Na ̄ga ̄rjunakonda, for example, one of the earliest medical schools on the
subcontinent flourished in the third and fourth centuries CE.
By the first century CE, there had arisen within Buddhism a movement
which called itself Maha ̄ya ̄na (the “great vehicle”) in contrast to what was
called Hinaya ̄na (lesser vehicle), also known as Therava ̄da. Maha ̄ya ̄na
emerged from the Maha ̄sa ̄n.ghika schools, which from the early days had
disparaged the arhatsand espoused such views as that the Buddha was
transmundane, and that the historical Buddha was a mere manifestation
of him. The Maha ̄ya ̄na schools claimed that buddhahood was innate to all,
that the path of the bodhisattva could be followed by any, and that a
pantheon of superhuman bodhisattvas and Buddhas existed to help devotees
in various ways. Buddhist literature flourished in Pa ̄li for the Hinaya ̄na
schools and Sanskrit for the Maha ̄ya ̄na ones, the latter often offered with the
claim that the represented doctrine was preserved from the mouth of
the Buddha himself.
The Maha ̄sa ̄n.ghikas, together with the Sarva ̄stiva ̄dins, were especially influ-
ential in the Kus.a ̄n.a period (first–third century CE). The Sarva ̄stiva ̄dins were
particularly strong in Mathura ̄ and Kashmı ̄r and, like the Maha ̄sa ̄n.ghikas,
were influenced by Greek and Persian ideas.^53 These groups provided
the rationale for the explosion of Buddhist art when Buddhas and bod-
hisattvas were iconographically depicted. Under the Kus.a ̄n.as one found
the concrete personifications of Amita ̄bha, the Buddha embodying light,
enlightenment, and wisdom, and of the bodhisattvas: Maitreya (the compas-
sionate one, personifying light), Mañjus ́rı ̄ (the “crown prince” of dharma),
and Avalokites ́vara (rich in love and compassion and Buddha’s chief
attendant).
Nearly thirty schools of Buddhist thought and practice grew in India, many
of them during this period. It will suffice by way of illustration to mention
but two of these. From the school once known as the Maha ̄sa ̄n.ghikas (those
of the larger congregation) emerged the Ma ̄dhyamika school by the
late second century CE. Indebted to Na ̄ga ̄rjuna’s doctrine of “emptiness”
(s ́ u ̄ nyata ̄) this school collapsed all dualities. Simply put, the argument
goes as follows: existence was characterized by svabha ̄va(having its own
independent existence). But, in fact, nothing had svabha ̄vaas all were
interdependent – neither nirva ̄n.anorsamsa ̄rahadsvabha ̄va. It follows then
thatsamsa ̄ra(the phenomenal world) was homologous to nirva ̄n.a. Hence,
buddhahood itself was found in this world; all dualities were collapsed
- those between self and other, wisdom and action included. Hence, tangible
symbols could be used to depict buddhahood.
Na ̄ga ̄rjuna’s doctrine of s ́u ̄ nyata ̄and the concomitant idea that buddha-
hood could be found in all material objects provided an added rationale for
the forms of worship that occurred at a popular level. Buddhist piety was
The Urban Period 81