, though As ́oka (third century BCE) eschewed
46 The Early Urban Period