LESSER VEHICLE AND GREAT VEHICLE

A Hearer’s mode of practice accords with that of the Lesser Vehicle discipline, one-pointedly viewing the desire realm attributes of pleasant forms, sounds, odors, tastes, and tangible objects as faulty. Āryadeva says that those who engage in this practice which is free from desire have “an interest in the lowly” because this path accords with the nature of a mind lacking the strength of the unusual attitude that bears the burden of all sentient beings’ welfare. Since they are unable to practice using the great power of desire in the path, they are taught a mode free from desire.

As long as you cannot use desire in the path there is a danger of coming under its influence, in which case it is better to proceed only on a path that is free from desire. Otherwise, if you attempt to use desire in the path, you will be harmed instead of helped. Prohibition is the only course. This is the mode of Lesser Vehicle practice.

For those having an interest in the vast, the Sūtra Great Vehicle practices of the grounds and the perfections are taught; these comprise the causal Perfection Vehicle. Those who, in addition to having an interest in the vast, have a special interest in the ultimate profundity, are taught practices wherein desire is used in the path. This is Tantra Great Vehicle.

The Indian scholar Tripiṭakamāla also includes all Buddha’s teaching into these three modes, the Lesser Vehicle mode of the four noble truths, the Sūtra Great Vehicle mode of the perfections—giving, ethics, patience, effort, concentration, and wisdom—and the Tantra Great Vehicle mode of Secret Mantra. Thus, Buddha’s word is divided into the two scriptural divisions of Lesser Vehicle and Great Vehicle; the vehicles or paths that are the subjects of expression by Buddha’s words are also divided into the two, Lesser Vehicle and Great Vehicle.

The Lesser Vehicle is further divided into two vehicles, Hearer Vehicle (śrāvakayāna) and Solitary Realizer Vehicle (pratyekabuddhayāna). Solitary Realizers are of two types, congregating and rhinoceros-like. Congregating Solitary Realizers are a little more social, staying in a group or community for a longer period than the rhinoceros-like, who find it unsuitable to stay in society and therefore live alone. Hearers and Solitary Realizers equally abandon the conception of inherent existence, but Solitary Realizers amass more merit than Hearers and thus, when they actualize the fruit of their vehicle, are capable of becoming Foe Destroyers—destroyers of the foe, the afflictions, the principal of which is the conception of inherent existence—without depending on a teacher in that lifetime. They actualize the fruit of their vehicle “independently” through the force of accumulating merit for a hundred eons. Solitary Realizers are said to be very proud and independent-minded. They mostly attain their enlightenment in a dark age when no Buddhas appear—perhaps so that they will not be outshone by a Buddha’s presence but more likely in order to be of greater benefit to others. As Nāgārjuna says in his Treatise on the Middle (madhyamakaśāstra, XVIII.12):

Though the perfect Buddhas do not appear

And Hearers have disappeared,

A Solitary Realizer’s wisdom

Arises without support.

Both Hearers and Solitary Realizers seek the wisdom realizing the absence of inherent existence of all phenomena—persons and other phenomena. This is because the chief bond binding one in cyclic existence is the conception of inherent existence, the other bonds being the afflictions such as desire, hatred, and ignorance that depend on the conception of inherent existence. According to Mantra, the causes binding one in cyclic existence are two, ignorance and winds [currents of energy], and among them the chief is the ignorance conceiving inherent existence. The winds that serve as the mount of afflicted conceptual thought are cooperative causes in the process of cyclic existence.

Hearers and Solitary Realizers understand that without the wisdom realizing selflessness it is impossible to overcome cyclic existence. They understand that they need this wisdom and seek it in company with ethics, meditative stabilization, and so forth. Through this path all afflictions are extinguished.

There are four schools of Buddhist tenets:

1.  Great Exposition School (bye brag smra ba, vaibhāṣika)

2.  Sūtra School (mdo sde pa, sautrāntika)

3.  Mind-Only School (sems tsam pa, cittamātra)

4.  Middle Way School (dbu ma pa, mādhyamika)

The highest of these is the Middle Way School which is further divided into a Middle Way Autonomy School (dbu ma rang rgyud pa, svātantrika-mādhyamika) and Middle Way Consequence School (dbu ma thal ’gyur pa, prāsaṅgika-mādhyamika). The Middle Way Consequence School is considered to be the highest philosophical view, its teachers having been Nāgārjuna, Āryadeva, Buddhapālita, Chandrakīrti, Shāntideva, Atisha, and so forth. According to the Consequentialist system, those of the Lesser Vehicle—who are unable to bear the burden of all sentient beings’ welfare but seek only their own liberation from cyclic existence—and those of the Great Vehicle—who are able to bear the burden of the welfare of all sentient beings throughout space—equally realize the subtle emptiness of both persons and other phenomena. They realize that both persons and other phenomena, such as mind and body, do not inherently exist, or exist in their own right.

However, the non-Consequence schools all say that those of the Lesser Vehicle—Hearers and Solitary Realizers—realize only a selflessness of persons which is a person’s absence of substantial existence in the sense that a person does not have a character different from the character of mind and body. From the viewpoint of the Consequence School, however, this wisdom is not sufficient as a means of liberation from cyclic existence, and furthermore, the other schools have described not the innate form of the misconception of persons as substantially existent entities, but the artificial misconception. According to the Consequentialists, the innate form of this coarse misconception of self is the apprehension of a person as a controller of mind and body, like a master over servants, but it does not involve an apprehension of the person as having a character different from mind and body. Apprehension of the person as having a character different from mind and body occurs only through the intellectual acquisition of tenets of non-Buddhist systems and thus is called “artificial,” not “innate.” From the viewpoint of the system of the Middle Way Consequence School, the selflessness of persons that is set forth by the lower schools is thus only a coarse selflessness and is merely the negative of self as misconceived by an artificial misconception of the nature of a person.

The non-Consequentialist systems—Autonomy School, Mind-Only School, Sūtra School, and Great Exposition School—assert that Hearers and Solitary Realizers do not realize a selflessness of phenomena other than persons; they realize only the selflessness of persons—that the person is empty of substantial existence, or self-sufficiency. They assert that merely through this Hearers and Solitary Realizers attain liberation. Tsongkhapa’s position is clear that according to the systems of the non-Consequence Schools, Hearers and Solitary Realizers attain liberation in this way. When he describes the type of selflessness that they realize, he says that they do not realize that persons are empty of establishment by way of their own character but realize that persons are empty of a substantial existence as is imputed by the non-Buddhists. He seems to be saying that according to the systems of tenets of the Great Exposition School and Sūtra School themselves, one need only realize that persons are empty of being a permanent, unitary, independent entity. However, we have to say that the Autonomists, Proponents of Mind-Only, Proponents of Sūtra, and Proponents of the Great Exposition do not assert that realization of a person’s emptiness of being permanent, unitary, and independent opposes the innate misconception of self. In their own systems the conception of the person as permanent, unitary, and independent is only artificial, intellectually acquired, not innate.

The innate misconception of self—not involving reasoned affirmation—binds beings in cyclic existence, and according to these systems it is the conception that a person is a substantially existent or self-sufficient entity. The non-Consequentialist systems themselves say that no matter how much one meditates on a person’s not being permanent, unitary, and independent, this cannot harm the conception of substantial existence or self-sufficiency. Therefore, according to them, Hearers and Solitary Realizers realize a selflessness which is the person’s absence of a substantial or self-sufficient nature. They must train in such a path and proceed by this means.

Tsongkhapa here and in other places seems to say that in the lower systems themselves the subtle selflessness of the person is described as a person’s not being permanent, unitary, and independent. Many scholars say that Tsongkhapa’s reference is to the implications of the lower systems as seen from the viewpoint of the Consequence School. This means that when Consequentialists consider the reasons proving selflessness that are set forth in the lower systems, they find that persons’ inherent establishment or establishment by way of their own character is taken for granted and that their reasoning for refuting self has the ability only to refute the existence of a person that has a character different from the character of mind and body.

According to the Consequentialist system, if one does not realize the absence of inherent existence of the person, one cannot eliminate the conception of a self of persons. Also, if the conception of inherent existence with regard to the mental and physical aggregates is not overcome, the conception of the inherent existence of the person cannot be overcome. Cyclic existence is achieved through the power of actions, and actions are achieved through the power of afflictions. Since this is so, ceasing actions meets back to ceasing afflictions. Ceasing afflictions, in turn, meets back to ceasing conceptions. Ceasing conceptions meets back to ceasing the proliferations of the conception of inherent existence which are ceased only by a mind realizing emptiness.

According to the final thought of the Perfection of Wisdom Sūtras, liberation from cyclic existence definitely involves realization of the selflessness of both persons and other phenomena. This is taught not only in the Great Vehicle but also in the Lesser Vehicle scriptures, though not in the Lesser Vehicle systems, the Great Exposition School and the Sūtra School. However, various ways of proceeding on the path are presented in the scriptures of both vehicles, and these must be distinguished to determine which scriptures require interpretation and which are definitive. For instance, it is taught that merely through realizing the coarse selflessness—the person’s lack of substantial or self-sufficient existence—liberation can be attained whereas this realization, as well as that of impermanence, can only train the mental continuum, not liberate it.

In general, we are under the strong influence of the conception of inherent existence, and due to it we do not wish to be liberated from cyclic existence. However, when we see that all products are impermanent, this helps to advance us to the point where we can overcome the conception of inherent existence. Those who are vessels only for such paths, training the mental continuum but not liberating it, are trainees of dull faculties. Those who are also vessels for the path of liberation are suitable for the teaching of the selflessness of phenomena. Thus, among Lesser Vehicle trainees there are two types, dull and sharp, the latter being the main or special trainees of Lesser Vehicle, but not the majority.

The Mother, the perfection of wisdom, is the common cause of all four children, Hearer, Solitary Realizer, Bodhisattva, and Buddha Superiors; thus, Lesser Vehicle and Great Vehicle are not differentiated by way of view but by way of accompanying methods. In particular, these are the aspirational and practical minds of enlightenment and the deeds of the six perfections, found in the Great Vehicle but not in the Lesser Vehicle.

“Vehicle” (yāna) has two meanings: the means by which one progresses and the destination to which one is progressing. Great Vehicle in the sense of the vehicle by which one progresses means to be motivated by the mind of enlightenment—wishing to attain highest enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings, one’s objects of intent—and means to engage in the six perfections. These paths of training are the paths of the Great Vehicle in general, and even though the Middle Way School and the Mind-Only School have different views, these two are not different vehicles because the vehicles are differentiated by way of method, and the method—the altruistic mind of enlightenment and its attendant practices—is the same in the Mind-Only School and the Middle Way School. Still, those who are able to penetrate the subtle selflessness of phenomena, as presented in the Middle Way School, are the main trainees of the Great Vehicle. The Mantra division of the Great Vehicle, including all four tantra sets, has exactly the same motivation—altruistic mind-generation—and deeds—the six perfections.

Seeing reason and need, Buddha set forth many systems and vehicles, but these did not arise due to his being intimate with some and alien to others. The trainees who were listening to his teaching had various dispositions, interests, and abilities, and thus he taught methods that were suitable for each of them. For those who temporarily did not have the courage to strive for Buddhahood or who did not at all have the capacity of obtaining Buddhahood at that time, Buddha did not say, “You can attain Buddha hood.” Rather, he set forth a path appropriate to the trainees’ abilities. Buddha spoke in terms of their situation, and everything that he spoke was a means of eventually attaining highest enlightenment even though he did not always say that these were means for attaining Buddhahood.

Since the purpose of a Buddha’s coming is others’ realization of the wisdom of Buddhahood, the methods for actualizing this wisdom are one vehicle, not two. A Buddha does not lead beings by a vehicle that does not proceed to Buddhahood; he establishes beings in his own level. A variety of vehicles is set forth in accordance with temporary needs.

Question: Maitreya has taught that if those bearing the Great Vehicle lineage came temporarily to abide in a hell, this would not interrupt their progress to stainless enlightenment; however, if they were attracted to Lesser Vehicle practices, leading solely to peace, seeking to bring help and happiness only to themselves, this would greatly interrupt their progress to Buddhahood. Thus, according to Maitreya, generating a Lesser Vehicle attitude is a greater obstacle than taking birth in a hell; so, how can it be said that the Lesser Vehicle is a means leading to Buddhahood?

Answer: If those who have the ability to practice the Great Vehicle do not practice it, and instead assume Lesser Vehicle practices, this action will interrupt their progress to Buddhahood. It is not said that with respect to all people generation of a Lesser Vehicle attitude is an obstacle to Buddhahood. It is so only for those capable of practicing the Bodhisattva path. It depends on the individual.

Nevertheless, the Lesser Vehicle is not part of the Great Vehicle. Lesser Vehicle paths are subsidiaries of the path to Buddhahood but not actual Great Vehicle paths. The Great Vehicle has the complete paths for the attainment of Buddhahood; thus, there is a difference of incompleteness and completeness, and hence inferiority and superiority, between the Lesser Vehicle and the Great Vehicle. The Lesser Vehicle is a separate but not final vehicle because everyone has the Buddha nature that makes full enlightenment possible.

The teaching that the Buddha nature is present in all sentient beings, providing the “substantial cause” for the attainment of Buddhahood, inspires courage. This is the Buddha lineage of which there are two types, natural and transformational. The natural Buddha lineage is the emptiness of the mind, and, according to Mantra, the transformational Buddha lineage is the defiled mind of clear light which serves as the cause of Buddhahood.

In the Nyingma school of the earlier translations, it is said that Buddhahood exists primordially in oneself. This teaching refers to the very subtle mind of clear light that we presently have in our continuum; it is not different from the mind of a Buddha in terms of the entity of the basic innate mind. The continuum of our basic innate mind will become a Buddha’s Wisdom Body; therefore, we presently have all the substances for achieving Buddhahood, and we should not seek for Buddhahood elsewhere. This is a very famous and meaningful instruction in the religious language of the Nyingma order.

If we think of the Buddha nature merely in terms of an emptiness of inherent existence, it is not so meaningful, for then it could be said that a pot’s emptiness would be a Buddha nature because it is an emptiness of inherent existence. Here in this Nyingma teaching there is the strong suggestion that a positive phenomenon—the mind of clear light—is the Buddha nature.

Since the substances that make enlightenment possible are present in all sentient beings’ continuums and since a Buddha knows the means of leading all these trainees through the stages of the path, if he hid that means from them, he would have the fault of miserliness. His mind would be biased. His compassion would not be unimpeded. On the contrary, the various vehicles that Buddha taught out of his unlimited compassion are all methods for achieving omniscience.

Shāntideva’s Engaging in the Bodhisattva Deeds (bodhisattvacaryāvatāra) says that the truthful Buddha taught that even bees and donkeys can attain Buddhahood if they generate effort. Therefore, since we now have attained a human body and have met with the doctrine, if we generate the power of courageous effort, why could we not attain Buddhahood?