THE RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM 85From the Mahayanist perspective, the Abhidharmists have erred in advancing
a single system for describing all of reality and in holding to teachings that ul-
timately must be let go. The style of the expanded Sutras thus serves to pro-
claim that their authors have access to a heightened mode of perception that
places them beyond the reach of scholastic critiques.
In the earliest extant expanded Sutras-such as The Small Peifection if Wis-
dom-the discussants are well-known figures of early Buddhism and do not
disparage the Hinayanists. Eventually, however, as the Mahayanists were un-
able to win over the majority of their brethren, a rift widened between the
two courses. For example, the Vimalakirti-nirdda, a somewhat later Sutra,
ridicules the arhants, depicting them as helpless losers to Vimalakirti's talent
for one-upmanship. Even the worst sinner still has a chance to become a Bud-
dha, this Sutra avows, whereas the arhant is at a dead end in an inferior
nirva!Ja. The still-later Lotus (SaddharmaputJqarlka) Siitra (circa 200 c.E.) is even
more blatantly hostile to the Hinayana but adopts a seemingly conciliatory, if
condescending, posture, affirming that the arhant is not really condemned to
an inferior goal because there is in reality just one nirval}a, that of a Buddha,
which even arhants will reach in due course. Partisan rhetoric reached a peak
in the Mahayana ParinirviitJa SiUra (circa 200-400 c.E., known as the NirviitJa
Siitra for short), which claimed to contain the Buddha's last "secret" teachings
before his passing away. According to this Sutra, whoever maligns the
Mahayana teachings is destined for severe punishment, even execution. Thus
what began as a small rift between the two courses in 100 B.C.E. gradually
widened until by 200 C.E. it had become a clear break.
The composition of Mahayana Sutras continued until the eighth century
C.E. There are no firsthand historical sources on the circumstances surround-
ing their composition. The Mahayana trend is paralleled, however, by other
developments at the time, as Indian culture as a whole was transformed by the
widespread adoption of the written word. Splits developed in many traditions
between those who tried to restrict written transmission to the modes of oral
transmission-that is, set ancient texts with attendant commentaries-and
those who championed the creative possibilities of the new, written mode.
Hindus were writing new Upani~ads, Puriif:las, and Agamas, attributing them to
gods and ancient sages; and Brahmanical philosophy underwent a rift similar
to that in Buddhism, between the conservative Mimarpsa school and the more
innovative Vaisesika school.
In the second century C.E., Mahayana authors began publishing Siistras (trea-
tises) in their own names, citing the Sutras as proofs, to present the Buddhist
case to non-Buddhists, and the newer Buddhist doctrine to Hinayanists who
denied the authenticity of the Mahayana Sutras. This new respect for individ-
ual human authorship, another result of the shift to written culture, was paral-
leled by similar trends in secular literature (fiction, poetry, and nonfiction),
science, non-Buddhist philosophy, and the techniques of debate and logic.
The first historical glimpses of Mahayana are afforded by Chinese reports
describing the Serindian missionaries of the second century C. E. At that time,
northwest India and adjoining regions of central Asia were under the powerful